Minnesota: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revision, 63074-63076 [E8-25315]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
63074
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 206 / Thursday, October 23, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
2. On page 58438, column 2, in the
‘‘Need for Correction’’ section of the
preamble the language ‘‘As published,
the correcting amendment of September
24, 2008 (72 FR 54945) to final
regulations (TD 9321) contains errors
that may prove to be misleading and is
in need of clarification.’’ is corrected to
read ‘‘As published, the correcting
amendment of September 24, 2008 (73
FR 54945) to final regulations (TD 9321)
contains errors that may prove to be
misleading and is in need of
clarification.’’
Guy R. Traynor,
Federal Register Liaison, Legal Processing
Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure
and Administration).
[FR Doc. E8–25234 Filed 10–22–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL–8733–7]
Minnesota: Final Authorization of State
Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revision
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
dwashington3 on PRODPC61 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is granting Minnesota
Final authorization of the changes to its
hazardous waste program under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). The agency published a
proposed rule on July 14, 2008 at 73 FR
40263 and provided for public
comment. The public comment period
ended on August 13, 2008. We received
no comments. No further opportunity
for comment will be provided. EPA has
determined that these changes satisfy all
requirements needed to qualify for Final
authorization, and is proposing to
authorize the State’s changes through
this proposed final action.
DATES: Effective Date: The final
authorization will be effective on
October 23, 2008. This approval will
expire automatically if the Joint Powers
Agreement (JPA) between the State of
Minnesota and Hennepin County is
terminated or expires without renewal.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R05–RCRA–
2008–0468. All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some of the
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Oct 22, 2008
Jkt 217001
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.
You may view and copy Minnesota’s
application from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the
following addresses: U.S. EPA Region 5,
LR–8J, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois, contact: Gary Westefer
(312) 886–7450; or Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency, 520 Lafayette Road,
North, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155,
contact Tanya Maurice (651) 297–1793.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary
Westefer, Minnesota Regulatory
Specialist, U.S. EPA Region 5, LR–8J, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604, (312) 886–7450, e-mail
westefer.gary@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Why Are Revisions to State
Programs Necessary?
States which have received final
authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must
maintain a hazardous waste program
that is equivalent to, consistent with,
and no less stringent than the Federal
program. As the Federal program
changes, States must change their
programs and ask EPA to authorize the
changes. Changes to State programs may
be necessary when Federal or State
statutory or regulatory authority is
modified or when certain other changes
occur. Most commonly, States must
change their programs because of
changes to EPA’s regulations in 40 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124,
260 through 266, 268, 270, 273 and 279.
B. What Decisions Have We Made in
This Rule?
We conclude that Minnesota’s
application to revise its authorized
program meets all of the statutory and
regulatory requirements established by
RCRA. Therefore, we are granting
Minnesota final authorization to operate
its hazardous waste program with the
changes described in the authorization
application. Minnesota has
responsibility for permitting Treatment,
Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs)
within its borders (except in Indian
Country) and for carrying out the
aspects of the RCRA program described
in its revised program application,
subject to the limitations of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New
Federal requirements and prohibitions
imposed by Federal regulations that
EPA promulgates under the authority of
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
HSWA take effect in authorized States
before they are authorized for the
requirements. Thus, EPA will
implement those requirements and
prohibitions in Minnesota, including
issuing permits, until the State is
granted authorization to do so.
C. What Is the Effect of the Proposed
Authorization Decision?
The effect of this decision is to allow
Minnesota to implement the EPA
approved JPA with Hennepin County.
Hennepin County will be able to
conduct an agreed number of
inspections, within Hennepin County,
annually on behalf of the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). The
JPA does not affect MPCA’s enforcement
responsibility.
Minnesota continues to have
enforcement responsibilities under its
State hazardous waste program for
violations of such program, but EPA
retains its authority under RCRA
sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003,
which include, among others, authority
to:
• Do inspections, require monitoring,
tests, analyses, or reports, and
• Enforce RCRA requirements and
suspend or revoke permits.
This action does not impose
additional requirements on the
regulated community because there are
no new regulations or inspection
requirements created by this action.
Metro County authorities, including
Hennepin County, are already
performing inspections at RCRA
facilities.
D. Proposed Rule
On July 14, 2008 (73 FR 40263), EPA
published a proposed rule. In that rule
we proposed granting authorization of
changes to Minnesota’s hazardous waste
program and opened our decision to
public comment. The agency received
no comments on this proposal. EPA
found Minnnesota’s RCRA program to
be satisfactory.
E. What Has Minnesota Previously Been
Authorized for?
Minnesota initially received final
authorization on January 28, 1985,
effective February 11, 1985 (50 FR 3756)
to implement the RCRA hazardous
waste management program. We granted
authorization for changes to their
program on July 20, 1987, effective
September 18, 1987 (52 FR 27199); on
April 24, 1989, effective June 23, 1989
(54 FR 16361) amended June 28, 1989
(54 FR 27169); on June 15, 1990,
effective August 14, 1990 (55 FR 24232);
on June 24, 1991, effective August 23,
1991 (56 FR 28709); on March 19, 1992,
E:\FR\FM\23OCR1.SGM
23OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 206 / Thursday, October 23, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
effective May 18, 1992 (57 FR 9501); on
March 17, 1993, effective May 17, 1993
(58 FR 14321); on January 20, 1994,
effective March 21, 1994 (59 FR 2998);
and on May 25, 2000, effective August
23, 2000 (65 FR 33774). Minnesota also
received authorization for the U.S. Filter
Recovery Services Project XL on May
22, 2001, effective May 22, 2001 (66 FR
28085).
F. What Changes Are We Authorizing
With Today’s Action?
On February 25, 2008, Minnesota
submitted a final complete program
revision application, seeking
authorization of their changes in
63075
accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. We
have determined that Minnesota’s
hazardous waste program revision
satisfies all of the requirements
necessary to qualify for final
authorization. Therefore, we are
granting Minnesota final authorization
for the following program change:
Description of state initiated change
(include checklist #, if relevant)
Federal Register date and page
(and/or RCRA statutory authority)
State authority
Joint Powers Agreement between the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Hennepin County.
42 U.S.C. 6926 and 6929, 40 CFR 271.16
and 271.17.
Minnesota Statutes sections 13.02, effective
1974 as amended; 13.39, effective 1981 as
amended; 115.071, effective 1973 as
amended; 115.072, effective 1973 as
amended; 116.07, effective 1967 as amended; 116.075, effective 1971 as amended;
471.59, effective 1943 as amended;
473.151, effective 1976 as amended;
473.811, effective 1975 as amended.
Minnesota entered into the Joint
Powers Agreement under its statutes.
Sections 13.02 and 13.39 of the
Minnesota Statutes cover data practices.
Section 13.02 includes political
subdivisions such as counties as well as
the State agencies. Section 13.39
provides for public access to all data
except that legally classified as
nonpublic. Section 115.071 provides for
adequate enforcement tools including
civil and criminal penalties meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR 271.16. Section
115.072 allows the State agency to seek
recovery of its litigation costs. Section
116.07 authorizes MPCA to adopt
hazardous waste rules. Section 116.072
authorizes the issuance of
Administrative Penalty Orders meeting
the requirements of 40 CFR 271.16.
Section 116.075 governs treatment of
trade secret data as does section
473.151, which also authorizes sharing
of this information to comply with
Federal law as required in 40 CFR
271.17(a). Section 471.59 provides the
legal basis for governmental units such
as MPCA and Hennepin County to enter
into a cooperative agreement. Section
473.811 provides the seven Metro
Counties (including Hennepin)
authority to inspect waste facilities for
enforcement purposes.
and issue permits for HSWA
requirements for which Minnesota is
not yet authorized. EPA or Minnesota
may enforce compliance with those
permits. There are no new permits, or
alterations to existing permits created by
the JPA.
requirements other than those imposed
by State law (see SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION, Section A. Why are
Revisions to State Programs Necessary?).
Therefore this rule complies with
applicable executive orders and
statutory provisions as follows:
I. How Does Today’s Action Affect
Indian Country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in
Minnesota?
1. Executive Order 18266: Regulatory
Planning Review
dwashington3 on PRODPC61 with RULES
G. Where Are the Revised State Rules
Different From the Federal Rules?
In the changes currently being made
to Minnesota’s program, there are no
revisions of State regulations.
H. Who Handles Permits After the
Authorization Takes Effect?
Minnesota will issue permits for all
the provisions for which it is authorized
and will administer the permits it
issues. EPA will continue to implement
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Oct 22, 2008
Jkt 217001
Minnesota is not authorized to carry
out its hazardous waste program in
Indian country, as defined in 18 U.S.C.
1151. This includes:
1. All lands within the exterior
boundaries of Indian Reservations
within or abutting the State of
Minnesota, including:
a. Bois Forte Indian Reservation.
b. Fond Du Lac Indian Reservation.
c. Grand Portage Indian Reservation.
d. Leech Lake Indian Reservation.
e. Lower Sioux Indian Reservation.
f. Mille Lacs Indian Reservation.
g. Prairie Island Indian Reservation.
h. Red Lake Indian Reservation.
i. Shakopee Mdewankanton Indian
Reservation.
j. Upper Sioux Indian Reservation.
k. White Earth Indian Reservation.
2. Any land held in trust by the U.S.
for an Indian tribe, and
3. Any other land, whether on or off
a reservation that qualifies as Indian
country.
Therefore, this action has no effect on
Indian country. EPA will continue to
implement and administer the RCRA
program in these lands.
K. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This proposed rule only authorizes
hazardous waste requirements pursuant
to RCRA 3006 and imposes no
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The Office of Management and Budget
has exempted this rule from its review
under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993).
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act
After considering the economic
impacts of today’s rule on small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.), I certify that this rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule approves preexisting requirements under state law
and does not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required
by state law, it does not contain any
unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999) does not apply to this
rule because it will not have federalism
implications (i.e., substantial direct
E:\FR\FM\23OCR1.SGM
23OCR1
63076
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 206 / Thursday, October 23, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government).
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000) does not apply to
this rule because it will not have tribal
implications (i.e., substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes).
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it is not economically
significant as defined in Executive
Order 12866 and because the EPA does
not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22,
2001), because it is not a significant
regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866.
EPA approves State programs as long
as they meet criteria required by RCRA,
so it would be inconsistent with
applicable law for EPA, in its review of
a State program, to require the use of
any particular voluntary consensus
standard in place of another standard
that meets requirements of RCRA. Thus,
the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply to this rule.
dwashington3 on PRODPC61 with RULES
10. Executive Order 12988
As required by section 3 of Executive
Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7,
1996), in issuing this rule, EPA has
taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize
potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct.
14:57 Oct 22, 2008
Jkt 217001
EPA has complied with Executive
Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 18,
1988) by examining the takings
implications of the rule in accordance
with the Attorney General’s
Supplemental Guidelines for the
Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of
Unanticipated Takings issued under the
executive order.
12. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low
Income Populations
Because this rule proposes
authorization of pre-existing State rules
and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law and
there are no anticipated significant
adverse human health or environmental
effects, the rule is not subject to
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994).
13. Congressional Review Act
EPA will submit a report containing
this rule and other information required
by the Congressional Review Act (5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.) to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication in the
Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is
published in the Federal Register. This
action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined
by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
9. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11. Executive Order 12630: Evaluation
of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated
Takings
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: This action is issued under the
authority of Sections 2002(a), 3006 and
7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
Dated: October 10, 2008.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. E8–25315 Filed 10–22–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 65
[Docket No. FEMA—B–1011]
Changes in Flood Elevation
Determinations
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Interim rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This interim rule lists
communities where modification of the
Base (1% annual-chance) Flood
Elevations (BFEs) is appropriate because
of new scientific or technical data. New
flood insurance premium rates will be
calculated from the modified BFEs for
new buildings and their contents.
DATES: These modified BFEs are
currently in effect on the dates listed in
the table below and revise the Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) in effect
prior to this determination for the listed
communities.
From the date of the second
publication of these changes in a
newspaper of local circulation, any
person has ninety (90) days in which to
request through the community that the
Mitigation Assistant Administrator of
FEMA reconsider the changes. The
modified BFEs may be changed during
the 90-day period.
ADDRESSES: The modified BFEs for each
community are available for inspection
at the office of the Chief Executive
Officer of each community. The
respective addresses are listed in the
table below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering
Management Branch, Mitigation
Directorate, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3151.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
modified BFEs are not listed for each
community in this interim rule.
However, the address of the Chief
Executive Officer of the community
where the modified BFE determinations
are available for inspection is provided.
Any request for reconsideration must
be based on knowledge of changed
conditions or new scientific or technical
data.
The modifications are made pursuant
to section 201 of the Flood Disaster
Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105,
and are in accordance with the National
Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C.
4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.
E:\FR\FM\23OCR1.SGM
23OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 206 (Thursday, October 23, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63074-63076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25315]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[FRL-8733-7]
Minnesota: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste
Management Program Revision
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is granting Minnesota Final authorization of the changes
to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA). The agency published a proposed rule on July 14,
2008 at 73 FR 40263 and provided for public comment. The public comment
period ended on August 13, 2008. We received no comments. No further
opportunity for comment will be provided. EPA has determined that these
changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for Final
authorization, and is proposing to authorize the State's changes
through this proposed final action.
DATES: Effective Date: The final authorization will be effective on
October 23, 2008. This approval will expire automatically if the Joint
Powers Agreement (JPA) between the State of Minnesota and Hennepin
County is terminated or expires without renewal.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R05-RCRA-2008-0468. All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in
the index, some of the 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. You may view and copy Minnesota's application from 9 a.m. to
4 p.m. at the following addresses: U.S. EPA Region 5, LR-8J, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, contact: Gary Westefer (312) 886-
7450; or Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 520 Lafayette Road, North,
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155, contact Tanya Maurice (651) 297-1793.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Westefer, Minnesota Regulatory
Specialist, U.S. EPA Region 5, LR-8J, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-7450, e-mail westefer.gary@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Why Are Revisions to State Programs Necessary?
States which have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must
change their programs and ask EPA to authorize the changes. Changes to
State programs may be necessary when Federal or State statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, States must change their programs because of changes to
EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124,
260 through 266, 268, 270, 273 and 279.
B. What Decisions Have We Made in This Rule?
We conclude that Minnesota's application to revise its authorized
program meets all of the statutory and regulatory requirements
established by RCRA. Therefore, we are granting Minnesota final
authorization to operate its hazardous waste program with the changes
described in the authorization application. Minnesota has
responsibility for permitting Treatment, Storage, and Disposal
Facilities (TSDFs) within its borders (except in Indian Country) and
for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program described in its
revised program application, subject to the limitations of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New Federal
requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal regulations that EPA
promulgates under the authority of HSWA take effect in authorized
States before they are authorized for the requirements. Thus, EPA will
implement those requirements and prohibitions in Minnesota, including
issuing permits, until the State is granted authorization to do so.
C. What Is the Effect of the Proposed Authorization Decision?
The effect of this decision is to allow Minnesota to implement the
EPA approved JPA with Hennepin County. Hennepin County will be able to
conduct an agreed number of inspections, within Hennepin County,
annually on behalf of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
The JPA does not affect MPCA's enforcement responsibility.
Minnesota continues to have enforcement responsibilities under its
State hazardous waste program for violations of such program, but EPA
retains its authority under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003,
which include, among others, authority to:
Do inspections, require monitoring, tests, analyses, or
reports, and
Enforce RCRA requirements and suspend or revoke permits.
This action does not impose additional requirements on the
regulated community because there are no new regulations or inspection
requirements created by this action. Metro County authorities,
including Hennepin County, are already performing inspections at RCRA
facilities.
D. Proposed Rule
On July 14, 2008 (73 FR 40263), EPA published a proposed rule. In
that rule we proposed granting authorization of changes to Minnesota's
hazardous waste program and opened our decision to public comment. The
agency received no comments on this proposal. EPA found Minnnesota's
RCRA program to be satisfactory.
E. What Has Minnesota Previously Been Authorized for?
Minnesota initially received final authorization on January 28,
1985, effective February 11, 1985 (50 FR 3756) to implement the RCRA
hazardous waste management program. We granted authorization for
changes to their program on July 20, 1987, effective September 18, 1987
(52 FR 27199); on April 24, 1989, effective June 23, 1989 (54 FR 16361)
amended June 28, 1989 (54 FR 27169); on June 15, 1990, effective August
14, 1990 (55 FR 24232); on June 24, 1991, effective August 23, 1991 (56
FR 28709); on March 19, 1992,
[[Page 63075]]
effective May 18, 1992 (57 FR 9501); on March 17, 1993, effective May
17, 1993 (58 FR 14321); on January 20, 1994, effective March 21, 1994
(59 FR 2998); and on May 25, 2000, effective August 23, 2000 (65 FR
33774). Minnesota also received authorization for the U.S. Filter
Recovery Services Project XL on May 22, 2001, effective May 22, 2001
(66 FR 28085).
F. What Changes Are We Authorizing With Today's Action?
On February 25, 2008, Minnesota submitted a final complete program
revision application, seeking authorization of their changes in
accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. We have determined that Minnesota's
hazardous waste program revision satisfies all of the requirements
necessary to qualify for final authorization. Therefore, we are
granting Minnesota final authorization for the following program
change:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Register
Description of state initiated date and page
change (include checklist #, if (and/or RCRA State authority
relevant) statutory
authority)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joint Powers Agreement between 42 U.S.C. 6926 and Minnesota Statutes
the Minnesota Pollution Control 6929, 40 CFR sections 13.02,
Agency and Hennepin County. 271.16 and 271.17. effective 1974 as
amended; 13.39,
effective 1981 as
amended; 115.071,
effective 1973 as
amended; 115.072,
effective 1973 as
amended; 116.07,
effective 1967 as
amended; 116.075,
effective 1971 as
amended; 471.59,
effective 1943 as
amended; 473.151,
effective 1976 as
amended; 473.811,
effective 1975 as
amended.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minnesota entered into the Joint Powers Agreement under its
statutes. Sections 13.02 and 13.39 of the Minnesota Statutes cover data
practices. Section 13.02 includes political subdivisions such as
counties as well as the State agencies. Section 13.39 provides for
public access to all data except that legally classified as nonpublic.
Section 115.071 provides for adequate enforcement tools including civil
and criminal penalties meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 271.16.
Section 115.072 allows the State agency to seek recovery of its
litigation costs. Section 116.07 authorizes MPCA to adopt hazardous
waste rules. Section 116.072 authorizes the issuance of Administrative
Penalty Orders meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 271.16. Section
116.075 governs treatment of trade secret data as does section 473.151,
which also authorizes sharing of this information to comply with
Federal law as required in 40 CFR 271.17(a). Section 471.59 provides
the legal basis for governmental units such as MPCA and Hennepin County
to enter into a cooperative agreement. Section 473.811 provides the
seven Metro Counties (including Hennepin) authority to inspect waste
facilities for enforcement purposes.
G. Where Are the Revised State Rules Different From the Federal Rules?
In the changes currently being made to Minnesota's program, there
are no revisions of State regulations.
H. Who Handles Permits After the Authorization Takes Effect?
Minnesota will issue permits for all the provisions for which it is
authorized and will administer the permits it issues. EPA will continue
to implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements for which
Minnesota is not yet authorized. EPA or Minnesota may enforce
compliance with those permits. There are no new permits, or alterations
to existing permits created by the JPA.
I. How Does Today's Action Affect Indian Country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in
Minnesota?
Minnesota is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste
program in Indian country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. This includes:
1. All lands within the exterior boundaries of Indian Reservations
within or abutting the State of Minnesota, including:
a. Bois Forte Indian Reservation.
b. Fond Du Lac Indian Reservation.
c. Grand Portage Indian Reservation.
d. Leech Lake Indian Reservation.
e. Lower Sioux Indian Reservation.
f. Mille Lacs Indian Reservation.
g. Prairie Island Indian Reservation.
h. Red Lake Indian Reservation.
i. Shakopee Mdewankanton Indian Reservation.
j. Upper Sioux Indian Reservation.
k. White Earth Indian Reservation.
2. Any land held in trust by the U.S. for an Indian tribe, and
3. Any other land, whether on or off a reservation that qualifies
as Indian country.
Therefore, this action has no effect on Indian country. EPA will
continue to implement and administer the RCRA program in these lands.
K. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This proposed rule only authorizes hazardous waste requirements
pursuant to RCRA 3006 and imposes no requirements other than those
imposed by State law (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, Section A. Why are
Revisions to State Programs Necessary?). Therefore this rule complies
with applicable executive orders and statutory provisions as follows:
1. Executive Order 18266: Regulatory Planning Review
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from its
review under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act
After considering the economic impacts of today's rule on small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), I
certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state
law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that
required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) does not apply
to this rule because it will not have federalism implications (i.e.,
substantial direct
[[Page 63076]]
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government).
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) does not
apply to this rule because it will not have tribal implications (i.e.,
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes).
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant as defined
in Executive Order 12866 and because the EPA does not have reason to
believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this
action present a disproportionate risk to children.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action as defined
in Executive Order 12866.
9. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
EPA approves State programs as long as they meet criteria required
by RCRA, so it would be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, in
its review of a State program, to require the use of any particular
voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard that meets
requirements of RCRA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) do not apply to this rule.
10. Executive Order 12988
As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729,
February 7, 1996), in issuing this rule, EPA has taken the necessary
steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential
litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct.
11. Executive Order 12630: Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of
Unanticipated Takings
EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 18,
1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance
with the Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation
of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings issued under the
executive order.
12. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations
Because this rule proposes authorization of pre-existing State
rules and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by
State law and there are no anticipated significant adverse human health
or environmental effects, the rule is not subject to Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
13. Congressional Review Act
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other information
required by the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to publication in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is
published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: This action is issued under the authority of Sections
2002(a), 3006 and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
Dated: October 10, 2008.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. E8-25315 Filed 10-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
