Adequacy of Massachusetts Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Permit Program, 5288-5290 [2013-01435]
Download as PDF
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
5288
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(m) Motions for reconsideration or
clarification. Motions to reconsider or
clarify any final disposition of the
Environmental Appeals Board must be
filed within 10 days after service of that
order. Motions for reconsideration must
set forth the matters claimed to have
been erroneously decided and the
nature of the alleged errors. Motions for
clarification must set forth with
specificity the portion of the decision
for which clarification is being sought
and the reason clarification is necessary.
Motions for reconsideration or
clarification under this provision must
be directed to, and decided by, the
Environmental Appeals Board. Motions
for reconsideration or clarification
directed to the Administrator, rather
than the Environmental Appeals Board,
will not be considered, unless such
motion relates to a matter that the
Environmental Appeals Board has
referred to the Administrator pursuant
to § 124.2 and for which the
Administrator has issued the final order.
A motion for reconsideration or
clarification does not stay the effective
date of the final order unless the
Environmental Appeals Board
specifically so orders.
(n) Board authority. In exercising its
duties and responsibilities under this
part, the Environmental Appeals Board
may do all acts and take all measures
necessary for the efficient, fair, and
impartial adjudication of issues arising
in an appeal under this part including,
but not limited to, imposing procedural
sanctions against a party who, without
adequate justification, fails or refuses to
comply with this part or an order of the
Environmental Appeals Board. Such
sanctions may include drawing adverse
inferences against a party, striking a
party’s pleadings or other submissions
from the record, and denying any or all
relief sought by the party in the
proceeding. Additionally, for good
cause, the Board may relax or suspend
the filing requirements prescribed by
these rules or Board order.
(o) General NPDES permits. (1)
Persons affected by an NPDES general
permit may not file a petition under this
section or otherwise challenge the
conditions of a general permit in further
Agency proceedings. Instead, they may
do either of the following:
(i) Challenge the general permit by
filing an action in court; or
(ii) Apply for an individual NPDES
permit under § 122.21 as authorized in
§ 122.28 of this chapter and may then
petition the Environmental Appeals
Board to review the individual permit as
provided by this section.
(2) As provided in § 122.28(b)(3) of
this chapter, any interested person may
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Jan 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
also petition the Director to require an
individual NPDES permit for any
discharger eligible for authorization to
discharge under an NPDES general
permit.
(p) The Environmental Appeals Board
also may decide on its own initiative to
review any condition of any RCRA, UIC,
NPDES, or PSD permit decision issued
under this part for which review is
available under paragraph (a) of this
section. The Environmental Appeals
Board must act under this paragraph
within 30 days of the service date of
notice of the Regional Administrator’s
action.
■ 5. Paragraph (b)(1) of § 124.60 is
amended by removing the reference to
‘‘§ 124.19(f)’’ in the first sentence and
adding in its place ‘‘§ 124.19(k)(2)’’.
PART 270—EPA ADMINISTERED
PERMIT PROGRAMS: THE
HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMIT
PROGRAM
6. The authority citation for part 270
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912, 6924,
6925, 6927, 6939, and 6974.
7. Paragraph (f)(3) of § 270.42 is
revised to read as follows:
■
§ 270.42 Permit modification at the request
of permittee.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(3) An automatic authorization that
goes into effect under paragraph
(b)(6)(iii) or (v) of this section may be
appealed under the permit appeal
procedures of 40 CFR 124.19; however,
the permittee may continue to conduct
the activities pursuant to the automatic
authorization unless and until a final
determination is made by the
Environmental Appeals Board to grant
review and remand the permit decision.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 8. Paragraph (a) of 270.155 is revised
to read as follows:
§ 270.155 May the decision to approve or
deny my RAP application be
administratively appealed?
(a) Any commenter on the draft RAP
or notice of intent to deny, or any
participant in any public hearing(s) on
the draft RAP, may appeal the Director’s
decision to approve or deny your RAP
application to EPA’s Environmental
Appeals Board under § 124.19 of this
chapter. Any person who did not file
comments, or did not participate in any
public hearing(s) on the draft RAP, may
petition for administrative review only
to the extent of the changes from the
draft to the final RAP decision. Appeals
of RAPs may be made to the same extent
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
as for final permit decisions under
§ 124.15 of this chapter (or a decision
under § 270.29 to deny a permit for the
active life of a RCRA hazardous waste
management facility or unit).
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–01318 Filed 1–24–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 239 and 258
[EPA–R01–RCRA–2012–0944; FRL–9771–7]
Adequacy of Massachusetts Municipal
Solid Waste Landfill Permit Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
This action approves a
modification to Massachusetts’s
approved municipal solid waste landfill
(MSWLF) program. The approved
modification allows the State to issue
Research, Development, and
Demonstration (RD&D) Permits to
owners and operators of MSWLF in
accordance with its State law. On March
22, 2004, EPA issued final regulations
allowing research, development, and
demonstration (RD&D) permits to be
issued to certain municipal solid waste
landfills by approved states. On
December 7, 2012 Massachusetts
submitted an application to EPA Region
1 seeking Federal approval of its RD&D
requirements. After thorough review
EPA Region 1 is determining that
Massachusetts’s RD&D permit
requirements are adequate through this
direct final action.
DATES: This determination of RD&D
program adequacy for Massachusetts
will become effective April 25, 2013
without further notice unless EPA
receives adverse comments on or before
March 26, 2013. If adverse comments
are received, EPA will review the
comments and publish another Federal
Register document responding to the
comments and either affirming or
revising the initial decision.
SUMMARY:
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
RCRA–2012–0944, by one of the
following methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: hsieh.juiyu@epa.gov.
• Fax: (617) 918–0646, to the
attention of Juiyu Hsieh.
• Mail: Juiyu Hsieh, RCRA Waste
Management and UST Section, Office of
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\25JAR1.SGM
25JAR1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Site Remediation and Restoration
(OSRR07–1), EPA New England—
Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite
100, Boston, MA 02109–3912.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver
your comments to Juiyu Hsieh, RCRA
Waste Management and UST Section,
Office of Site Remediation and
Restoration (OSRR07–1), EPA New
England—Region 1, 5 Post Office
Square, 7th floor, Boston, MA 02109–
3912. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Office’s normal hours of
operation.
Instructions: Identify your comments
as relating to Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
RCRA–2012–0944. EPA’s policy is that
all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and
may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or claimed to be other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov 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 email comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public 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. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: EPA has established a docket
for this action under Docket ID No.
EPA–R01–RCRA–2012–0944. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although it may be listed in the index,
some information might not be publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Jan 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
5289
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Region 1 Library, 5 Post Office
Square, 1st floor, Boston, MA 02109–
3912; by appointment only; tel: (617)
918–1990.
always exercise its authority to ensure
that all federal requirements are met.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
C. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action approves State solid waste
requirements pursuant to Resource
Conversation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
Section 4005 and imposes no Federal
requirements. Therefore, this rule
complies with applicable executive
orders and statutory provisions as
follows:
1. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning Review—The Office of
Management and Budget has exempted
this action from its review under
Executive Order 12866;
2. Paperwork Reduction Act: This
action does not impose an information
collection burden under the Paperwork
Reduction Act;
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act: Since
this action will not add any
requirements not already imposed
under State law, I certify that this action
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities;
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act:
Because this action approves preexisting requirement under State law
and does not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required
by State law, it does not contain any
unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act;
5. Executive Order 13132:
Federalism—Executive Order 13132
does not apply to this action because
this action will not have federalism
implications (i.e., there are no
substantial direct effects on States, on
the relationship between the national
government and States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between Federal and
State governments);
6. Executive Order 13175:
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments—Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this
action because it will not have Tribal
implications (i.e., there are no
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);
Juiyu Hsieh, Remediation and
Restoration II Branch (Mail Code
OSRR07–1), U.S. EPA Region 1, 5 Post
Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA
02109, telephone: (617) 918–1646,
hsieh.juiyu@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On March 22, 2004, EPA issued a
final rule amending the municipal solid
waste landfill criteria in 40 CFR part
258 to allow for research, development
and demonstration (RD&D) permits (69
FR 13242). This rule allows for
variances from specified criteria for a
limited period of time, to be
implemented through state-issued
RD&D permits. RD&D permits are
available only in states with approved
MSWLF permit programs that have been
modified to incorporate RD&D permit
authority. While States are not required
to seek approval to allow permits under
this new provision, those States that are
interested in providing RD&D permits to
owners and operators of MSWLFs must
seek approval from EPA before issuing
such permits. Approval procedures for
new provisions of 40 CFR part 258 are
outlined in 40 CFR 239.12.
Massachusetts’s MSWLF permit
program was approved on July 5, 1995
(60 FR 34982). On December 7, 2012,
Massachusetts submitted an application
to EPA Region 1 seeking Federal
approval of its RD&D project program in
conformance with Federal Requirements
at 40 CFR 258.4. The Massachusetts
RD&D program utilizes existing State
regulations at 310 C.M.R. 19.080 and
310 C.M.R. 19.062, which allow the
State to issue variances, and
demonstration project permits,
respectively. The State has the authority
under these regulations to ensure that
all federal requirements are met, by
limiting the variances issued to those
that are federally allowed, and by
attaching conditions and requirements
to any variances and permits that are
issued which ensure that all federal
requirements will be met. The
Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection has entered
into a Memorandum of Agreement with
the EPA in which it has committed to
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
B. Decision
After a thorough review, EPA is
determining that the Massachusetts
RD&D permit provisions are adequate to
comply with the Federal criteria as set
out in 40 CFR 258.4.
E:\FR\FM\25JAR1.SGM
25JAR1
5290
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection
of Children from Environmental Health
and Safety Risks—This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is not economically
significant and it is not based on health
or safety risks;
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use: This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13211
because it is not a significant regulatory
action as defined in Executive Order
12866;
9. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act: This provision
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impracticable. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
material specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards and
bodies. EPA approves State programs so
long as the State programs adequately
meet the criteria set out in 40 CFR part
258. It would be inconsistent with
applicable law for EPA, in its review of
a State program, to require the use of
any particular voluntary consensus
standard in place of another standard
that meets the 40 CFR part 258 criteria.
Thus, the National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act does not apply to this
action;
10. Congressional Review Act: EPA
will submit a report containing this
action 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.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 239
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Intergovernmental relations, Waste
treatment and disposal.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
40 CFR Part 258
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waste treatment disposal,
Water pollution control.
Authority: This action is issued under the
authority of section 2002, 4005 and 4010(c)
of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended,
42 U.S.C. 6912, 6945 and 6949(a).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:07 Jan 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
Dated: January 4, 2013.
Ira W. Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New
England, Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2013–01435 Filed 1–24–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0610; FRL–9770–6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Reasonably Available
Control Technology Requirements for
Volatile Organic Compounds
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Maryland.
These revisions pertain to the adoption
of various test methods, calculations
methods, work practice standards and
exemptions which make Maryland
Department of the Environment (MDE)
regulations more consistent with EPA’s
Control Techniques Guidelines (CTGs)
for seven source categories. These
categories are: Paper, film, and foil
coatings; industrial cleaning solvents;
miscellaneous metal and plastic parts
coatings; large appliance coatings; offset
lithographic printing and letterpress
printing; flat wood paneling coatings;
and flexible package printing. EPA is
approving these revisions to reduce
volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions from these seven categories
which will help Maryland attain and
maintain the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone
in accordance with the requirements of
the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This final rule is effective on
February 25, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA–EPA–R03–OAR–2012–
0610. All documents in the docket are
listed in the www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the electronic
docket, some information is not publicly
available, i.e., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
public inspection during normal
business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Maryland Department of
the Environment, 1800 Washington
Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore,
Maryland 21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christopher Cripps, (215) 814–2179, or
by email at cripps.christoher@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On October 23, 2012 (77 FR 64787),
EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the State of
Maryland. The NPR proposed approval
of revisions to Maryland regulations for
the control of emissions of VOC from
seven categories of sources covered by
a CTG. The State of Maryland submitted
the formal SIP revision (Revision No.
12–03) on April 4, 2012.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
On April 5, 2012, EPA received a SIP
revision submittal from the Maryland
Department of the Environment (MDE)
which addressed sources of VOC
emissions covered by EPA’s CTGs for
the following seven source categories:
(1) Paper, film, and foil coatings; (2)
industrial cleaning solvents; (3)
miscellaneous metal and plastic parts
coatings; (4) large appliance coatings; (5)
offset lithographic printing and
letterpress printing; (6) flat wood
paneling coatings; and (7) flexible
package printing. This SIP revision
submittal included amended Regulation
.04 ‘‘Testing and Monitoring’’ under
COMAR 26.11.01 ‘‘General
Administrative Provisions’’ (COMAR
26.11.01.04) and Regulation .02
‘‘Applicability, Determining
Compliance, Reporting and General
Requirements’’ under COMAR 26.11.19
‘‘Volatile Organic Compounds from
Specific Processes’’ (COMAR
26.11.19.02). These amendments pertain
to the adoption of various test methods,
calculations methods, work practice
standards and exemptions which make
MDE’s regulations more consistent with
EPA’s CTGs for these seven source
categories.
An explanation of the CAA’s
reasonably available control technology
(RACT) requirements for the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS as they apply to
Maryland, the specific details of the
amendments to COMAR 26.11.01.04
and COMAR 26.11.19.02 and EPA’s
rationale for approving this SIP revision
were provided in the NPR and will not
be restated here.
E:\FR\FM\25JAR1.SGM
25JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 17 (Friday, January 25, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5288-5290]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01435]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 239 and 258
[EPA-R01-RCRA-2012-0944; FRL-9771-7]
Adequacy of Massachusetts Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Permit
Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action approves a modification to Massachusetts's
approved municipal solid waste landfill (MSWLF) program. The approved
modification allows the State to issue Research, Development, and
Demonstration (RD&D) Permits to owners and operators of MSWLF in
accordance with its State law. On March 22, 2004, EPA issued final
regulations allowing research, development, and demonstration (RD&D)
permits to be issued to certain municipal solid waste landfills by
approved states. On December 7, 2012 Massachusetts submitted an
application to EPA Region 1 seeking Federal approval of its RD&D
requirements. After thorough review EPA Region 1 is determining that
Massachusetts's RD&D permit requirements are adequate through this
direct final action.
DATES: This determination of RD&D program adequacy for Massachusetts
will become effective April 25, 2013 without further notice unless EPA
receives adverse comments on or before March 26, 2013. If adverse
comments are received, EPA will review the comments and publish another
Federal Register document responding to the comments and either
affirming or revising the initial decision.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
RCRA-2012-0944, by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: hsieh.juiyu@epa.gov.
Fax: (617) 918-0646, to the attention of Juiyu Hsieh.
Mail: Juiyu Hsieh, RCRA Waste Management and UST Section,
Office of
[[Page 5289]]
Site Remediation and Restoration (OSRR07-1), EPA New England--Region 1,
5 Post Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3912.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Juiyu
Hsieh, RCRA Waste Management and UST Section, Office of Site
Remediation and Restoration (OSRR07-1), EPA New England--Region 1, 5
Post Office Square, 7th floor, Boston, MA 02109-3912. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the Office's normal hours of operation.
Instructions: Identify your comments as relating to Docket ID No.
EPA-R01-RCRA-2012-0944. EPA's policy is that all comments received will
be included in the public docket without change and may be made
available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or claimed to be other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov 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 email comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public 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. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
ID No. EPA-R01-RCRA-2012-0944. All documents in the docket are listed
on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although it may be listed in the
index, some information might not be publicly available, e.g., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Region 1
Library, 5 Post Office Square, 1st floor, Boston, MA 02109-3912; by
appointment only; tel: (617) 918-1990.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juiyu Hsieh, Remediation and
Restoration II Branch (Mail Code OSRR07-1), U.S. EPA Region 1, 5 Post
Office Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109, telephone: (617) 918-1646,
hsieh.juiyu@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On March 22, 2004, EPA issued a final rule amending the municipal
solid waste landfill criteria in 40 CFR part 258 to allow for research,
development and demonstration (RD&D) permits (69 FR 13242). This rule
allows for variances from specified criteria for a limited period of
time, to be implemented through state-issued RD&D permits. RD&D permits
are available only in states with approved MSWLF permit programs that
have been modified to incorporate RD&D permit authority. While States
are not required to seek approval to allow permits under this new
provision, those States that are interested in providing RD&D permits
to owners and operators of MSWLFs must seek approval from EPA before
issuing such permits. Approval procedures for new provisions of 40 CFR
part 258 are outlined in 40 CFR 239.12.
Massachusetts's MSWLF permit program was approved on July 5, 1995
(60 FR 34982). On December 7, 2012, Massachusetts submitted an
application to EPA Region 1 seeking Federal approval of its RD&D
project program in conformance with Federal Requirements at 40 CFR
258.4. The Massachusetts RD&D program utilizes existing State
regulations at 310 C.M.R. 19.080 and 310 C.M.R. 19.062, which allow the
State to issue variances, and demonstration project permits,
respectively. The State has the authority under these regulations to
ensure that all federal requirements are met, by limiting the variances
issued to those that are federally allowed, and by attaching conditions
and requirements to any variances and permits that are issued which
ensure that all federal requirements will be met. The Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection has entered into a Memorandum of
Agreement with the EPA in which it has committed to always exercise its
authority to ensure that all federal requirements are met.
B. Decision
After a thorough review, EPA is determining that the Massachusetts
RD&D permit provisions are adequate to comply with the Federal criteria
as set out in 40 CFR 258.4.
C. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action approves State solid waste requirements pursuant to
Resource Conversation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Section 4005 and imposes
no Federal requirements. Therefore, this rule complies with applicable
executive orders and statutory provisions as follows:
1. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning Review--The Office of
Management and Budget has exempted this action from its review under
Executive Order 12866;
2. Paperwork Reduction Act: This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act;
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act: Since this action will not add any
requirements not already imposed under State law, I certify that this
action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities;
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act: Because this action approves pre-
existing requirement under State law and does not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required by State law, it does not contain
any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act;
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism--Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to this action because this action will not have federalism
implications (i.e., there are no substantial direct effects on States,
on the relationship between the national government and States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between Federal and
State governments);
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments--Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action
because it will not have Tribal implications (i.e., there are no
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);
[[Page 5290]]
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks--This action is not subject to Executive Order
13045 because it is not economically significant and it is not based on
health or safety risks;
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use: This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 because it is not a significant regulatory action as
defined in Executive Order 12866;
9. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act: This provision
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impracticable. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., material specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards and bodies. EPA approves State programs
so long as the State programs adequately meet the criteria set out in
40 CFR part 258. It would be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA,
in its review of a State program, to require the use of any particular
voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard that meets
the 40 CFR part 258 criteria. Thus, the National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act does not apply to this action;
10. Congressional Review Act: EPA will submit a report containing
this action 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.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 239
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Intergovernmental relations, Waste treatment and disposal.
40 CFR Part 258
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment disposal,
Water pollution control.
Authority: This action is issued under the authority of section
2002, 4005 and 4010(c) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended,
42 U.S.C. 6912, 6945 and 6949(a).
Dated: January 4, 2013.
Ira W. Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England, Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2013-01435 Filed 1-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P