Virginia: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revisions, 27204-27209 [06-4200]
Download as PDF
27204
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
(5) Construction deficiencies deemed
by VA to be the participant’s
responsibility;
(6) Falsely certifying in connection
with any VA program, whether or not
the certification was made directly to
VA;
(7) Commission of an offense or other
cause listed in § 44.800;
(8) Violation of any law, regulation, or
procedure relating to the application for
guaranty, or to the performance of the
obligations incurred pursuant to a
commitment to guaranty;
(9) Making or procuring to be made
any false statement for the purpose of
influencing in any way an action of the
Department;
(10) Imposition of a limited denial of
participation by any other VA field
facility;
(b) Indictment. A criminal indictment
or information shall constitute adequate
evidence for the purpose of limited
denial of participation actions.
(c) Limited denial of participation.
Imposition of a limited denial of
participation by a VA field facility shall,
at the discretion of any other VA field
facility, constitute adequate evidence for
a concurrent limited denial of
participation. Where such a concurrent
limited denial of participation is
imposed, participation may be restricted
on the same basis without the need for
an additional conference or further
hearing.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
§ 44.1110 Scope and period of a limited
denial of participation.
(a) Scope and period. The scope of a
limited denial of participation shall be
as follows:
(1) A limited denial of participation
extends only to participation in the VA
Loan Guaranty Program and shall be
effective only within the geographic
jurisdiction of the office or offices
imposing it.
(2) The sanction may be imposed for
a period not to exceed 12 months except
for unresolved construction
deficiencies. In cases involving
construction deficiencies, the builder
may be excluded for either a period not
to exceed 12 months or for an
indeterminate period which ends when
the deficiency has been corrected or
otherwise resolved in a manner
acceptable to VA.
(b) Effectiveness. The sanction shall
be effective immediately upon issuance
and shall remain effective for the
prescribed period. If the cause for the
limited denial of participation is
resolved before the expiration of the
prescribed period, the official who
imposed the sanction may terminate it.
The imposition of a limited denial of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:26 May 09, 2006
Jkt 208001
participation shall not affect the right of
the Department to suspend or debar any
person under this part.
(c) Affiliates. An affiliate or
organizational element may be included
in a limited denial of participation
solely on the basis of its affiliation, and
regardless of its knowledge of or
participation in the acts providing cause
for the sanction. The burden of proving
that a particular affiliate or
organizational element is capable of
meeting VA requirements and is
currently a responsible entity and not
controlled by the primary sanctioned
party (or by an entity that itself is
controlled by the primary sanctioned
party) is on the affiliate or
organizational element.
§ 44.1111
Notice.
(a) Generally. A limited denial of
participation shall be initiated by
advising a participant or contractor, and
any specifically named affiliate, by
certified mail, return receipt requested:
(1) That the sanction is effective as of
the date of the notice;
(2) Of the reasons for the sanction in
terms sufficient to put the participant or
contractor on notice of the conduct or
transaction(s) upon which it is based;
(3) Of the cause(s) relied upon under
§ 44.1105 for imposing the sanction;
(4) Of the right to request in writing,
within 30 days of receipt of the notice,
a conference on the sanction, and the
right to have such conference held
within 10 business days of receipt of the
request;
(5) Of the potential effect of the
sanction and the impact on the
participant’s or contractor’s
participation in Departmental programs,
specifying the program(s) involved and
the geographical area affected by the
action.
(b) Notification of action. After 30
days, if no conference has been
requested, the official imposing the
limited denial of participation will
notify VA Central Office of the action
taken and of the fact that no conference
has been requested. If a conference is
requested within the 30-day period, VA
Central Office need not be notified
unless a decision to affirm all or a
portion of the remaining period of
exclusion is issued. VA Central Office
will notify all VA field offices of
sanctions imposed and still in effect
under this subpart.
§ 44.1112
Conference.
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
§ 44.1113
Appeal.
Where the decision is made to affirm
all or a portion of the remaining period
of exclusion, any participant desiring an
appeal shall file a written request for a
hearing with the Under Secretary for
Benefits, Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20420. This request
shall be filed within 30 days of receipt
of the decision to affirm. If a hearing is
requested, it shall be held in accordance
with the procedures set forth at
§§ 44.825 through 44.855. Where a
limited denial of participation is
followed by a suspension or debarment,
the limited denial of participation shall
be superseded and the appeal shall be
heard solely as an appeal of the
suspension or debarment.
[FR Doc. 06–4332 Filed 5–9–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[EPA–R03–RCRA–2006–0381; FRL–8165–7]
Virginia: Final Authorization of State
Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Immediate final rule.
AGENCY:
Upon receipt of a request for a
conference, the official imposing the
sanction shall arrange such a conference
with the participant or contractor and
may designate another official to
PO 00000
conduct the conference. The participant
shall be given the opportunity to be
heard within 10 business days of receipt
of the request. This conference
precedes, and is in addition to, the
formal hearing provided if an appeal is
taken under § 44.1113. Although formal
rules of procedure do not apply to the
conference, the participant or contractor
may be represented by counsel and may
present all relevant information and
materials to the official or designee.
After consideration of the information
and materials presented, the official
shall, in writing, advise the participant
or contractor of the decision to
withdraw, modify or affirm the limited
denial of participation. If the decision is
made to affirm all or a portion of the
remaining period of exclusion, the
participant shall be advised of the right
to request a formal hearing in writing
within 30 days of receipt of the notice
of decision. This decision shall be
issued promptly, but in no event later
than 20 days after the conference and
receipt of materials.
Sfmt 4700
SUMMARY: Virginia has applied to EPA
for final authorization of revisions to its
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
hazardous waste program under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that
these revisions satisfy all requirements
needed to qualify for final authorization
and is authorizing Virginia’s revisions
through this immediate final action.
EPA is publishing this rule to authorize
the revisions without a prior proposal
because we believe this action is not
controversial and do not expect
comments that oppose it. Unless we
receive written comments that oppose
this authorization during the comment
period, the decision to authorize
Virginia’s revisions to its hazardous
waste program will take effect. If we
receive comments that oppose this
action, we will publish a document in
the Federal Register withdrawing the
relevant amendments, section or
paragraph of this rule before they take
effect and a separate document in the
proposed rules section of this Federal
Register will serve as a proposal to
authorize revisions to Virginia’s
program that were the subject of adverse
comments.
DATES: This final authorization will
become effective on July 10, 2006,
unless EPA receives adverse written
comments by June 9, 2006. If EPA
receives any such comment, it will
publish a timely withdrawal of this
immediate final rule in the Federal
Register and inform the public that this
authorization, or portions thereof, will
not take effect as scheduled.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by [EPA–R03–RCRA–2006–
0381] by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail:
ellerbe.lillie@epamail.epa.gov.
3. Mail: Lillie Ellerbe, Mailcode
3WC21, RCRA State Programs Branch,
U.S. EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029.
4. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
You may inspect and copy Virginia’s
application from 8:15 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday at the following
addresses: Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, Division of
Waste Program Coordination, 629 East
Main Street, Richmond, VA 23219,
Phone number: (804) 698–4213, attn:
Robert Wickline, and Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality,
West Central Regional Office, 3019
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:26 May 09, 2006
Jkt 208001
Peters Creek Road, Roanoke, VA 24019,
Phone number: (540) 562–6872, attn:
Aziz Farahmand, and EPA Region III,
Library, 2nd Floor, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029, Phone
number: (215) 814–5254.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
[EPA–R03–RCRA–2006–0381]. EPA’s
policy is that all comments received
will be included in the public file
without change, 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 e-mail. The federal
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system which
means that EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to 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 file
and made available on the Internet. If
you submit an electronic comment, 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 EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters and any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lillie Ellerbe, Mailcode 3WC21, RCRA
State Programs Branch, U.S. EPA Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA
19103–2029, Phone number: (215) 814–
5454.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Why Are Revisions to State
Programs Necessary?
States that 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. Program revision may be
necessary when the controlling Federal
or State statutory or regulatory authority
is modified or supplemented. Most
commonly, States must revise their
programs because of revisions to EPA’s
regulations in 40 Code of Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
27205
Regulations (CFR) parts 124, 260
through 266, 268, 270, 273 and 279.
B. What Decisions Have We Made in
This Rule?
EPA concludes that Virginia’s
application to revise its authorized
program meets all of the statutory and
regulatory requirements established by
RCRA. Therefore, we grant Virginia final
authorization to operate its hazardous
waste program with the revisions
described in its application for program
revisions, subject to the procedures
described in section E, below. Virginia
has responsibility for permitting
treatment, storage, and disposal
facilities (TSDFs) within its borders and
for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA
program described in its 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 HSWA requirements
and prohibitions for which Virginia has
not been authorized, including issuing
HSWA permits, until the State is
granted authorization to do so.
C. What Is the Effect of This
Authorization Decision?
This decision serves to authorize
revisions to Virginia’s authorized
hazardous waste program. This action
does not impose additional
requirements on the regulated
community because the regulations for
which Virginia is being authorized by
today’s action are already effective and
are not changed by today’s action.
Virginia has enforcement
responsibilities under its state
hazardous waste program for violations
of its program, but EPA retains its
authority under RCRA sections 3007,
3008, 3013, and 7003, which include,
among others, authority to:
• Perform inspections, and require
monitoring, tests, analyses or reports;
• Enforce RCRA requirements and
suspend or revoke permits; and
• Take enforcement actions regardless
of whether Virginia has taken its own
actions.
D. Why Wasn’t There a Proposed Rule
Before This Rule?
EPA did not publish a proposal before
today’s rule because we view this as a
routine program change and do not
expect comments that oppose this
approval. We are providing an
opportunity for public comment now. In
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
27206
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
addition to this rule, in the proposed
rules section of today’s Federal Register
we are publishing a separate document
that proposes to authorize Virginia’s
program revisions. If EPA receives
comments that oppose this
authorization, or portions thereof, that
document will serve as a proposal to
authorize the revisions to Virginia’s
program that were the subject of adverse
comment.
E. What Happens if EPA Receives
Comments That Oppose This Action?
If EPA receives comments that oppose
this authorization, or portions thereof,
we will withdraw this rule, or portions
thereof, by publishing a document in
the Federal Register before the rule
would become effective. EPA will base
any further decision on the
authorization of Virginia’s program
revisions on the proposal mentioned in
the previous section. We will then
address all public comments in a later
final rule. You may not have another
opportunity to comment. If you want to
comment on this authorization, you
must do so at this time.
If we receive comments that oppose
the authorization of a particular revision
to Virginia’s hazardous waste program,
we will withdraw that part of this rule,
but the authorization of the program
revisions that the comments do not
oppose will become effective on the
date specified above. The Federal
Register withdrawal document will
specify which part of the authorization
will become effective, and which part is
being withdrawn.
F. What Has Virginia Previously Been
Authorized For?
Initially, Virginia received final
authorization to implement its
hazardous waste management program
effective December 18, 1984 (49 FR
47391). EPA granted authorization for
revisions to Virginia’s regulatory
program effective August 13, 1993 (58
FR 32855); September 29, 2000 (65 FR
46607); and June 20, 2003 (68 FR
36925).
G. What Revisions Are We Authorizing
With This Action?
On May 6, 2005, Virginia submitted a
program revision application, seeking
authorization of additional revisions to
its program in accordance with 40 CFR
271.21. Virginia’s revision application
includes various regulations that are
equivalent to, and no less stringent than,
revisions to the Federal hazardous waste
program, as published in the Federal
Register from July 1, 2001 through July
1, 2004, as well as miscellaneous
changes to its previously authorized
program. We now make an immediate
final decision, subject to receipt of
written comments that oppose this
action, that Virginia’s hazardous waste
program revision satisfies all of the
requirements necessary to qualify for
final authorization. Therefore, EPA
grants Virginia’s final authorization for
the following program revisions:
1. Program Revision Changes for Federal
Rules
Virginia seeks authority to administer
the Federal requirements that are listed
in Table 1. Virginia incorporates by
reference these Federal provisions, in
accordance with the dates specified in
Title 9, Virginia Administrative Code (9
VAC 20–60–18). Table 1 lists Virginia’s
requirements that are being recognized
as no less stringent than the analogous
Federal requirements. The Virginia
Waste Management Act (VWMA),
enacted by the 1986 session of the
Virginia’s General Assembly and
recodified in 1988 as Chapter 14, Title
10.1, Code of Virginia, forms the basis
of the Virginia program. The regulatory
references are to Title 9, Virginia
Administrative Code (9 VAC) effective
September 8, 2004.
TABLE 1.—VIRGINIA’S ANALOGS TO THE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS
Description of Federal Requirement (Revision Checklists) 1
Federal Register
Analogous Virginia Authority
RCRA Cluster XI 2, Non-HSWA
Hazardous Air Pollutant Standards; Technical corrections,
Checklist 188.
66 FR 35087, 7/3/01 .....
Title 9, Virginia Administrative Code (9 VAC) §§ 20–60–
18 and 20–60–264 A.
RCRA Cluster XII, HSWA/Non-HSWA
Hazardous Waste Identification Rule Corrections: Revi- 66 FR 50332, 10/3/01 ...
sions to Mixture and Derived-From Rules, Checklist 194.
Identification and Listing of Hazardous Waste: Inorganic 66 FR 58258, 11/20/01;
Chemical Manufacturing Wastes; Land Disposal Re67 FR 17119, 4/9/02.
strictions for Newly Identified Wastes, Checklist 195.
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18 and 20–60–261 A.
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18, 20–60–261 A and 20–60–268 A.
RCRA Cluster XII, HSWA
CAMU Amendments, Checklist 196 ....................................
67 FR 2962, 1/22/02 .....
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18, 20–60–260 A and 20–60–264 A.
RCRA Cluster XII, HSWA/Non-HSWA
Interim Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Hazardous Waste Combustors, Checklist 197.
Hazardous Air Pollutant Standards for Hazardous Waste
Combustors, Checklist 198.
67 FR 6792, 2/13/02 .....
67 FR 6968, 2/14/02 .....
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18, 20–60–264 A, 20–60–265 A, 20–
60–266 A and 20–60–270 A.
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18, 20–60–266 A and 20–60–270 A.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
RCRA Cluster XII, Non-HSWA
Vacatur of Mineral Processing Spent Materials Being Reclaimed as Solid Wastes and TCLP Use with MGP
Waste, Checklist 199.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:26 May 09, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
67 FR 11251, 3/13/02 ...
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18 and 20–60–261 A.
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
27207
TABLE 1.—VIRGINIA’S ANALOGS TO THE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS—Continued
Description of Federal Requirement (Revision Checklists) 1
Federal Register
Analogous Virginia Authority
RCRA Cluster XIII, HSWA/Non-HSWA
Zinc Fertilizers Made From Recycled Hazardous Secondary Materials, Checklist 200.
67 FR 48393, 7/24/02 ...
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18, 20–60–261 A, 266 A and 20–60–
268 A.
RCRA Cluster XIII, HSWA
Land Disposal Restrictions: National Treatment Variance
to Designate New Treatment Subcategories for Radioactively Contaminated Cadmium-, Mercury-, and Silver-,
Containing Batteries, Checklist 201.
NESHAP: Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Hazardous Waste Combustors-Corrections, Checklist 202.
67 FR 62618, 10/7/02 ...
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18 and 20–60–268 A.
67 FR 77687, 12/19/02
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18 and 20–60–270 A.
RCRA Cluster XIV, Non-HSWA
Hazardous Waste Management System: Identification and
Listing of Hazardous Waste; Recycled Used Oil Standards, Checklist 203.
National Environmental Performance Track Program,
Checklist 204.
NESHAP: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty
Trucks, Checklist 205.
68 FR 44659, 7/30/03 ...
9 VAC §§ 20–60–8, 20–60–261 A and 20–60–279 A.
69 FR 21737, 4/22/04 ...
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18 and 20–60–262A.
69 FR 22601, 4/26/04 ...
9 VAC §§ 20–60–18, 20–60–264A, and 20–60–265A.
1 A Revision Checklist is a document that addresses the specific revisions made to the Federal regulations by one or more related final rules
published in the Federal Register. EPA develops these checklists as tools to assist States in developing their authorization applications and in
documenting specific State analogs to the Federal Regulations. For more information see EPA’s RCRA State Authorization Web page at https://
www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/state.
2 A RCRA ‘‘Cluster’’ is a set of Revision Checklists for Federal rules, typically promulgated over a 12-month period starting on July 1 and ending on June 30 of the following year.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
2. Miscellaneous Changes
In addition to adopting the Federal
program revisions discussed in Section
G.1, Virginia has made various
regulatory revisions to its authorized
program. Virginia is seeking
authorization for these miscellaneous
changes. In a number of the revisions,
Virginia has made wording changes and
technical corrections in order to clarify
its regulations. For example, ‘‘director’’
has been replaced by ‘‘department’’ in
many provisions. Virginia has also
removed a portion of the provision that
was at 9 VAC § 20–60–70 B. The
Commonwealth previously required that
permits for hazardous waste
management facilities, including
permits by rule, be the subject of a
public hearing. The provision was more
stringent than the Federal requirements.
By removing a portion of the 9 VAC
§ 20–60–70 B provision from its
regulations, Virginia’s requirement for
public hearings is now the same as the
analogous Federal regulation.
Finally, Virginia has made various
additional regulatory revisions which
are listed following this paragraph.
While some of the changes clarify
Virginia’s regulations, others make the
Virginia program more stringent or
broader in scope than the Federal
program. The broader-in-scope
provisions are discussed in Section H.1
below. Regulatory citations annotated
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:26 May 09, 2006
Jkt 208001
with an asterisk are deemed to be more
stringent than the Federal program. EPA
has evaluated the changes described in
this section and has determined that
they are consistent with and no less
stringent than the corresponding
Federal regulations.
Title 9, Virginia Administrative Code
(9 VAC) §§ 20–60–264 B 8*, 20–60–264
B 9*, 20–60–264 B 10*, 20–60–264 B 11,
20–60–264 B 12, 20–60–264 B 13*, 20–
60–264 B 14*, 20–60–264 B 15*, 20–60–
264 B 16*, 20–60–264 B 17*, 20–60–264
B 18*, 20–60–264 B 19*, 20–60–264 B
20, 20–60–264 B 21, 20–60–264 B 22*,
20–60–265 B 8*, 20–60–270 B 15, 20–
60–315 D and 20–60–420 A.
A further discussion of Virginia’s
miscellaneous regulatory changes is
found in the following application
document for Virginia: ‘‘Demonstration
of Adequate Authority for Virginia
Hazardous Waste Program Revisions,
Program Revision III, 2004.’’
H. Where Are the Revised Virginia
Rules Different From the Federal Rules?
1. Virginia Requirements That Are
Broader in Scope Than the Federal
Program
The Virginia hazardous waste
program contains certain provisions that
are beyond the scope of the Federal
program. As part of the miscellaneous
changes discussed in Section G.2,
Virginia amended its hazardous waste
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
regulations to (1) change the fee
structure for permit applicants, (2) add
annual fees for facilities and large
quantity generators, and (3) shift the
cost of certain public participation
activities to applicants and petitioners.
The requirements, which are listed
below, are beyond the scope of the
Federal program. These broader in
scope provisions are not part of the
program being authorized by today’s
action. EPA cannot enforce
requirements that are broader in scope,
although compliance with such
provisions is required by Virginia law.
(a) Virginia’s regulations at 9 VAC
§ 20–60–124 B9 now require the
petitioners for variances to publish and
announce the required public hearings
at their expense.
(b) Virginia’s regulations at 9 VAC
§§ 20–60–262 B8, 20–60–270 B16 and
20–60–1260 through 9 VAC 20–60–1286
require that beginning July 1, 2004, large
quantity generators, permitted facilities,
interim status facilities and all facilities
subject to an order or agreement, must
pay an annual fee to help fund the
regulatory programs.
2. Virginia Requirements That Are More
Stringent Than the Federal Program
The Virginia hazardous waste
program contains some provisions that
are more stringent than those required
by the RCRA program as codified in the
July 1, 2004 edition of title 40 of the
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
27208
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
These more stringent provisions are
hereby incorporated into the Federallyauthorized program. The specific more
stringent provisions are noted in Section
G.2.
J. How Does This Action Affect Indian
Country (18 U.S.C. 115) in Virginia?
Virginia is not seeking authorization
to operate the program on Indian lands,
since there are no Federally-recognized
Indian lands in Virginia.
3. Virginia’s Adoption of EPA’s SiteSpecific Delisting and Variance
Decisions
K. What Is Codification and Is EPA
Codifying Virginia’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. We reserve the
amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart
VV, for this authorization of Virginia’s
program revisions until a later date.
In its regulations, Virginia has
adopted EPA’s decisions relative to the
site-specific delistings published on July
30, 2003 (68 FR 44652), August 7, 2003
(68 FR 46951), September 11, 2003 (68
FR 53517), February 26, 2004 (69 FR
8828), April 22, 2004 (69 FR 21754), as
well as the site-specific treatment
variances from the Land Disposal
Restrictions (LDR) treatment standards
published on February 11, 2004 (69 FR
6567). EPA today is not authorizing
Virginia to delist wastes or to grant
treatment variances. With regard to
waste delisted as a hazardous waste by
EPA, the authority of the Department of
Environmental Quality is limited to
recognition of the waste as a delisted
waste in Virginia, and the supervision of
waste management activities for the
delisted waste when the activities occur
within the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Virginia is not authorized to delist
wastes on behalf of the EPA, or to
otherwise administer any case decision
to issue, revoke, or continue a delisting
of a waste by EPA. Similarly, while
Virginia is recognizing EPA’s decision
regarding the site-specific treatment
variances, the authority to grant such
variances remains with the EPA.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
I. Who Handles Permits After This
Authorization Takes Effect?
After authorization, Virginia 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 that we issued prior to the
effective date of this authorization until
the timing and process for effective
transfer to the State are mutually agreed
upon. Until such time as formal transfer
of EPA permit responsibility to Virginia
occurs and EPA terminates its permit,
EPA and Virginia agree to coordinate
the administration of permits in order to
maintain consistency. We will not issue
any more new permits or new portions
of permits for the provisions listed in
section G above after the effective date
of this authorization. EPA will continue
to implement and issue permits for
HSWA requirements for which Virginia
is not yet authorized.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:26 May 09, 2006
Jkt 208001
L. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This rule only authorizes hazardous
waste requirements pursuant to RCRA
section 3006 and imposes no
requirements other than those imposed
by State law (see Supplementary
Information: section A. Why are
Revisions to State Programs Necessary?).
Therefore, this rule complies with
applicable executive orders and
statutory provisions as follows.
1. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning Review
The Office of Management and Budget
has exempted this rule from its review
under Executive Order 12866.
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act
After considering the economic
impacts of today’s rule on small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 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.
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 does not apply
to this rule because it will not have
federalism implications (i.e., substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 does not apply
to this rule because it will not have
tribal implications (i.e., substantial
direct effects 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).
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health &
Safety Risks
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it is not
economically significant and it is not
based on health or safety risks.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 because it is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
in Executive Order 12866.
9. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
EPA approves State programs as long
as they meet 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 the requirements of RCRA.
Thus, section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act does not apply to this rule.
10. Congressional Review Act
EPA will submit a report containing
this rule and other information required
by the Congressional Review Act (5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.) 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). This action will be
effective on July 10, 2006.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 10, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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: April 13, 2006.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region III.
[FR Doc. 06–4200 Filed 5–9–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 600
[Docket No. 050520139–6102–04; I.D.
030305A]
RIN 0648–AS46
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions;
Fishing Capacity Reduction Program;
Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King and
Tanner Crabs; Industry Fee System for
Fishing Capacity Reduction Loan
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS publishes this final
rule to exempt any crab landed under
the Community Development Quota
(CDQ) Program from the fee regulations
for the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King
and Tanner Crab Fishing Capacity
Reduction Program, to provide that crab
buyers disburse fee collections to NMFS
not later than the 7th calendar day of
each month, and to provide that the
annual report from each crab buyer shall
be submitted to NMFS by July 1 of each
calendar year. The fee regulations
otherwise remain unchanged. The intent
of this final rule is to modify the fee
rules so that they do not apply to any
crab allocated pursuant to the CDQ
Program, and to ease the fee collection
burden for crab buyers.
DATES: This final rule is effective June
9, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael A. Sturtevant, Financial
Services Division, NMFS headquarters,
at 301–713–2390.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
This Federal Register document is
also accessible via the Internet at the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:26 May 09, 2006
Jkt 208001
Office of the Federal Register’s website
at https://www.access.gpo.gov/su-docs/
aces/aces140.html.
Background
Sections 312(b)-(e) of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1861a(b)
through (e)) generally authorized fishing
capacity reduction programs. In
particular, section 312(d) authorized
industry fee systems for repaying the
reduction loans which finance
reduction program costs.
Subpart L of 50 CFR part 600 is the
framework rule generally implementing
sections 312(b)-(e).
Sections 1111 and 1112 of the
Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 App.
U.S.C. 1279f and 1279g) generally
authorized reduction loans.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act
of 2001 (Public Law 106–554) directed
the Secretary of Commerce to establish
a $100 million fishing capacity
reduction program in the Bering Sea/
Aleutian Islands king and Tanner crab
fishery. Congress amended the
authorizing act twice (Public Law 107–
20 and Public Law 107–117), once to
change the crab reduction program’s
funding from a $50 million
appropriation and a $50 million loan to
a $100 million loan and once to clarify
provisions about crab fishery vessels.
NMFS published the crab reduction
program’s proposed implementation
rule on December 12, 2002 (67 FR
76329) and its final rule on December
12, 2003 (68 FR 69331). Anyone
interested in the program’s full
implementation details should refer to
these two documents. NMFS initially
proposed and adopted the program’s
implementation rule as section 600.1018
of Subpart L of 50 CFR part 600, but
NMFS has since, without other change,
re-designated the rule as section
600.1103 in a new subpart M of part
600.
NMFS allocated the prospective
$97,399,357.11 million reduction loan
to the six reduction endorsement
fisheries involved, as the following subamounts:
1. Bristol Bay red king,
$17,129,957.23,
2. BSAI C. opilio and C. bairdi,
$66,410,767.20,
3. Aleutian Islands brown king,
$6,380,837.19,
4. Aleutian Islands red king,
$237,588.04,
5. Pribilof red king and blue king,
$1,571,216.35, and
6. St. Matthew blue king,
$5,668,991.10.
On November 24, 2004, NMFS
published another Federal Register
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
27209
notice (69 FR 68313) advising the public
that NMFS would, beginning on
December 27, 2004, tender the crab
reduction program’s reduction
payments to the 25 accepted bidders.
On December 27, 2004, NMFS required
all accepted bidders to then
permanently stop all further fishing
with the reduction vessels and permits.
Subsequently, NMFS:
1. Disbursed $97,399,357.11 in
reduction payments to 25 accepted
bidders;
2. Revoked the relinquished reduction
permits;
3. Revoked each reduction vessel’s
fishing history;
4. Notified the National Vessel
Documentation Center to revoke the
reduction vessels’ fishery trade
endorsements and appropriately
annotate the reduction vessel’s
document; and
5. Notified the U.S. Maritime
Administration to prohibit the reduction
vessel’s transfer to foreign ownership or
registry.
On July 28, 2005, NMFS published a
Federal Register document (70 FR
43673) proposing regulations to
implement the crab buyback program’s
industry fee system.
On September 16, 2005, NMFS
published a Federal Register document
(70 FR 54652) implementing the crab
buyback program’s industry fee system
regulations. Fee collection and payment
began on October 17, 2005.
On March 1, 2006, NMFS published
a Federal Register document (71 FR
10459) proposing to exempt any crab
landed by the recipients of the CDQ
allocations from the fee regulations
because they did not vote in the crab
buyback program’s fee referendum and
NMFS did not include the ex-vessel
value of crab landed under the CDQ
allocations in the required formula for
establishing the reduction loan subamounts for whose repayment the
reduction fishery was responsible. The
recipients of the CDQ allocations do not
directly benefit from the crab buyback.
In addition, NMFS was informed by
crab buyers that requiring fee principal
disbursement to NMFS on the last
business day of the month presents
problems in properly accounting for
crab landings in a timely fashion. Crab
buyers are unable to complete their
accounting process prior to the end of
that business day. Therefore, in order to
allow crab buyers sufficient time to
disburse fee principal, NMFS proposed
that deposit principal disbursement
shall be made to NMFS not later than
the 7th calendar day of each month.
NMFS also proposed that the annual
report from each crab buyer shall be
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 10, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27204-27209]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4200]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[EPA-R03-RCRA-2006-0381; FRL-8165-7]
Virginia: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Immediate final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Virginia has applied to EPA for final authorization of
revisions to its
[[Page 27205]]
hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that these revisions satisfy all
requirements needed to qualify for final authorization and is
authorizing Virginia's revisions through this immediate final action.
EPA is publishing this rule to authorize the revisions without a prior
proposal because we believe this action is not controversial and do not
expect comments that oppose it. Unless we receive written comments that
oppose this authorization during the comment period, the decision to
authorize Virginia's revisions to its hazardous waste program will take
effect. If we receive comments that oppose this action, we will publish
a document in the Federal Register withdrawing the relevant amendments,
section or paragraph of this rule before they take effect and a
separate document in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register will serve as a proposal to authorize revisions to Virginia's
program that were the subject of adverse comments.
DATES: This final authorization will become effective on July 10, 2006,
unless EPA receives adverse written comments by June 9, 2006. If EPA
receives any such comment, it will publish a timely withdrawal of this
immediate final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that
this authorization, or portions thereof, will not take effect as
scheduled.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by [EPA-R03-RCRA-2006-0381]
by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
2. E-mail: ellerbe.lillie@epamail.epa.gov.
3. Mail: Lillie Ellerbe, Mailcode 3WC21, RCRA State Programs
Branch, U.S. EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-
2029.
4. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
You may inspect and copy Virginia's application from 8:15 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday at the following addresses: Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Waste Program
Coordination, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, VA 23219, Phone number:
(804) 698-4213, attn: Robert Wickline, and Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, West Central Regional Office, 3019 Peters Creek
Road, Roanoke, VA 24019, Phone number: (540) 562-6872, attn: Aziz
Farahmand, and EPA Region III, Library, 2nd Floor, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029, Phone number: (215) 814-5254.
Instructions: Direct your comments to [EPA-R03-RCRA-2006-0381].
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public file without change, 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 e-mail. The federal www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous
access'' system which means that EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public file
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, 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 EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters and any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lillie Ellerbe, Mailcode 3WC21, RCRA
State Programs Branch, U.S. EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029, Phone number: (215) 814-5454.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Why Are Revisions to State Programs Necessary?
States that 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. Program revision may be necessary when the
controlling Federal or State statutory or regulatory authority is
modified or supplemented. Most commonly, States must revise their
programs because of revisions 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?
EPA concludes that Virginia's application to revise its authorized
program meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements
established by RCRA. Therefore, we grant Virginia final authorization
to operate its hazardous waste program with the revisions described in
its application for program revisions, subject to the procedures
described in section E, below. Virginia has responsibility for
permitting treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) within
its borders and for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program
described in its 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 HSWA requirements and prohibitions for which Virginia
has not been authorized, including issuing HSWA permits, until the
State is granted authorization to do so.
C. What Is the Effect of This Authorization Decision?
This decision serves to authorize revisions to Virginia's
authorized hazardous waste program. This action does not impose
additional requirements on the regulated community because the
regulations for which Virginia is being authorized by today's action
are already effective and are not changed by today's action. Virginia
has enforcement responsibilities under its state hazardous waste
program for violations of its program, but EPA retains its authority
under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003, which include, among
others, authority to:
Perform inspections, and require monitoring, tests,
analyses or reports;
Enforce RCRA requirements and suspend or revoke permits;
and
Take enforcement actions regardless of whether Virginia
has taken its own actions.
D. Why Wasn't There a Proposed Rule Before This Rule?
EPA did not publish a proposal before today's rule because we view
this as a routine program change and do not expect comments that oppose
this approval. We are providing an opportunity for public comment now.
In
[[Page 27206]]
addition to this rule, in the proposed rules section of today's Federal
Register we are publishing a separate document that proposes to
authorize Virginia's program revisions. If EPA receives comments that
oppose this authorization, or portions thereof, that document will
serve as a proposal to authorize the revisions to Virginia's program
that were the subject of adverse comment.
E. What Happens if EPA Receives Comments That Oppose This Action?
If EPA receives comments that oppose this authorization, or
portions thereof, we will withdraw this rule, or portions thereof, by
publishing a document in the Federal Register before the rule would
become effective. EPA will base any further decision on the
authorization of Virginia's program revisions on the proposal mentioned
in the previous section. We will then address all public comments in a
later final rule. You may not have another opportunity to comment. If
you want to comment on this authorization, you must do so at this time.
If we receive comments that oppose the authorization of a
particular revision to Virginia's hazardous waste program, we will
withdraw that part of this rule, but the authorization of the program
revisions that the comments do not oppose will become effective on the
date specified above. The Federal Register withdrawal document will
specify which part of the authorization will become effective, and
which part is being withdrawn.
F. What Has Virginia Previously Been Authorized For?
Initially, Virginia received final authorization to implement its
hazardous waste management program effective December 18, 1984 (49 FR
47391). EPA granted authorization for revisions to Virginia's
regulatory program effective August 13, 1993 (58 FR 32855); September
29, 2000 (65 FR 46607); and June 20, 2003 (68 FR 36925).
G. What Revisions Are We Authorizing With This Action?
On May 6, 2005, Virginia submitted a program revision application,
seeking authorization of additional revisions to its program in
accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. Virginia's revision application includes
various regulations that are equivalent to, and no less stringent than,
revisions to the Federal hazardous waste program, as published in the
Federal Register from July 1, 2001 through July 1, 2004, as well as
miscellaneous changes to its previously authorized program. We now make
an immediate final decision, subject to receipt of written comments
that oppose this action, that Virginia's hazardous waste program
revision satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify for
final authorization. Therefore, EPA grants Virginia's final
authorization for the following program revisions:
1. Program Revision Changes for Federal Rules
Virginia seeks authority to administer the Federal requirements
that are listed in Table 1. Virginia incorporates by reference these
Federal provisions, in accordance with the dates specified in Title 9,
Virginia Administrative Code (9 VAC 20-60-18). Table 1 lists Virginia's
requirements that are being recognized as no less stringent than the
analogous Federal requirements. The Virginia Waste Management Act
(VWMA), enacted by the 1986 session of the Virginia's General Assembly
and recodified in 1988 as Chapter 14, Title 10.1, Code of Virginia,
forms the basis of the Virginia program. The regulatory references are
to Title 9, Virginia Administrative Code (9 VAC) effective September 8,
2004.
Table 1.--Virginia's Analogs to the Federal Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of Federal Requirement
(Revision Checklists) \1\ Federal Register Analogous Virginia Authority
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCRA Cluster XI \2\, Non-HSWA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous Air Pollutant Standards; 66 FR 35087, 7/3/01.................... Title 9, Virginia
Technical corrections, Checklist 188. Administrative Code (9 VAC)
Sec. Sec. 20-60-18 and 20-
60-264 A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCRA Cluster XII, HSWA/Non-HSWA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous Waste Identification Rule 66 FR 50332, 10/3/01................... 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18
Corrections: Revisions to Mixture and and 20-60-261 A.
Derived-From Rules, Checklist 194.
Identification and Listing of Hazardous 66 FR 58258, 11/20/01; 67 FR 17119, 4/9/ 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18,
Waste: Inorganic Chemical 02. 20-60-261 A and 20-60-268 A.
Manufacturing Wastes; Land Disposal
Restrictions for Newly Identified
Wastes, Checklist 195.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCRA Cluster XII, HSWA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAMU Amendments, Checklist 196......... 67 FR 2962, 1/22/02.................... 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18,
20-60-260 A and 20-60-264 A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCRA Cluster XII, HSWA/Non-HSWA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interim Standards for Hazardous Air 67 FR 6792, 2/13/02.................... 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18,
Pollutants for Hazardous Waste 20-60-264 A, 20-60-265 A, 20-
Combustors, Checklist 197. 60-266 A and 20-60-270 A.
Hazardous Air Pollutant Standards for 67 FR 6968, 2/14/02.................... 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18,
Hazardous Waste Combustors, Checklist 20-60-266 A and 20-60-270 A.
198.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCRA Cluster XII, Non-HSWA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vacatur of Mineral Processing Spent 67 FR 11251, 3/13/02................... 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18
Materials Being Reclaimed as Solid and 20-60-261 A.
Wastes and TCLP Use with MGP Waste,
Checklist 199.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 27207]]
RCRA Cluster XIII, HSWA/Non-HSWA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zinc Fertilizers Made From Recycled 67 FR 48393, 7/24/02................... 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18,
Hazardous Secondary Materials, 20-60-261 A, 266 A and 20-60-
Checklist 200. 268 A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCRA Cluster XIII, HSWA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land Disposal Restrictions: National 67 FR 62618, 10/7/02................... 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18
Treatment Variance to Designate New and 20-60-268 A.
Treatment Subcategories for
Radioactively Contaminated Cadmium-,
Mercury-, and Silver-, Containing
Batteries, Checklist 201.
NESHAP: Standards for Hazardous Air 67 FR 77687, 12/19/02.................. 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18
Pollutants for Hazardous Waste and 20-60-270 A.
Combustors-Corrections, Checklist 202.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCRA Cluster XIV, Non-HSWA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous Waste Management System: 68 FR 44659, 7/30/03................... 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-8, 20-
Identification and Listing of 60-261 A and 20-60-279 A.
Hazardous Waste; Recycled Used Oil
Standards, Checklist 203.
National Environmental Performance 69 FR 21737, 4/22/04................... 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18
Track Program, Checklist 204. and 20-60-262A.
NESHAP: Surface Coating of Automobiles 69 FR 22601, 4/26/04................... 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-18,
and Light-Duty Trucks, Checklist 205. 20-60-264A, and 20-60-265A.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A Revision Checklist is a document that addresses the specific revisions made to the Federal regulations by
one or more related final rules published in the Federal Register. EPA develops these checklists as tools to
assist States in developing their authorization applications and in documenting specific State analogs to the
Federal Regulations. For more information see EPA's RCRA State Authorization Web page at https://www.epa.gov/
epaoswer/hazwaste/state.
\2\ A RCRA ``Cluster'' is a set of Revision Checklists for Federal rules, typically promulgated over a 12-month
period starting on July 1 and ending on June 30 of the following year.
2. Miscellaneous Changes
In addition to adopting the Federal program revisions discussed in
Section G.1, Virginia has made various regulatory revisions to its
authorized program. Virginia is seeking authorization for these
miscellaneous changes. In a number of the revisions, Virginia has made
wording changes and technical corrections in order to clarify its
regulations. For example, ``director'' has been replaced by
``department'' in many provisions. Virginia has also removed a portion
of the provision that was at 9 VAC Sec. 20-60-70 B. The Commonwealth
previously required that permits for hazardous waste management
facilities, including permits by rule, be the subject of a public
hearing. The provision was more stringent than the Federal
requirements. By removing a portion of the 9 VAC Sec. 20-60-70 B
provision from its regulations, Virginia's requirement for public
hearings is now the same as the analogous Federal regulation.
Finally, Virginia has made various additional regulatory revisions
which are listed following this paragraph. While some of the changes
clarify Virginia's regulations, others make the Virginia program more
stringent or broader in scope than the Federal program. The broader-in-
scope provisions are discussed in Section H.1 below. Regulatory
citations annotated with an asterisk are deemed to be more stringent
than the Federal program. EPA has evaluated the changes described in
this section and has determined that they are consistent with and no
less stringent than the corresponding Federal regulations.
Title 9, Virginia Administrative Code (9 VAC) Sec. Sec. 20-60-264
B 8*, 20-60-264 B 9*, 20-60-264 B 10*, 20-60-264 B 11, 20-60-264 B 12,
20-60-264 B 13*, 20-60-264 B 14*, 20-60-264 B 15*, 20-60-264 B 16*, 20-
60-264 B 17*, 20-60-264 B 18*, 20-60-264 B 19*, 20-60-264 B 20, 20-60-
264 B 21, 20-60-264 B 22*, 20-60-265 B 8*, 20-60-270 B 15, 20-60-315 D
and 20-60-420 A.
A further discussion of Virginia's miscellaneous regulatory changes
is found in the following application document for Virginia:
``Demonstration of Adequate Authority for Virginia Hazardous Waste
Program Revisions, Program Revision III, 2004.''
H. Where Are the Revised Virginia Rules Different From the Federal
Rules?
1. Virginia Requirements That Are Broader in Scope Than the Federal
Program
The Virginia hazardous waste program contains certain provisions
that are beyond the scope of the Federal program. As part of the
miscellaneous changes discussed in Section G.2, Virginia amended its
hazardous waste regulations to (1) change the fee structure for permit
applicants, (2) add annual fees for facilities and large quantity
generators, and (3) shift the cost of certain public participation
activities to applicants and petitioners. The requirements, which are
listed below, are beyond the scope of the Federal program. These
broader in scope provisions are not part of the program being
authorized by today's action. EPA cannot enforce requirements that are
broader in scope, although compliance with such provisions is required
by Virginia law.
(a) Virginia's regulations at 9 VAC Sec. 20-60-124 B9 now require
the petitioners for variances to publish and announce the required
public hearings at their expense.
(b) Virginia's regulations at 9 VAC Sec. Sec. 20-60-262 B8, 20-60-
270 B16 and 20-60-1260 through 9 VAC 20-60-1286 require that beginning
July 1, 2004, large quantity generators, permitted facilities, interim
status facilities and all facilities subject to an order or agreement,
must pay an annual fee to help fund the regulatory programs.
2. Virginia Requirements That Are More Stringent Than the Federal
Program
The Virginia hazardous waste program contains some provisions that
are more stringent than those required by the RCRA program as codified
in the July 1, 2004 edition of title 40 of the
[[Page 27208]]
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). These more stringent provisions are
hereby incorporated into the Federally-authorized program. The specific
more stringent provisions are noted in Section G.2.
3. Virginia's Adoption of EPA's Site-Specific Delisting and Variance
Decisions
In its regulations, Virginia has adopted EPA's decisions relative
to the site-specific delistings published on July 30, 2003 (68 FR
44652), August 7, 2003 (68 FR 46951), September 11, 2003 (68 FR 53517),
February 26, 2004 (69 FR 8828), April 22, 2004 (69 FR 21754), as well
as the site-specific treatment variances from the Land Disposal
Restrictions (LDR) treatment standards published on February 11, 2004
(69 FR 6567). EPA today is not authorizing Virginia to delist wastes or
to grant treatment variances. With regard to waste delisted as a
hazardous waste by EPA, the authority of the Department of
Environmental Quality is limited to recognition of the waste as a
delisted waste in Virginia, and the supervision of waste management
activities for the delisted waste when the activities occur within the
Commonwealth of Virginia. Virginia is not authorized to delist wastes
on behalf of the EPA, or to otherwise administer any case decision to
issue, revoke, or continue a delisting of a waste by EPA. Similarly,
while Virginia is recognizing EPA's decision regarding the site-
specific treatment variances, the authority to grant such variances
remains with the EPA.
I. Who Handles Permits After This Authorization Takes Effect?
After authorization, Virginia 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 that we issued prior to the effective
date of this authorization until the timing and process for effective
transfer to the State are mutually agreed upon. Until such time as
formal transfer of EPA permit responsibility to Virginia occurs and EPA
terminates its permit, EPA and Virginia agree to coordinate the
administration of permits in order to maintain consistency. We will not
issue any more new permits or new portions of permits for the
provisions listed in section G above after the effective date of this
authorization. EPA will continue to implement and issue permits for
HSWA requirements for which Virginia is not yet authorized.
J. How Does This Action Affect Indian Country (18 U.S.C. 115) in
Virginia?
Virginia is not seeking authorization to operate the program on
Indian lands, since there are no Federally-recognized Indian lands in
Virginia.
K. What Is Codification and Is EPA Codifying Virginia'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. We reserve the amendment
of 40 CFR part 272, subpart VV, for this authorization of Virginia's
program revisions until a later date.
L. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This rule only authorizes hazardous waste requirements pursuant to
RCRA section 3006 and imposes no requirements other than those imposed
by State law (see Supplementary Information: section A. Why are
Revisions to State Programs Necessary?). Therefore, this rule complies
with applicable executive orders and statutory provisions as follows.
1. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning Review
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from its
review under Executive Order 12866.
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the Paperwork Reduction Act.
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act
After considering the economic impacts of today's rule on small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 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.
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 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 does not apply to this rule because it will
not have tribal implications (i.e., substantial direct effects 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).
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health & Safety Risks
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not
economically significant and it is not based on health or safety risks.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is not
a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866.
9. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
EPA approves State programs as long as they meet 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
the requirements of RCRA. Thus, section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act does not apply to this rule.
10. Congressional Review Act
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other information
required by the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) 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). This action will be effective on July
10, 2006.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
[[Page 27209]]
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: April 13, 2006.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region III.
[FR Doc. 06-4200 Filed 5-9-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P