Tentative Determination to Approve Research, Development, and Demonstration Request for the Salt River Landfill, and Proposed Finding of No Adverse Effect Under the National Historic Preservation Act; Opportunity for Public Comment, 45187-45193 [E8-17828]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 150 / Monday, August 4, 2008 / Proposed Rules
El Paso CO redesignation request and
the maintenance plan with its
associated MVEBs as satisfying the
requirements of the Federal Clean Air
Act (CAA) as amended in 1990.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Written comments must be
received by September 3, 2008.
Tentative Determination to Approve
Research, Development, and
Demonstration Request for the Salt
River Landfill, and Proposed Finding of
No Adverse Effect Under the National
Historic Preservation Act; Opportunity
for Public Comment
40 CFR Part 258
[EPA–R09–RCRA–2008–0354; FRL–8700–3]
DATES:
Comments may be mailed to
Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning
Section (6PD–L), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.
Comments may also be submitted
electronically or through hand delivery/
courier by following the detailed
instructions in the ADDRESSES section of
the direct final rule located in the rules
section of this Federal Register.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeffrey Riley, Air Planning Section
(6PD–L), Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733,
telephone 214–665–8542; fax number
214–665–7263; e-mail address
riley.jeffrey@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Why is EPA issuing this proposed
rule?
ebenthall on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
This document proposes to take
action on SIP revisions pertaining to the
El Paso area. We have published a direct
final rule approving the State’s SIP
revisions in the ‘‘Rules and
Regulations’’ section of this Federal
Register because we view this as a
noncontroversial action and anticipate
no adverse comment. We have
explained our reasons for this action in
the preamble to the direct final rule.
If we receive no relevant adverse
comment, we will not take further
action on this proposed rule. If we
receive relevant adverse comment, we
will withdraw the direct final rule and
it will not take effect. We would address
all public comments in any subsequent
final rule based on this proposed rule.
We do not intend to institute a second
comment period on this action. Any
parties interested in commenting must
do so at this time. For further
information, please see the information
provided in the ADDRESSES section of
this document.
Dated: July 18, 2008.
Richard E. Greene,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. E8–17701 Filed 8–1–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Aug 01, 2008
Jkt 214001
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX is making a tentative
determination to approve a research,
development, and demonstration
(RD&D) project at the Salt River
Landfill, a commercial municipal solid
waste landfill (MSWLF) owned and
operated by the Salt River PimaMaricopa County Indian Community
(SRPMIC) on the SRPMIC reservation in
Arizona. EPA is seeking public
comment on EPA’s tentative
determination to approve SRPMIC’s
RD&D project. Pursuant to the National
Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), EPA
is also seeking public comment on
EPA’s proposed Area of Potential Effects
(APE), the proposed finding that the
Arizona Canal is the sole historic
property within the APE, and the
proposed finding that the RD&D project
will not adversely affect the Arizona
Canal.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before September 30, 2008. If
sufficient public interest is expressed,
EPA will hold a public hearing at 11
a.m. on September 30, 2008. If by
September 18, 2008, EPA does not
receive information indicating sufficient
public interest for a public hearing, EPA
may cancel the public hearing with no
further notice. If you are interested in
attending the public hearing, contact
Karen Ueno at (415) 972–3317 to verify
that a hearing will be held.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
RCRA–2008–0354 by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: ueno.karen@epa.gov.
• Fax: (415) 947–3530
• Mail: Karen Ueno, Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, Mailcode:
WST–7, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
• Hand Delivery: Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45187
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket Facility’s normal
hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R09–RCRA–2008–
0354. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means 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 https://
www.regulations.gov your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, 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, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Docket Facility located at the
Environmental Protection Agency
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, California. A complete public
portion of the administrative record for
this rulemaking is also available for
review at the Docket Facility upon
request. The Docket Facility is open
from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
ebenthall on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
45188
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 150 / Monday, August 4, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Thursday, excluding legal holidays, and
is located in a secured building. To
review docket materials at the Docket
facility, it is recommended that the
public make an appointment by calling
the Docket Facility at (415) 947–4406
during normal business hours.
Submitting Comments to EPA:
1. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
• Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
• Follow directions—The Agency
may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by
referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section
number.
• Explain why you agree or disagree,
suggest alternatives, and substitute
language for your requested changes.
• Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
• If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
• Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
• Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
• Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
2. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information
that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD–ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD–ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
3. Docket Copying Costs. Copying
arrangements will be made through the
Docket Facility and billed directly to the
recipient. Copying costs may be waived
depending on the total number of pages
copied.
If sufficient public interest is
expressed, EPA will hold a public
hearing at 11 a.m. on September 30,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Aug 01, 2008
Jkt 214001
2008 in Conference Room A of the
offices of the U.S. Bureau of Indian
Affairs, 400 North 5th Street, Phoenix,
Arizona.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen Ueno, Waste Management
Division, WST–7, Environmental
Protection Agency, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901;
telephone number: (415) 972–3317; fax
number: (415) 947–3530; e-mail address:
ueno.karen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Background
Under sections 1008, 2002, 4004, and
4010 of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) as
amended by the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA),
EPA established revised minimum
federal criteria for MSWLFs, including
landfill location restrictions, operating
standards, design standards and
requirements for ground water
monitoring, corrective action, closure
and post-closure care, and financial
assurance. Under RCRA section 4005,
states are to develop permit programs
for facilities that may receive household
hazardous waste or waste from
conditionally exempt small quantity
generators, and EPA determines
whether the program is adequate to
ensure that facilities will comply with
the revised criteria.
The MSWLF criteria are in the Code
of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR part
258. These regulations are selfimplementing and apply directly to
owners and operators of MSWLFs. For
many of these criteria, 40 CFR part 258
includes a flexible performance
standard as an alternative to the selfimplementing regulation. The flexible
standard is not self-implementing, and
use of the alternative standard requires
approval by the Director of an EPAapproved state.
Since EPA’s approval of a state
program does not extend to Indian
country, owners and operators of
MSWLF units located in Indian country
cannot take advantage of the flexibilities
available to those facilities subject to an
approved state program. However, the
EPA has the authority under sections
2002, 4004, and 4010 of RCRA to
promulgate site-specific rules that may
provide for use of alternative standards.
See Yankton Sioux Tribe v. EPA, 950 F.
Supp. 1471 (D.S.D. 1996); Backcountry
Against Dumps v. EPA, 100 F.3d 147
(D.C. Cir. 1996). EPA has developed
draft guidance on preparing a sitespecific request to provide flexibility to
owners or operators of MSWLFs in
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Indian country (Site-Specific Flexibility
Requests for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills in Indian Country Draft
Guidance, EPA530–R–97–016, August
1997).
On March 22, 2004, EPA issued a
final rule at 40 CFR 258.4 amending the
municipal solid waste landfill criteria to
allow for RD&D permits. (69 FR 13242).
This rule allows for variances from
specified criteria for a limited period of
time. Specifically, the rule allows for
the Director of an approved state to
issue a time-limited RD&D permit for a
new MSWLF unit, existing MSWLF
unit, or lateral expansion, for which the
owner or operator proposes to use
innovative and new methods which
vary from either or both of the
following: (1) The run-on control
systems at 40 CFR 258.26(a)(1); and/or
(2) the liquids restrictions at 40 CFR
258.28(a), provided that the MSWLF
unit has a leachate collection system
designed and constructed to maintain
less than a 30-cm depth of leachate on
the liner. The rule also allows for the
issuance of a time-limited RD&D permit
for which the owner or operator
proposes to use innovative and new
methods that vary from the final cover
criteria at 40 CFR 258.60(a)(1) and (2),
and (b)(1), provided that the owner or
operator demonstrates that the
infiltration of liquid through the
alternative cover system will not cause
contamination to groundwater or
surface water, or cause leachate depth
on the liner to exceed 30 cm. RD&D
permits must include such terms and
conditions at least as protective as the
criteria for MSWLFs to assure protection
of human health and the environment.
An RD&D permit cannot exceed three
years and a renewal of an RD&D permit
cannot exceed three years. Although
multiple renewals of an RD&D permit
can be issued, the current total term for
an RD&D permit including renewals
cannot exceed twelve years. In adopting
the RD&D rule, EPA stated that RD&D
facilities in Indian country could be
approved in a site-specific rule.
B. SRPMIC’s Site-Specific Flexibility
Request
The Salt River Landfill is a municipal
solid waste landfill owned and operated
by the SPRMIC on the SRPMIC’s
reservation in Arizona. The landfill site
is approximately 200 acres. The Salt
River Landfill has been in operation
since October 1993 and serves as a solid
waste collection and disposal point for
Maricopa County, Arizona. The landfill
consists of 8 disposal cells within 6
waste disposal areas. The latter are
identified as Phases I—VI. Phase VI is
divided into three cells: VIA, VIB, and
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 150 / Monday, August 4, 2008 / Proposed Rules
ebenthall on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
VIC. Construction of Phase VI, which is
the last below-grade excavation planned
for the landfill, is complete. The landfill
accepts approximately 2,200 tons of
solid waste per day and has composting
and material recovery facilities on-site.
The Phases/cells relevant to this sitespecific flexibility request are Phases
IIIB, IVA, VIA, VIB, and VIC.
In January 2005, the SRPMIC
submitted a site-specific flexibility
application request to EPA for the Salt
River Landfill. The request is twofold. It
seeks EPA approval to use innovative
and new methods which vary from the
liquids restrictions at 40 CFR 258.28(a),
as allowed by EPA’s RD&D regulations
at 40 CFR 258.4. It also seeks approval
to install an alternative bottom liner, as
allowed by EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR
258.40. Specifically, SRPMIC is seeking
to install an alternative bottom liner
system in and to operate Phase VI as a
below grade anaerobic bioreactor.
SRPMIC is also seeking to add certain
liquids to two existing waste disposal
cells within the landfill, Phase IIIB and
Phase IVA, which were constructed
with an alternative bottom liner system
previously approved by EPA (63 FR
68453, Dec. 11, 1998).
Between January 2005 and April
2008, the SRPMIC made revisions to its
application request in response to
concerns raised by EPA. EPA is basing
its tentative determination and this
proposed rule on the application, dated
September 24, 2007, and the April 2008
amendments to that application. The
specific requests for EPA approval in
SRPMIC’s application are discussed
below. As set forth in more detail below,
EPA is proposing to approve the request
and allow SRPMIC to install an
alternative bottom liner system in Phase
VI, and to operate Phases VI, IIIB, and
IVA using innovative and new methods
which vary from the liquids restrictions
at 40 CFR 258.28(a). This tentative
determination is based on 40 CFR
258.40 and 40 CFR 258.4, respectively.
1. Phase VI: Approval to Install an
Alternative Bottom Liner System in and
to Add Certain Liquids to Phase VI
The SRPMIC is seeking EPA approval
to use an alternative bottom liner system
in each of the Phase VI cells (Phase VIA,
B, and C). SRPMIC proposes to replace
the 24-inch compacted clay liner of the
composite liner system with a
geosynthetic clay liner. As provided in
40 CFR 258.40(a)(1), SRPMIC must
ensure that the alternative liner system
does not allow the concentration of the
chemicals listed in Table 1 of 40 CFR
258.40 to be exceeded in the uppermost
aquifer at the relevant point of
compliance, as specified by EPA.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Aug 01, 2008
Jkt 214001
To create bioreactor conditions in
Phase VI, SRMPIC is also seeking EPA
approval to recirculate leachate and
landfill gas condensate, and to add
storm water and groundwater. A
bioreactor uses large amounts of liquids
to accelerate the biodegradation of waste
by increasing the moisture content of
the waste. In turn, enhanced
biodegradation is expected to increase
the capacity of the cell and extend its
operating life. Without approval as
provided in the RD&D rule, MSWLFs
are restricted from adding bulk or
noncontanerized liquids to cells, and
from recirculating leachate and landfill
gas in cells designed with alternative
liner systems.
SRPMIC proposes to recirculate
leachate and landfill gas condensate,
and to add storm water and
groundwater to the Phase VI cells. Only
these types of liquids will be added to
Phase VI, and only to the below grade
portions of this Phase. SRPMIC will
introduce these liquids into Phase VI
using two methods: Moisture addition at
the working face of the cells, and
moisture addition through a series of
below-grade horizontal pipe galleries.
The horizontal pipe galleries will be
constructed below-grade as landfilling
progresses in Phase VI. Each horizontal
pipe gallery will first be used to collect
landfill gas before being converted to a
liquids addition pipe gallery. The
conversion to liquids addition will not
occur until the pipe gallery above it is
installed and collecting landfill gas.
SRPMIC will install at least two layers
of horizontal pipe galleries in the abovegrade portion of Phase VI. These aboveground horizontal pipe galleries will be
for the sole purpose of collecting gas.
SRPMIC will monitor for fugitive gas
emissions at least annually using
ground-based optical remote sensing in
accordance with EPA’s approved
method (EPA OTM–10). Increases to
fugitive gas emission are a concern with
bioreactor operations due to the
enhanced biological degradation of the
solid waste and the associated rise in
the amount of gas generated. SRPMIC
will monitor for fugitive emission and
use this and other monitoring and
operating information collected to better
project the amount of landfill gas
generated and the performance of the
landfill gas collection system.
In addition to increasing the amount
of gas generated, bioreactors increase
the amount of leachate produced.
SRPMIC’s design for Phase VI includes
a separate leachate collection and
recovery system in each of the three
cells to support the increase in leachate
production associated with bioreactor
operation. SRPMIC performed modeling
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45189
to estimate peak leachate depth on the
liner to help ensure that the federal
regulatory limit of less than 30-cm
would be maintained. The leachate
collection system is equipped with an
alarm that is triggered in response to
any depth of leachate on the liner
outside of the sump (for example, if the
sump is not fully draining).
SRPMIC will collect data and results
related to the operation of Phase VI,
including the quality and quantity of gas
and leachate generated, and the
efficiency of the landfill gas and
leachate capture systems. As stated in
SRPMIC’s application of September 24,
2007, and the April 2008 amendments
to that application, an overarching goal
is to demonstrate that the proposed
operation of Phase VI does not increase
risk to human health and the
environment over a standard MSWLF
permit.
2. Phase IIIB and IVA: Approval to Add
Certain Liquids to Below Grade Portions
of Cells With Previously EPA-Approved
Alternative Bottom Liner Systems
SRPMIC is seeking EPA approval to
add certain liquids to below-grade
portions of two existing cells, Phases
IIIB and IVA, each of which were
constructed using an alternative bottom
liner system previously approved by
EPA (63 FR 68453, December 11, 1998).
As noted, above, without approval as
provided in the RD&D rule, MSWLFs
are restricted from adding bulk or
noncontanerized liquids to cells, and
from recirculating leachate and landfill
gas condensate in cells designed with
alternative liner systems.
SRPMIC proposes to add liquids to
Phases IIIB and IVA, but does not intend
to increase the moisture content of the
solid waste mass to a bioreactor level
(40 CFR 63.1990 defines ‘‘bioreactor’’ as
reaching a minimum average moisture
content of at least 40% by weight).
SRPMIC is seeking to add only 25% of
the liquids volume that would be
needed to increase moisture content to
40%. SRPMIC proposes to increase the
moisture content of the waste mass by
recirculating leachate and landfill gas
condensate, and by adding storm water
and groundwater. Only these types of
liquids will be added to Phases IIIB and
IVA, and only to the below grade
portions of these Phases.
SRPMIC will add the liquids using the
existing gas collection pipes in these
cells. Field practice and research have
shown that using the same pipe galleries
to both collect gas and distribute liquids
can negatively affect the gas collection
efficiency of the pipes. SRPMIC will
monitor the gas flow. If the gas flow rate
drops below 50% of the pre-liquids
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
45190
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 150 / Monday, August 4, 2008 / Proposed Rules
injection rate, SRPMIC will suspend
liquids injection until gas flow rebounds
to 75% of the pre-liquids injection rate.
As proposed for Phase VI, SRPMIC
will monitor for fugitive gas emission
and use this and other monitoring and
operating information to better project
the amount of landfill gas generated and
the performance of the landfill gas
collection system. SRPMIC will collect
data and results related to the operation
of Phases IIIB and IVA, including the
quality and quantity of gas and leachate
generated, and the efficiency of the
landfill gas and leachate capture
systems.
SRPMIC has performed modeling to
determine how much liquid can be
added annually to Phases IIIB and IVA
to, among other things, keep the depth
of leachate on the liner to less than 30
cm as required by the federal
regulations. SRPMIC is required to
suspend adding liquids to Phases IIIB
and IVA if operating parameters are not
being met, including depth of leachate
on the liner at or over 30 cm, ponding,
gas collection difficulty, and seeps. As
stated in SRPMIC’s application of
September 24, 2007, and the April 2008
amendments to that application, an
overarching goal is to demonstrate that
the proposed operation of Phase IIIB
and IVA does not increase risk to
human health and the environment over
a standard MSWLF permit.
To further reduce the potential risk
posed by increased liquids addition and
leachate generation from Phases VI, IIIB,
and IVA, SRPMIC will install a new
groundwater monitoring network of 7
wells. The network will be used to
monitor the uppermost portion of the
aquifer for changes to groundwater
elevation and quality. SRPMIC shall
maintain at least a 25-foot separation
zone between the bottom of the landfill
and groundwater. SRPMIC will also
monitor liquids balance (how much
liquid is being deposited into the
landfill compared to how much is being
collected), mass balance (the mass of the
materials deposited into the landfill,
compared to the mass of what is being
collected), and waste volume and
settlement.
ebenthall on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
II. EPA’s Action
A. Tentative Determination To Approve
SRPMIC’s Site-Specific Flexibility
Request
After completing a review of
SRPMIC’s final site-specific flexibility
application request, dated September
27, 2007, and the amendments to that
application, dated April 2008, EPA is
proposing to approve SRPMIC’s sitespecific flexibility request to: (1) Install
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Aug 01, 2008
Jkt 214001
an alternative bottom liner system in
Phase VI and to operate Phase VI as an
anaerobic bioreactor by recirclating
leachate and landfill gas condensate,
and adding storm water and
groundwater to the below grade portions
of Phase VI; and (2) recirculate leachate
and landfill gas condensate and add
storm water and groundwater to the
below grade portions of Phases IIIB and
IVA to increase the moisture content of
the waste mass in these phases, both of
which have previously EPA-approved
alternative bottom liner systems.
EPA is basing its tentative
determination on a number of factors,
including SRPMIC’s overarching goal to
demonstrate protection of human health
and the environment, and the
requirement of today’s rule to maintain
less than 30-cm depth of leachate on the
liner.
EPA considered certain issues
pertaining to the proposed RD&D
project, including the potential for
increased leachate production and
increased landfill gas generation and
fugitive emissions from operation of the
bioreactor. With respect to the potential
for increased leachate production,
SRPMIC performed modeling to project
the impact of liquids addition on the
liner and peak leachate production
rates, and to assess the adequacy of the
leachate collection system design
capacity. This modeling demonstrated
that the leachate collection system is
designed to appropriately handle the
amount of anticipated leachate and that
the increase in liquids should not
adversely affect the performance of the
liner system in protecting groundwater.
SRPMIC will also maintain a 25-foot or
greater separation zone between the
bottom of the landfill and the top of the
groundwater aquifer. SRPMIC will
routinely monitor leachate quantity and
quality, liquids balance, volume and
settlement of the waste, and
groundwater quality and levels. By
monitoring, SRPMIC will be able to
ensure effective and protective ongoing
operations of these Phases of the landfill
and provide data for EPA to use in its
ongoing RD&D study.
With respect to the potential for
increased landfill gas generation and
fugitive gas emissions, SRPMIC will
ensure that each horizontal pipe gallery
in Phase VI will be used to collect
landfill gas before being converted for
liquids addition to reduce the risk of
negatively affecting the gas collection
efficiency of the pipe gallery. No pipe
gallery will be converted to liquids
addition until the pipe gallery above it
is installed and collecting landfill gas.
SRPMIC also will install at least two
layers of horizontal pipe galleries in the
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
above-grade portion of Phase VI for the
sole purpose of collecting gas. To
further reduce the risk of increased
landfill gas generation and fugitive
emissions, SRPMIC will only add
liquids to the below-grade portions of
Phases VI, IIIB, and IVA. SRPMIC will
monitor fugitive gas emissions annually
or more frequently, as appropriate,
using ground-based optical remote
sensing (EPA OTM–10), and will
routinely monitor landfill gas quantity
and quality. Using information gained
from the monitoring program, SRPMIC
will propose site-specific input
parameters to EPA that improve
modeling calculations for the amount of
landfill gas generated and the
performance of landfill gas collection
systems.
In the event that EPA determines that
the project goals are not being attained,
including protecting human health and
the environment, EPA may terminate
SRPMIC’s authority to operate the RD&D
project.
As part of this tentative
determination, and in accordance with
40 CFR 258.4, EPA is proposing to
require SRPMIC to maintain less than 30
cm depth of leachate on the liner in
Phases VI, IIIB, and IVA, and to ensure
that the approved operation of these
Phases is protective of human health
and the environment. For purposes of
the alternative liner system in Phase VI,
the relevant point(s) of compliance
pursuant to 40 CFR 258.40 will be
determined by EPA and shall be no
more than 150 meters from the waste
management cell boundaries and
located on land owned by the owner of
the cells.
In accordance with its application,
SRPMIC will submit annual reports to
EPA that summarize and show whether
and to what extent RD&D project goals
are being achieved. The annual report
will include a summary of all
monitoring and testing results. Any
deviations from the September 27, 2007
application, and the April 2008
amendments to that application, must
continue to conform to the standards set
forth in 40 CFR 258.4 and require the
prior approval of EPA.
Also in accordance with its
application, SRPMIC will arrange for
independent, third party inspections of
the RD&D operations on a quarterly
basis throughout the term of the RD&D
approval. Copies of the report will be
submitted to EPA.
The tentative determination would
allow operation of the subject Phases of
the landfill consistent with the RD&D
rule for a total of 12 years. However, the
owner or operator of the landfill must
seek a renewal of this authority every
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 150 / Monday, August 4, 2008 / Proposed Rules
three years. EPA is proposing to allow
operation of the landfill cells in
accordance with the RD&D rule for three
years, but the operator may request a
renewal of the authorization by
submitting a request to the Director of
the Waste Management Division. Each
renewal request would be subject to
public notice and comment. No renewal
may be for greater than three years and
the overall period of operation may not
exceed twelve years.
ebenthall on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
B. Proposed Finding of No Adverse
Effect Under NHPA
As part of the NHPA process, EPA is
proposing a 1⁄2-mile radius around the
Salt River Landfill as the area of
potential effects (APE). An APE is the
geographic area within which a project
may directly or indirectly cause
alterations in the character or use of
historic properties, if any such
properties exist. In proposing a 1⁄2-mile
APE, EPA considered that SRPMIC’s
request is of a limited nature at a
landfill that already exists and has been
operating since 1993. EPA’s proposed
APE is consistent with the policy of the
Archaeology Department of SRPMIC’s
Environmental Protection and Natural
Resources Division. SRPMIC does not
have a Tribal Historic Preservation
Officer (THPO).
In accordance with the NHPA, EPA
consulted with SRPMIC’s Archaeology
Department, the Arizona State Historic
Preservation Officer, the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation, the Salt River Project, the
U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs and
nearby certified local governments on
SRPMIC’s RD&D request and reviewed
the NHPA requirements. EPA provided
the following tribes, who may have a
cultural or historic interest within the
proposed APE, with an opportunity to
identify such cultural or historic
properties: Ak-Chin Indian Community;
Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation; Gila
River Indian Community; Hopi Tribe;
Pascua Yaqui Tribe; Tohono O’odham
Nation; Yavapai-Apache Nation;
Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe. No
cultural or historic property was
identified by these tribes, nor was any
interest expressed to further consult
with EPA.
Only one historic property, the
Arizona Canal, has been identified
within the proposed APE. The Arizona
Canal and associated access roads and
banks are the property of the U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation. Construction of
the Arizona Canal began in 1883. It is
a concrete-lined structure that continues
to distribute water for domestic and
irrigation uses in Maricopa County. The
canal banks support a variety of non-
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Aug 01, 2008
Jkt 214001
motorized recreation activities, such as
hiking, bicycling, walking, and jogging.
The northern border of the Salt River
Landfill is adjacent to the Arizona
Canal. An eight-foot fence separates the
landfill and the canal, and at its closest
proximity, the fence is approximately 50
feet away from the canal. An additional
10–30 feet separates the fence from the
proposed locations of the new
groundwater wells nearest to the canal.
Recreational use of the canal is
restricted and minimized in the vicinity
of the SRPMIC border.
The proposed SRPMIC RD&D project
could potentially impact the Arizona
Canal in three ways: (1) Off-site
migration of leachate, (2) disturbance
from the installation of the 7 new
groundwater monitoring network wells,
and (3) fugitive gas emissions.
It is not likely that there would be offsite migration of leachate via the
groundwater or surface water pathways.
With respect to the groundwater
pathway, SRPMIC will maintain a 25foot or greater zone of separation
between the bottom of the landfill and
the top of the aquifer to prevent leachate
from coming into contact with
groundwater. Each waste cell is or will
be equipped with a bottom liner and
leachate collection system to further
reduce the risk of off-site leachate
migration. With respect to the surface
water pathway, the leachate retention
pond has the estimated capacity to
accommodate the additional leachate
projected to be generated from Phases
VI, IIIA, and IVB, even when leachate is
not being recirculated back into the
landfill. Stormwater is retained on-site
and stormwater retention capacity will
continue to be increased by SRPMIC
throughout the life of the landfill. The
canal, itself, is protected by berms and
is at a higher elevation than the landfill.
Surface water from the landfill does not
flow towards the canal.
The installation of 7 new groundwater
monitoring wells should not have an
adverse impact on the canal. The noise,
equipment, vehicles, and possible dust
associated with installing wells should
not affect recreation use of the canal
because the installation process is shortterm, and recreation use is restricted
and minimized along the SRPMIC
border. In addition, the proposed well
locations and the canal are separated by
an eight-foot fence and a distance of 60
feet or more. Because surface water does
not move from the landfill towards the
canal, and because storm water is
retained on-site, it is not likely that
loosened sediment from ground
disturbance would find a ready pathway
to the canal.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45191
Increased gas generation and
emissions should not negatively impact
the canal, as the canal is made of
concrete, an inert building material. As
required by EPA approval of the
proposed RD&D project, each of the
waste cells have or will have a gas
collection and control system, and
SRPMIC will routinely monitor the
quality and quantity of landfill gas and
fugitive emissions, and assess collection
efficiency. The gas that is collected will
be destroyed at the landfill’s flare
station or converted into energy. To the
extent there are increased fugitive
emissions, recreational use of the canal
should not be adversely affected since
there are few, if any, such uses along the
SRPMIC border of the canal.
Pursuant to section 106 of the NHPA,
EPA has reviewed SRPMIC’s sitespecific flexibility request to take into
account the effect of the proposed RD&D
project on historic properties. EPA
requests public comment on its
proposed 1⁄2-mile area of potential
effects, its proposed finding that the
Arizona Canal is the sole historic
property within the APE, and its
proposed finding of no adverse effect.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866,
‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this rule is
not of general applicability and
therefore is not a regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
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.)
because it applies to a particular facility
only.
Because this rule is of particular
applicability relating to a particular
facility, it is not subject to the regulatory
flexibility provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), or
to sections 202, 204, and 205 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA) (Pub. L. 104–4). Because this
rule will affect only a particular facility,
it will not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as specified in
section 203 of UMRA.
Because this rule will affect only a
particular facility, this proposed rule
does not have federalism implications.
It will not have substantial direct effects
on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132,
‘‘Federalism,’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10,
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
ebenthall on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
45192
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 150 / Monday, August 4, 2008 / Proposed Rules
1999). Thus, Executive Order 13132
does not apply to this rule.
This 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 as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because the
Agency does not have reason to believe
the environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children. The
basis for this belief is EPA’s
conservative analysis of the potential
risks posed by SRPMIC’s proposal and
the controls and standards set forth in
the application.
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is
not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
As required by section 3 of Executive
Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ (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.
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments,’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), calls for EPA
to develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ EPA has concluded that
this action may have tribal implications
because it is directly applicable to the
owner and/or operator of the landfill,
which is currently the Tribe. However,
this tentative determination, if made
final, will neither impose substantial
direct compliance costs on tribal
governments, nor preempt Tribal law.
This tentative determination to approve
the SRPMIC’s application will affect
only the SRPMIC’s operation of their
landfill on their own land.
EPA consulted with the SRPMIC early
in the process of making this tentative
determination to approve the Tribe’s
RD&D project so as to give them
meaningful and timely input into the
determination. In 2005, SRPMIC
submitted its site-specific RD&D
flexibility request. Between 2005 and
2008, many technical issues were raised
and addressed concerning SRPMIC’s
proposal. EPA’s consultation with the
Tribe culminated in the SRPMIC
submitting an RD&D application
amendment in April of 2008.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Aug 01, 2008
Jkt 214001
With respect to the type of flexibility
being afforded to SRPMIC under this
proposed rule, Executive Order 13175
does provide for agencies to review
applications for flexibility ‘‘with a
general view toward increasing
opportunities for utilizing flexible
policy approaches at the Indian tribal
level in cases in which the proposed
waiver is consistent with the applicable
Federal policy objectives and is
otherwise appropriate.’’ In formulating
this tentative determination and
proposed rule, the Region has been
guided by the fundamental principles
set forth in Executive Order 13175 and
has granted the SRPMIC the ‘‘maximum
administrative discretion possible’’
within the standards set forth under the
RD&D rule in accordance with
Executive Order 13175.
EPA specifically solicits any
additional comment on this tentative
determination from tribal officials of the
SRPMIC.
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs
EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards, (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to
provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
The technical standards included in
the application were proposed by
SRPMIC. Given EPA’s obligations under
Executive Order 13175 (see above), the
Agency has, to the extent appropriate,
applied the standards established by the
Tribe. In addition, the Agency
considered the Interstate Technology
and Regulatory Council’s February 2006
technical and regulatory guideline
‘‘Characterization, Design, Construction,
and Monitoring of Bioreactor Landfills.’’
Authority: Sections 1008, 2002, 4004, and
4010 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6907, 6912, 6944, and
6949a. Temporary Delegation of Authority to
Promulgate Site-Specific Rules to Respond to
Requests for Flexibility from Owners/
Operators of Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
Facilities in Indian Country, February 26,
2008, Incorporation by Reference.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 258
Environmental protection, Municipal
landfills, Reporting and recordkeeping
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requirements, Waste treatment and
disposal.
Dated: July 23, 2008.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, 40 CFR part 258 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 258—CRITERIA FOR MUNICIPAL
SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS
Subpart D—[Amended]
1. The authority citation for part 258
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1345(d) and (e); 42
U.S.C. 6902(a), 6907, 6912(a), 6944, 6945(c)
and 6949a(c), 6981(a).
2. Amend subpart D by adding
§ 258.42 to read as follows:
§ 258.42 Approval of Site-specific
Flexibility Requests in Indian Country.
(a) Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian
Community (SRPMIC), Salt River
Landfill Research, Development, and
Demonstration Project Requirements.
Paragraph (a) of this section applies to
the Salt River Landfill, a municipal
solid waste landfill owned and operated
by the SPRMIC on the SRPMIC’s
reservation in Arizona, which includes
waste disposal areas identified as
‘‘Phases I–VI.’’ The Research,
Development, and Demonstration
Permit Application Salt River Landfill,
submitted by SRPMIC and dated
September 24, 2007 and amended in
April 2008 is hereby incorporated into
this provision by this reference. The
facility owner and/or operator may
operate the facility in accordance with
this application, including the following
activities more generally described as
follows:
(1) The owner and/or operator may
install a geosynthetic clay liner as an
alternative bottom liner system in Phase
VI.
(2) The owner and/or operator may
operate Phase VI as a bioreactor by
recirculating leachate and landfill gas
condensate, and by adding storm water
and groundwater, to the below grade
portions of Phase VI.
(3) The owner and/or operator may
increase the moisture content of the
waste mass in Phases IIIB and IVA by
recirculating leachate and landfill gas
condensate, and by adding storm water
and groundwater, to the below grade
portions of Phases IIIB and IVA.
(4) The owner and/or operator shall
maintain less than a 30-cm depth of
leachate on the liner.
(5) The owner and/or operator shall
submit reports to the Director of the
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
ebenthall on PRODPC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 150 / Monday, August 4, 2008 / Proposed Rules
Waste Management Division at EPA
Region 9 as specified in the September
24, 2007 application, as amended in
April of 2008, including an annual
report showing whether and to what
extent the site is progressing in attaining
project goals. The annual report will
also include a summary of all
monitoring and testing results, as
specified in the application.
(6) The owner and/or operator may
not operate the facility pursuant to the
authority granted by this section if there
is any deviation from the terms,
conditions, and requirements of this
section unless the operation of the
facility will continue to conform to the
standards set forth in § 258.4 of this
chapter and the owner and/or operator
has obtained the prior written approval
of the Director of the Waste
Management Division at EPA Region 9
or his or her designee to implement
corrective measures or otherwise
operate the facility subject to such
deviation. The Director of the Waste
Management Division or designee shall
provide an opportunity for the public to
comment on any significant deviation
prior to providing his or her written
approval of the deviation.
(7) Paragraphs (a)(2), (3), (5), (6) and
(9) of this section will terminate August
4, 2011 unless the Director of the Waste
Management Division at EPA Region 9
or his or her designee renews this
authority in writing. Any such renewal
may extend the authority granted under
paragraphs (a)(2), (3), (5), (6) and (9) of
this section for up to an additional three
years, and multiple renewals (up to a
total of 12 years) may be provided. The
Director of the Waste Management
Division or designee shall provide an
opportunity for the public to comment
on any renewal request prior to
providing his or her written approval or
disapproval of such request.
(8) In no event will the provisions of
paragraphs (a)(2), (3), (5), (6) or (9) of
this section remain in effect after August
4, 2020. Upon termination of paragraphs
(a)(2), (3), (5), (6) and (9) of this section,
and except with respect to paragraphs
(a)(1) and (4) of this section, the owner
and/or operator shall return to
compliance with the regulatory
requirements which would have been in
effect absent the flexibility provided
through this site-specific rule.
(9) In seeking any renewal of the
authority granted under or other
requirements of paragraphs (a)(2), (3),
(5) and (6) of this section, the owner
and/or operator shall provide a detailed
assessment of the project showing the
status with respect to achieving project
goals, a list of problems and status with
respect to problem resolutions, and any
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Aug 01, 2008
Jkt 214001
other requirements that the Director of
the Waste Management Division at EPA
Region 9 or his or her designee has
determined are necessary for the
approval of any renewal and has
communicated in writing to the owner
and operator.
(10) The owner and/or operator’s
authority to operate the landfill in
accordance with paragraphs (a)(2), (3),
(5), (6) and (9) of this section shall
terminate if the Director of the Waste
Management Division at EPA Region 9
or his or her designee determines that
the overall goals of the project are not
being attained, including protection of
human health or the environment. Any
such determination shall be
communicated in writing to the owner
and operator.
(b) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. E8–17828 Filed 8–1–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[EPA–R04–RCRA–2007–1185; FRL–8699–8]
Mississippi: Proposed Authorization of
State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revision
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Mississippi has applied to
EPA for Final authorization of the
changes to its hazardous waste program
under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA proposes to
grant final authorization to Mississippi.
In the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section
of this Federal Register, EPA is
authorizing the changes by an
immediate final rule. EPA did not make
a proposal prior to the immediate final
rule because we believe this action is
not controversial and do not expect
comments that oppose it. We have
explained the reasons for this
authorization in the preamble of the
immediate final rule. Unless we get
written comments which oppose this
authorization during the comment
period, the immediate final rule will
become effective on the date it
establishes, and we will not take further
action on this proposal. If we receive
comments that oppose this action, we
will withdraw the immediate final rule
and it will not take effect. We will
respond to public comments in a later
final rule based on this proposal. You
may not have another opportunity for
comment.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45193
Comments must be received on
or before September 3, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
RCRA–2007–1185 by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: johnson.otis@epa.gov.
• Fax: (404) 562–9964 (prior to
faxing, please notify the EPA contact
listed below).
• Mail: Send written comments to
Otis Johnson, Permits and State
Programs Section, RCRA Programs and
Materials Management Branch, RCRA
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, The Sam Nunn Federal Center,
61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303–8960.
• Hand Delivery: Otis Johnson,
Permits and State Programs, RCRA
Programs and Materials Management
Branch, RCRA Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, The
Sam Nunn Federal Center, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–
8960. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket’s normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R04–RCRA–2007–
1185. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means 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 https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, 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
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\04AUP1.SGM
04AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 150 (Monday, August 4, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45187-45193]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17828]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 258
[EPA-R09-RCRA-2008-0354; FRL-8700-3]
Tentative Determination to Approve Research, Development, and
Demonstration Request for the Salt River Landfill, and Proposed Finding
of No Adverse Effect Under the National Historic Preservation Act;
Opportunity for Public Comment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency Region IX is making a
tentative determination to approve a research, development, and
demonstration (RD&D) project at the Salt River Landfill, a commercial
municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) owned and operated by the Salt
River Pima-Maricopa County Indian Community (SRPMIC) on the SRPMIC
reservation in Arizona. EPA is seeking public comment on EPA's
tentative determination to approve SRPMIC's RD&D project. Pursuant to
the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), EPA is also seeking
public comment on EPA's proposed Area of Potential Effects (APE), the
proposed finding that the Arizona Canal is the sole historic property
within the APE, and the proposed finding that the RD&D project will not
adversely affect the Arizona Canal.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 30, 2008. If
sufficient public interest is expressed, EPA will hold a public hearing
at 11 a.m. on September 30, 2008. If by September 18, 2008, EPA does
not receive information indicating sufficient public interest for a
public hearing, EPA may cancel the public hearing with no further
notice. If you are interested in attending the public hearing, contact
Karen Ueno at (415) 972-3317 to verify that a hearing will be held.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
RCRA-2008-0354 by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: ueno.karen@epa.gov.
Fax: (415) 947-3530
Mail: Karen Ueno, Environmental Protection Agency Region
IX, Mailcode: WST-7, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
Hand Delivery: Environmental Protection Agency Region IX,
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket Facility's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R09-RCRA-
2008-0354. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means 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 https://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, 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, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Docket Facility
located at the Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, California. A complete public portion of the
administrative record for this rulemaking is also available for review
at the Docket Facility upon request. The Docket Facility is open from 9
a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
[[Page 45188]]
Thursday, excluding legal holidays, and is located in a secured
building. To review docket materials at the Docket facility, it is
recommended that the public make an appointment by calling the Docket
Facility at (415) 947-4406 during normal business hours.
Submitting Comments to EPA:
1. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
Follow directions--The Agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
Explain why you agree or disagree, suggest alternatives,
and substitute language for your requested changes.
Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
2. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk
or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
3. Docket Copying Costs. Copying arrangements will be made through
the Docket Facility and billed directly to the recipient. Copying costs
may be waived depending on the total number of pages copied.
If sufficient public interest is expressed, EPA will hold a public
hearing at 11 a.m. on September 30, 2008 in Conference Room A of the
offices of the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, 400 North 5th Street,
Phoenix, Arizona.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Ueno, Waste Management Division,
WST-7, Environmental Protection Agency, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105-3901; telephone number: (415) 972-3317; fax number:
(415) 947-3530; e-mail address: ueno.karen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Background
Under sections 1008, 2002, 4004, and 4010 of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) as amended by the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA), EPA established
revised minimum federal criteria for MSWLFs, including landfill
location restrictions, operating standards, design standards and
requirements for ground water monitoring, corrective action, closure
and post-closure care, and financial assurance. Under RCRA section
4005, states are to develop permit programs for facilities that may
receive household hazardous waste or waste from conditionally exempt
small quantity generators, and EPA determines whether the program is
adequate to ensure that facilities will comply with the revised
criteria.
The MSWLF criteria are in the Code of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR
part 258. These regulations are self-implementing and apply directly to
owners and operators of MSWLFs. For many of these criteria, 40 CFR part
258 includes a flexible performance standard as an alternative to the
self-implementing regulation. The flexible standard is not self-
implementing, and use of the alternative standard requires approval by
the Director of an EPA-approved state.
Since EPA's approval of a state program does not extend to Indian
country, owners and operators of MSWLF units located in Indian country
cannot take advantage of the flexibilities available to those
facilities subject to an approved state program. However, the EPA has
the authority under sections 2002, 4004, and 4010 of RCRA to promulgate
site-specific rules that may provide for use of alternative standards.
See Yankton Sioux Tribe v. EPA, 950 F. Supp. 1471 (D.S.D. 1996);
Backcountry Against Dumps v. EPA, 100 F.3d 147 (D.C. Cir. 1996). EPA
has developed draft guidance on preparing a site-specific request to
provide flexibility to owners or operators of MSWLFs in Indian country
(Site-Specific Flexibility Requests for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
in Indian Country Draft Guidance, EPA530-R-97-016, August 1997).
On March 22, 2004, EPA issued a final rule at 40 CFR 258.4 amending
the municipal solid waste landfill criteria to allow for RD&D permits.
(69 FR 13242). This rule allows for variances from specified criteria
for a limited period of time. Specifically, the rule allows for the
Director of an approved state to issue a time-limited RD&D permit for a
new MSWLF unit, existing MSWLF unit, or lateral expansion, for which
the owner or operator proposes to use innovative and new methods which
vary from either or both of the following: (1) The run-on control
systems at 40 CFR 258.26(a)(1); and/or (2) the liquids restrictions at
40 CFR 258.28(a), provided that the MSWLF unit has a leachate
collection system designed and constructed to maintain less than a 30-
cm depth of leachate on the liner. The rule also allows for the
issuance of a time-limited RD&D permit for which the owner or operator
proposes to use innovative and new methods that vary from the final
cover criteria at 40 CFR 258.60(a)(1) and (2), and (b)(1), provided
that the owner or operator demonstrates that the infiltration of liquid
through the alternative cover system will not cause contamination to
groundwater or surface water, or cause leachate depth on the liner to
exceed 30 cm. RD&D permits must include such terms and conditions at
least as protective as the criteria for MSWLFs to assure protection of
human health and the environment. An RD&D permit cannot exceed three
years and a renewal of an RD&D permit cannot exceed three years.
Although multiple renewals of an RD&D permit can be issued, the current
total term for an RD&D permit including renewals cannot exceed twelve
years. In adopting the RD&D rule, EPA stated that RD&D facilities in
Indian country could be approved in a site-specific rule.
B. SRPMIC's Site-Specific Flexibility Request
The Salt River Landfill is a municipal solid waste landfill owned
and operated by the SPRMIC on the SRPMIC's reservation in Arizona. The
landfill site is approximately 200 acres. The Salt River Landfill has
been in operation since October 1993 and serves as a solid waste
collection and disposal point for Maricopa County, Arizona. The
landfill consists of 8 disposal cells within 6 waste disposal areas.
The latter are identified as Phases I--VI. Phase VI is divided into
three cells: VIA, VIB, and
[[Page 45189]]
VIC. Construction of Phase VI, which is the last below-grade excavation
planned for the landfill, is complete. The landfill accepts
approximately 2,200 tons of solid waste per day and has composting and
material recovery facilities on-site. The Phases/cells relevant to this
site-specific flexibility request are Phases IIIB, IVA, VIA, VIB, and
VIC.
In January 2005, the SRPMIC submitted a site-specific flexibility
application request to EPA for the Salt River Landfill. The request is
twofold. It seeks EPA approval to use innovative and new methods which
vary from the liquids restrictions at 40 CFR 258.28(a), as allowed by
EPA's RD&D regulations at 40 CFR 258.4. It also seeks approval to
install an alternative bottom liner, as allowed by EPA's regulations at
40 CFR 258.40. Specifically, SRPMIC is seeking to install an
alternative bottom liner system in and to operate Phase VI as a below
grade anaerobic bioreactor. SRPMIC is also seeking to add certain
liquids to two existing waste disposal cells within the landfill, Phase
IIIB and Phase IVA, which were constructed with an alternative bottom
liner system previously approved by EPA (63 FR 68453, Dec. 11, 1998).
Between January 2005 and April 2008, the SRPMIC made revisions to
its application request in response to concerns raised by EPA. EPA is
basing its tentative determination and this proposed rule on the
application, dated September 24, 2007, and the April 2008 amendments to
that application. The specific requests for EPA approval in SRPMIC's
application are discussed below. As set forth in more detail below, EPA
is proposing to approve the request and allow SRPMIC to install an
alternative bottom liner system in Phase VI, and to operate Phases VI,
IIIB, and IVA using innovative and new methods which vary from the
liquids restrictions at 40 CFR 258.28(a). This tentative determination
is based on 40 CFR 258.40 and 40 CFR 258.4, respectively.
1. Phase VI: Approval to Install an Alternative Bottom Liner System in
and to Add Certain Liquids to Phase VI
The SRPMIC is seeking EPA approval to use an alternative bottom
liner system in each of the Phase VI cells (Phase VIA, B, and C).
SRPMIC proposes to replace the 24-inch compacted clay liner of the
composite liner system with a geosynthetic clay liner. As provided in
40 CFR 258.40(a)(1), SRPMIC must ensure that the alternative liner
system does not allow the concentration of the chemicals listed in
Table 1 of 40 CFR 258.40 to be exceeded in the uppermost aquifer at the
relevant point of compliance, as specified by EPA.
To create bioreactor conditions in Phase VI, SRMPIC is also seeking
EPA approval to recirculate leachate and landfill gas condensate, and
to add storm water and groundwater. A bioreactor uses large amounts of
liquids to accelerate the biodegradation of waste by increasing the
moisture content of the waste. In turn, enhanced biodegradation is
expected to increase the capacity of the cell and extend its operating
life. Without approval as provided in the RD&D rule, MSWLFs are
restricted from adding bulk or noncontanerized liquids to cells, and
from recirculating leachate and landfill gas in cells designed with
alternative liner systems.
SRPMIC proposes to recirculate leachate and landfill gas
condensate, and to add storm water and groundwater to the Phase VI
cells. Only these types of liquids will be added to Phase VI, and only
to the below grade portions of this Phase. SRPMIC will introduce these
liquids into Phase VI using two methods: Moisture addition at the
working face of the cells, and moisture addition through a series of
below-grade horizontal pipe galleries. The horizontal pipe galleries
will be constructed below-grade as landfilling progresses in Phase VI.
Each horizontal pipe gallery will first be used to collect landfill gas
before being converted to a liquids addition pipe gallery. The
conversion to liquids addition will not occur until the pipe gallery
above it is installed and collecting landfill gas. SRPMIC will install
at least two layers of horizontal pipe galleries in the above-grade
portion of Phase VI. These above-ground horizontal pipe galleries will
be for the sole purpose of collecting gas.
SRPMIC will monitor for fugitive gas emissions at least annually
using ground-based optical remote sensing in accordance with EPA's
approved method (EPA OTM-10). Increases to fugitive gas emission are a
concern with bioreactor operations due to the enhanced biological
degradation of the solid waste and the associated rise in the amount of
gas generated. SRPMIC will monitor for fugitive emission and use this
and other monitoring and operating information collected to better
project the amount of landfill gas generated and the performance of the
landfill gas collection system.
In addition to increasing the amount of gas generated, bioreactors
increase the amount of leachate produced. SRPMIC's design for Phase VI
includes a separate leachate collection and recovery system in each of
the three cells to support the increase in leachate production
associated with bioreactor operation. SRPMIC performed modeling to
estimate peak leachate depth on the liner to help ensure that the
federal regulatory limit of less than 30-cm would be maintained. The
leachate collection system is equipped with an alarm that is triggered
in response to any depth of leachate on the liner outside of the sump
(for example, if the sump is not fully draining).
SRPMIC will collect data and results related to the operation of
Phase VI, including the quality and quantity of gas and leachate
generated, and the efficiency of the landfill gas and leachate capture
systems. As stated in SRPMIC's application of September 24, 2007, and
the April 2008 amendments to that application, an overarching goal is
to demonstrate that the proposed operation of Phase VI does not
increase risk to human health and the environment over a standard MSWLF
permit.
2. Phase IIIB and IVA: Approval to Add Certain Liquids to Below Grade
Portions of Cells With Previously EPA-Approved Alternative Bottom Liner
Systems
SRPMIC is seeking EPA approval to add certain liquids to below-
grade portions of two existing cells, Phases IIIB and IVA, each of
which were constructed using an alternative bottom liner system
previously approved by EPA (63 FR 68453, December 11, 1998). As noted,
above, without approval as provided in the RD&D rule, MSWLFs are
restricted from adding bulk or noncontanerized liquids to cells, and
from recirculating leachate and landfill gas condensate in cells
designed with alternative liner systems.
SRPMIC proposes to add liquids to Phases IIIB and IVA, but does not
intend to increase the moisture content of the solid waste mass to a
bioreactor level (40 CFR 63.1990 defines ``bioreactor'' as reaching a
minimum average moisture content of at least 40% by weight). SRPMIC is
seeking to add only 25% of the liquids volume that would be needed to
increase moisture content to 40%. SRPMIC proposes to increase the
moisture content of the waste mass by recirculating leachate and
landfill gas condensate, and by adding storm water and groundwater.
Only these types of liquids will be added to Phases IIIB and IVA, and
only to the below grade portions of these Phases.
SRPMIC will add the liquids using the existing gas collection pipes
in these cells. Field practice and research have shown that using the
same pipe galleries to both collect gas and distribute liquids can
negatively affect the gas collection efficiency of the pipes. SRPMIC
will monitor the gas flow. If the gas flow rate drops below 50% of the
pre-liquids
[[Page 45190]]
injection rate, SRPMIC will suspend liquids injection until gas flow
rebounds to 75% of the pre-liquids injection rate.
As proposed for Phase VI, SRPMIC will monitor for fugitive gas
emission and use this and other monitoring and operating information to
better project the amount of landfill gas generated and the performance
of the landfill gas collection system. SRPMIC will collect data and
results related to the operation of Phases IIIB and IVA, including the
quality and quantity of gas and leachate generated, and the efficiency
of the landfill gas and leachate capture systems.
SRPMIC has performed modeling to determine how much liquid can be
added annually to Phases IIIB and IVA to, among other things, keep the
depth of leachate on the liner to less than 30 cm as required by the
federal regulations. SRPMIC is required to suspend adding liquids to
Phases IIIB and IVA if operating parameters are not being met,
including depth of leachate on the liner at or over 30 cm, ponding, gas
collection difficulty, and seeps. As stated in SRPMIC's application of
September 24, 2007, and the April 2008 amendments to that application,
an overarching goal is to demonstrate that the proposed operation of
Phase IIIB and IVA does not increase risk to human health and the
environment over a standard MSWLF permit.
To further reduce the potential risk posed by increased liquids
addition and leachate generation from Phases VI, IIIB, and IVA, SRPMIC
will install a new groundwater monitoring network of 7 wells. The
network will be used to monitor the uppermost portion of the aquifer
for changes to groundwater elevation and quality. SRPMIC shall maintain
at least a 25-foot separation zone between the bottom of the landfill
and groundwater. SRPMIC will also monitor liquids balance (how much
liquid is being deposited into the landfill compared to how much is
being collected), mass balance (the mass of the materials deposited
into the landfill, compared to the mass of what is being collected),
and waste volume and settlement.
II. EPA's Action
A. Tentative Determination To Approve SRPMIC's Site-Specific
Flexibility Request
After completing a review of SRPMIC's final site-specific
flexibility application request, dated September 27, 2007, and the
amendments to that application, dated April 2008, EPA is proposing to
approve SRPMIC's site-specific flexibility request to: (1) Install an
alternative bottom liner system in Phase VI and to operate Phase VI as
an anaerobic bioreactor by recirclating leachate and landfill gas
condensate, and adding storm water and groundwater to the below grade
portions of Phase VI; and (2) recirculate leachate and landfill gas
condensate and add storm water and groundwater to the below grade
portions of Phases IIIB and IVA to increase the moisture content of the
waste mass in these phases, both of which have previously EPA-approved
alternative bottom liner systems.
EPA is basing its tentative determination on a number of factors,
including SRPMIC's overarching goal to demonstrate protection of human
health and the environment, and the requirement of today's rule to
maintain less than 30-cm depth of leachate on the liner.
EPA considered certain issues pertaining to the proposed RD&D
project, including the potential for increased leachate production and
increased landfill gas generation and fugitive emissions from operation
of the bioreactor. With respect to the potential for increased leachate
production, SRPMIC performed modeling to project the impact of liquids
addition on the liner and peak leachate production rates, and to assess
the adequacy of the leachate collection system design capacity. This
modeling demonstrated that the leachate collection system is designed
to appropriately handle the amount of anticipated leachate and that the
increase in liquids should not adversely affect the performance of the
liner system in protecting groundwater. SRPMIC will also maintain a 25-
foot or greater separation zone between the bottom of the landfill and
the top of the groundwater aquifer. SRPMIC will routinely monitor
leachate quantity and quality, liquids balance, volume and settlement
of the waste, and groundwater quality and levels. By monitoring, SRPMIC
will be able to ensure effective and protective ongoing operations of
these Phases of the landfill and provide data for EPA to use in its
ongoing RD&D study.
With respect to the potential for increased landfill gas generation
and fugitive gas emissions, SRPMIC will ensure that each horizontal
pipe gallery in Phase VI will be used to collect landfill gas before
being converted for liquids addition to reduce the risk of negatively
affecting the gas collection efficiency of the pipe gallery. No pipe
gallery will be converted to liquids addition until the pipe gallery
above it is installed and collecting landfill gas. SRPMIC also will
install at least two layers of horizontal pipe galleries in the above-
grade portion of Phase VI for the sole purpose of collecting gas. To
further reduce the risk of increased landfill gas generation and
fugitive emissions, SRPMIC will only add liquids to the below-grade
portions of Phases VI, IIIB, and IVA. SRPMIC will monitor fugitive gas
emissions annually or more frequently, as appropriate, using ground-
based optical remote sensing (EPA OTM-10), and will routinely monitor
landfill gas quantity and quality. Using information gained from the
monitoring program, SRPMIC will propose site-specific input parameters
to EPA that improve modeling calculations for the amount of landfill
gas generated and the performance of landfill gas collection systems.
In the event that EPA determines that the project goals are not
being attained, including protecting human health and the environment,
EPA may terminate SRPMIC's authority to operate the RD&D project.
As part of this tentative determination, and in accordance with 40
CFR 258.4, EPA is proposing to require SRPMIC to maintain less than 30
cm depth of leachate on the liner in Phases VI, IIIB, and IVA, and to
ensure that the approved operation of these Phases is protective of
human health and the environment. For purposes of the alternative liner
system in Phase VI, the relevant point(s) of compliance pursuant to 40
CFR 258.40 will be determined by EPA and shall be no more than 150
meters from the waste management cell boundaries and located on land
owned by the owner of the cells.
In accordance with its application, SRPMIC will submit annual
reports to EPA that summarize and show whether and to what extent RD&D
project goals are being achieved. The annual report will include a
summary of all monitoring and testing results. Any deviations from the
September 27, 2007 application, and the April 2008 amendments to that
application, must continue to conform to the standards set forth in 40
CFR 258.4 and require the prior approval of EPA.
Also in accordance with its application, SRPMIC will arrange for
independent, third party inspections of the RD&D operations on a
quarterly basis throughout the term of the RD&D approval. Copies of the
report will be submitted to EPA.
The tentative determination would allow operation of the subject
Phases of the landfill consistent with the RD&D rule for a total of 12
years. However, the owner or operator of the landfill must seek a
renewal of this authority every
[[Page 45191]]
three years. EPA is proposing to allow operation of the landfill cells
in accordance with the RD&D rule for three years, but the operator may
request a renewal of the authorization by submitting a request to the
Director of the Waste Management Division. Each renewal request would
be subject to public notice and comment. No renewal may be for greater
than three years and the overall period of operation may not exceed
twelve years.
B. Proposed Finding of No Adverse Effect Under NHPA
As part of the NHPA process, EPA is proposing a \1/2\-mile radius
around the Salt River Landfill as the area of potential effects (APE).
An APE is the geographic area within which a project may directly or
indirectly cause alterations in the character or use of historic
properties, if any such properties exist. In proposing a \1/2\-mile
APE, EPA considered that SRPMIC's request is of a limited nature at a
landfill that already exists and has been operating since 1993. EPA's
proposed APE is consistent with the policy of the Archaeology
Department of SRPMIC's Environmental Protection and Natural Resources
Division. SRPMIC does not have a Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
(THPO).
In accordance with the NHPA, EPA consulted with SRPMIC's
Archaeology Department, the Arizona State Historic Preservation
Officer, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the Salt River Project, the
U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs and nearby certified local governments on
SRPMIC's RD&D request and reviewed the NHPA requirements. EPA provided
the following tribes, who may have a cultural or historic interest
within the proposed APE, with an opportunity to identify such cultural
or historic properties: Ak-Chin Indian Community; Fort McDowell Yavapai
Nation; Gila River Indian Community; Hopi Tribe; Pascua Yaqui Tribe;
Tohono O'odham Nation; Yavapai-Apache Nation; Yavapai-Prescott Indian
Tribe. No cultural or historic property was identified by these tribes,
nor was any interest expressed to further consult with EPA.
Only one historic property, the Arizona Canal, has been identified
within the proposed APE. The Arizona Canal and associated access roads
and banks are the property of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
Construction of the Arizona Canal began in 1883. It is a concrete-lined
structure that continues to distribute water for domestic and
irrigation uses in Maricopa County. The canal banks support a variety
of non-motorized recreation activities, such as hiking, bicycling,
walking, and jogging.
The northern border of the Salt River Landfill is adjacent to the
Arizona Canal. An eight-foot fence separates the landfill and the
canal, and at its closest proximity, the fence is approximately 50 feet
away from the canal. An additional 10-30 feet separates the fence from
the proposed locations of the new groundwater wells nearest to the
canal. Recreational use of the canal is restricted and minimized in the
vicinity of the SRPMIC border.
The proposed SRPMIC RD&D project could potentially impact the
Arizona Canal in three ways: (1) Off-site migration of leachate, (2)
disturbance from the installation of the 7 new groundwater monitoring
network wells, and (3) fugitive gas emissions.
It is not likely that there would be off-site migration of leachate
via the groundwater or surface water pathways. With respect to the
groundwater pathway, SRPMIC will maintain a 25-foot or greater zone of
separation between the bottom of the landfill and the top of the
aquifer to prevent leachate from coming into contact with groundwater.
Each waste cell is or will be equipped with a bottom liner and leachate
collection system to further reduce the risk of off-site leachate
migration. With respect to the surface water pathway, the leachate
retention pond has the estimated capacity to accommodate the additional
leachate projected to be generated from Phases VI, IIIA, and IVB, even
when leachate is not being recirculated back into the landfill.
Stormwater is retained on-site and stormwater retention capacity will
continue to be increased by SRPMIC throughout the life of the landfill.
The canal, itself, is protected by berms and is at a higher elevation
than the landfill. Surface water from the landfill does not flow
towards the canal.
The installation of 7 new groundwater monitoring wells should not
have an adverse impact on the canal. The noise, equipment, vehicles,
and possible dust associated with installing wells should not affect
recreation use of the canal because the installation process is short-
term, and recreation use is restricted and minimized along the SRPMIC
border. In addition, the proposed well locations and the canal are
separated by an eight-foot fence and a distance of 60 feet or more.
Because surface water does not move from the landfill towards the
canal, and because storm water is retained on-site, it is not likely
that loosened sediment from ground disturbance would find a ready
pathway to the canal.
Increased gas generation and emissions should not negatively impact
the canal, as the canal is made of concrete, an inert building
material. As required by EPA approval of the proposed RD&D project,
each of the waste cells have or will have a gas collection and control
system, and SRPMIC will routinely monitor the quality and quantity of
landfill gas and fugitive emissions, and assess collection efficiency.
The gas that is collected will be destroyed at the landfill's flare
station or converted into energy. To the extent there are increased
fugitive emissions, recreational use of the canal should not be
adversely affected since there are few, if any, such uses along the
SRPMIC border of the canal.
Pursuant to section 106 of the NHPA, EPA has reviewed SRPMIC's
site-specific flexibility request to take into account the effect of
the proposed RD&D project on historic properties. EPA requests public
comment on its proposed \1/2\-mile area of potential effects, its
proposed finding that the Arizona Canal is the sole historic property
within the APE, and its proposed finding of no adverse effect.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this rule is not of general applicability
and therefore is not a regulatory action subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
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.) because it applies to a particular facility only.
Because this rule is of particular applicability relating to a
particular facility, it is not subject to the regulatory flexibility
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), or
to sections 202, 204, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). Because this rule will affect only a
particular facility, it will not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as specified in section 203 of UMRA.
Because this rule will affect only a particular facility, this
proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' (64 FR 43255,
August 10,
[[Page 45192]]
1999). Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
This 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 as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the Agency
does not have reason to believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. The basis for this belief is EPA's conservative analysis of
the potential risks posed by SRPMIC's proposal and the controls and
standards set forth in the application.
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice
Reform,'' (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.
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
calls for EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' EPA has concluded that this
action may have tribal implications because it is directly applicable
to the owner and/or operator of the landfill, which is currently the
Tribe. However, this tentative determination, if made final, will
neither impose substantial direct compliance costs on tribal
governments, nor preempt Tribal law. This tentative determination to
approve the SRPMIC's application will affect only the SRPMIC's
operation of their landfill on their own land.
EPA consulted with the SRPMIC early in the process of making this
tentative determination to approve the Tribe's RD&D project so as to
give them meaningful and timely input into the determination. In 2005,
SRPMIC submitted its site-specific RD&D flexibility request. Between
2005 and 2008, many technical issues were raised and addressed
concerning SRPMIC's proposal. EPA's consultation with the Tribe
culminated in the SRPMIC submitting an RD&D application amendment in
April of 2008.
With respect to the type of flexibility being afforded to SRPMIC
under this proposed rule, Executive Order 13175 does provide for
agencies to review applications for flexibility ``with a general view
toward increasing opportunities for utilizing flexible policy
approaches at the Indian tribal level in cases in which the proposed
waiver is consistent with the applicable Federal policy objectives and
is otherwise appropriate.'' In formulating this tentative determination
and proposed rule, the Region has been guided by the fundamental
principles set forth in Executive Order 13175 and has granted the
SRPMIC the ``maximum administrative discretion possible'' within the
standards set forth under the RD&D rule in accordance with Executive
Order 13175.
EPA specifically solicits any additional comment on this tentative
determination from tribal officials of the SRPMIC.
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical standards, (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through
OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
The technical standards included in the application were proposed
by SRPMIC. Given EPA's obligations under Executive Order 13175 (see
above), the Agency has, to the extent appropriate, applied the
standards established by the Tribe. In addition, the Agency considered
the Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council's February 2006
technical and regulatory guideline ``Characterization, Design,
Construction, and Monitoring of Bioreactor Landfills.''
Authority: Sections 1008, 2002, 4004, and 4010 of the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6907, 6912, 6944, and
6949a. Temporary Delegation of Authority to Promulgate Site-Specific
Rules to Respond to Requests for Flexibility from Owners/Operators
of Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Facilities in Indian Country,
February 26, 2008, Incorporation by Reference.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 258
Environmental protection, Municipal landfills, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment and disposal.
Dated: July 23, 2008.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, 40 CFR part 258 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 258--CRITERIA FOR MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS
Subpart D--[Amended]
1. The authority citation for part 258 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1345(d) and (e); 42 U.S.C. 6902(a), 6907,
6912(a), 6944, 6945(c) and 6949a(c), 6981(a).
2. Amend subpart D by adding Sec. 258.42 to read as follows:
Sec. 258.42 Approval of Site-specific Flexibility Requests in Indian
Country.
(a) Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community (SRPMIC), Salt River
Landfill Research, Development, and Demonstration Project Requirements.
Paragraph (a) of this section applies to the Salt River Landfill, a
municipal solid waste landfill owned and operated by the SPRMIC on the
SRPMIC's reservation in Arizona, which includes waste disposal areas
identified as ``Phases I-VI.'' The Research, Development, and
Demonstration Permit Application Salt River Landfill, submitted by
SRPMIC and dated September 24, 2007 and amended in April 2008 is hereby
incorporated into this provision by this reference. The facility owner
and/or operator may operate the facility in accordance with this
application, including the following activities more generally
described as follows:
(1) The owner and/or operator may install a geosynthetic clay liner
as an alternative bottom liner system in Phase VI.
(2) The owner and/or operator may operate Phase VI as a bioreactor
by recirculating leachate and landfill gas condensate, and by adding
storm water and groundwater, to the below grade portions of Phase VI.
(3) The owner and/or operator may increase the moisture content of
the waste mass in Phases IIIB and IVA by recirculating leachate and
landfill gas condensate, and by adding storm water and groundwater, to
the below grade portions of Phases IIIB and IVA.
(4) The owner and/or operator shall maintain less than a 30-cm
depth of leachate on the liner.
(5) The owner and/or operator shall submit reports to the Director
of the
[[Page 45193]]
Waste Management Division at EPA Region 9 as specified in the September
24, 2007 application, as amended in April of 2008, including an annual
report showing whether and to what extent the site is progressing in
attaining project goals. The annual report will also include a summary
of all monitoring and testing results, as specified in the application.
(6) The owner and/or operator may not operate the facility pursuant
to the authority granted by this section if there is any deviation from
the terms, conditions, and requirements of this section unless the
operation of the facility will continue to conform to the standards set
forth in Sec. 258.4 of this chapter and the owner and/or operator has
obtained the prior written approval of the Director of the Waste
Management Division at EPA Region 9 or his or her designee to implement
corrective measures or otherwise operate the facility subject to such
deviation. The Director of the Waste Management Division or designee
shall provide an opportunity for the public to comment on any
significant deviation prior to providing his or her written approval of
the deviation.
(7) Paragraphs (a)(2), (3), (5), (6) and (9) of this section will
terminate August 4, 2011 unless the Director of the Waste Management
Division at EPA Region 9 or his or her designee renews this authority
in writing. Any such renewal may extend the authority granted under
paragraphs (a)(2), (3), (5), (6) and (9) of this section for up to an
additional three years, and multiple renewals (up to a total of 12
years) may be provided. The Director of the Waste Management Division
or designee shall provide an opportunity for the public to comment on
any renewal request prior to providing his or her written approval or
disapproval of such request.
(8) In no event will the provisions of paragraphs (a)(2), (3), (5),
(6) or (9) of this section remain in effect after August 4, 2020. Upon
termination of paragraphs (a)(2), (3), (5), (6) and (9) of this
section, and except with respect to paragraphs (a)(1) and (4) of this
section, the owner and/or operator shall return to compliance with the
regulatory requirements which would have been in effect absent the
flexibility provided through this site-specific rule.
(9) In seeking any renewal of the authority granted under or other
requirements of paragraphs (a)(2), (3), (5) and (6) of this section,
the owner and/or operator shall provide a detailed assessment of the
project showing the status with respect to achieving project goals, a
list of problems and status with respect to problem resolutions, and
any other requirements that the Director of the Waste Management
Division at EPA Region 9 or his or her designee has determined are
necessary for the approval of any renewal and has communicated in
writing to the owner and operator.
(10) The owner and/or operator's authority to operate the landfill
in accordance with paragraphs (a)(2), (3), (5), (6) and (9) of this
section shall terminate if the Director of the Waste Management
Division at EPA Region 9 or his or her designee determines that the
overall goals of the project are not being attained, including
protection of human health or the environment. Any such determination
shall be communicated in writing to the owner and operator.
(b) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. E8-17828 Filed 8-1-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P