Determination of Full Program Adequacy of Washington's Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Permitting Program, 85438-85440 [2016-26754]
Download as PDF
85438
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 228 / Monday, November 28, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 239 and 258
[EPA–R10–RCRA–2016–0629; FRL 9928–
27–Region 10]
Determination of Full Program
Adequacy of Washington’s Municipal
Solid Waste Landfill Permitting
Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
Under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, as
amended by the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments, States must
develop and implement permit
programs for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills (MSWLFs) and seek an
adequacy determination by the
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). This rule documents EPA’s
determination that Washington’s
MSWLF permit program is adequate to
ensure compliance with Federal
MSWLF requirements.
DATES: This direct final rule will
become effective February 27, 2017
without further notice, unless EPA
receives adverse comments on or before
January 27, 2017. If written adverse
comments are received, the EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of the rule
in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
RCRA–2016–0629 by one of the
following methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: calabro.domenic@epa.gov.
• Fax: (206) 553–6640, to the
attention of Domenic Calabro.
• Mail: Send written comments to
Domenic Calabro, U.S. EPA, Region 10,
1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mailstop:
AW–150, Seattle, WA 98101.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver
your comments to: Domenic Calabro,
Office of Air and Waste, U.S. EPA,
Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite
900, Mailstop: AW–150, Seattle, WA
98101. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Office’s normal
hours of operation.
Instructions: Identify your comments
as relating to Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
RCRA–2016–0629. The 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
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Nov 25, 2016
Jkt 241001
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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
the 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 the EPA’s public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/
dockets/.
Docket: EPA has established a docket
for this action under Docket ID No.
EPA–R10–RCRA–2016–0629. 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
the disclosure of which 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 U.S. Region 10 Library, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Seattle, Washington by
appointment only; please telephone
(206) 553–1289 to make an
appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S.
EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Suite 900, Mailcode: AW–150, Seattle,
Washington, 98101 Attn: Mr. Domenic
Calabro. Telephone: (206) 553–6640.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On October 9, 1991, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
promulgated the ‘‘Solid Waste Disposal
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Facility Criteria: Final Rule’’ (56 FR
50978). That rule established part 258 of
Title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR). The criteria set out
in 40 CFR part 258 include location
restrictions and standards for design,
operation, groundwater monitoring,
corrective action, financial assurance,
and closure and post-closure care for
MSWLFs. The 40 CFR part 258 criteria
establish minimum Federal standards
that take into account the practical
capability of owners and operators of
MSWLFs while ensuring that these
facilities are designed and managed in
a manner that is protective of human
health and the environment. Section
4005(c)(1)(B) of subtitle D of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), as amended by the
Hazardous and Solid Waste
Amendments of 1984, requires States to
develop and implement permit
programs to ensure that MSWLFs
comply with the 40 CFR part 258
criteria. RCRA section 4005(c)(1)(C)
requires EPA to determine whether the
permit programs that States develop and
implement for these facilities are
adequate.
To fulfill this requirement to
determine whether State permit
programs that implement the 40 CFR
part 258 criteria are adequate, EPA
promulgated the State Implementation
Rule (SIR) (63 FR 57025, Oct. 23, 1998).
The SIR, which established part 239 of
Title 40 of the CFR, has the following
four purposes: (1) Lay out the
requirements that State programs must
satisfy to be determined adequate; (2)
confirm the process for EPA approval or
partial approval of State MSWLF permit
programs; (3) provide the procedures for
withdrawal of such approvals; and (4)
establish a flexible framework for
modifications of approved programs.
Only those owners and operators
located in States with approved permit
programs for MSWLFs can use the sitespecific flexibility provided by 40 CFR
part 258, to the extent the State permit
program allows such flexibility. Every
standard in the 40 CFR part 258 criteria
is designed to be implemented by the
owner or operator with or without
oversight or participation by EPA or the
State regulatory agency. States with
approved programs may choose to
require facilities to comply with the 40
CFR part 258 criteria exactly, or they
may choose to allow owners and
operators to use site-specific alternative
approaches to meet the Federal criteria.
The flexibility that an owner or operator
may be allowed under an approved
State program can provide a significant
reduction in the burden associated with
complying with the 40 CFR part 258
E:\FR\FM\28NOR1.SGM
28NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 228 / Monday, November 28, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
criteria. Regardless of the approval
status of a State and the permit status of
any facility, the 40 CFR part 258 criteria
shall apply to all permitted and
unpermitted MSWLFs. As EPA
explained in the preamble to the revised
Federal MSWLF criteria, EPA expects
that any owner or operator complying
with provisions in a State program
approved by EPA should be considered
to be in compliance with the revised
Federal MSWLF criteria.
To receive a determination of
adequacy for a MSWLF permit program
under the SIR, a State must have
enforceable standards for new and
existing MSWLFs. These State standards
must be technically comparable to the
40 CFR part 258 criteria. In addition, the
State must have the authority to issue a
permit or other notice of prior approval
and conditions to all new and existing
MSWLFs in its jurisdiction. The State
also must provide for public
participation in permit issuance and
enforcement, as required in RCRA
section 7004(b). Finally, the State must
demonstrate that it has sufficient
compliance monitoring and
enforcement authorities to take specific
action against any owner or operator
that fails to comply with an approved
permit program. EPA expects States to
meet all of these requirements for all
elements of a permit program before it
gives full approval to a State’s program.
On April 9, 1993, Washington
submitted an application to obtain a
partial program adequacy determination
for the State’s MSWLF permit program
under Section 4005 of RCRA. EPA
reviewed Washington’s application and
published a determination of partial
program adequacy on March 31, 1994
(FR Vol. 59, No. 62) for those portions
of the MSWLF permit program that were
adequate to ensure compliance with the
revised Federal MSWLF criteria.
Washington made amendments to
Chapter 173–351 of the Washington
Administrative Code, which became
effective in November 2012 and
November 2015. On June 16, 2016,
Washington submitted to EPA an
amended application which
incorporated the amendments, seeking a
determination of full program adequacy
for Washington’s MSWLF permitting
program. The amended application
included a detailed description of
changes made to Washington’s MSWLF
permitting program since the March 31,
1994 EPA determination of partial
program adequacy. Specifically,
Washington addressed the following
portions of its MSWLF permit program
that were not approved in the March 31,
1994 determination of partial program
adequacy:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Nov 25, 2016
Jkt 241001
(1) Revised the definitions of Existing
MSWLF Unit and Lateral Expansion, per
the federal regulations found in 40 CFR
258.2.
(2) Eliminated equivalent and arid
liner designs in the state rule, retained
composite liner requirements, and
incorporated an option for alternate
liner design, consistent with federal
regulations.
(3) Revised the rules to require
monitoring for total metals in
groundwater.
(4) Adopted revisions to Appendix 3
of WAC 173–351–990 to include two
hazardous organic constituents: 2,3,7,8Tetrachlorodibenzo- p-dioxin - [CAS
1746–01–6] and alpha, alphaDimethylphenethylamine [CAS 122–09–
8]. This revision affects landfills that are
required to perform assessment
monitoring under the rule, and is
necessary to be consistent with federal
rules in 40 CFR part 258.
(5) Adopted new post-closure care
period criteria, which are based on
potential risk to human and
environmental receptors, per 40 CFR
part 258.61(b).
(6) Made revisions to allow for
issuance of Research, Development, and
Demonstration (RD&D) landfill permits,
pursuant to the 2004 rulemaking by EPA
(69 FR 13242, March 22, 2004).
Washington Assistant Attorney
General, Jonathan C. Thompson,
certified in a letter dated June 10, 2016
that the regulations cited in the
Washington Department of Ecology’s
Amended Application for Municipal
Solid Waste Facilities Program
Determination of Adequacy were
enacted and full effective at the time of
the application and will continue to be
when the state’s permit program is fully
approved.
II. Decision
In addition to those portions of the
State’s MSWLF permit program that
were approved on March 31, 1994, EPA
has determined that the State’s revised
MSWLF permit program will ensure
adequacy with the Federal criteria in 40
CFR part 258. In addition, Washington
has demonstrated that its MSWLF
permit program contains specific
provisions for public participation,
compliance monitoring, and
enforcement. After reviewing
Washington’s amended application,
EPA has concluded that Washington’s
MSWLF permit program meets all of the
statutory and regulatory requirements
established by RCRA. Accordingly,
Washington is granted a determination
of full program adequacy for its MSWLF
permitting program.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
85439
By finding that Washington’s MSWLF
permit program is adequate, EPA does
not intend to affect the rights of
Federally-recognized Indian Tribes in
Washington, nor does it intend to limit
the existing rights of the State of
Washington. RCRA section 4005(a)
provides that citizens may use the
citizen suit provisions of RCRA section
7002 to enforce the 40 CFR part 258
criteria independent of any State
enforcement program.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was therefore not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new
Information Collection Request (ICR)
burden under the PRA. The purpose of
this action is to approve amendments to
Washington’s MSWLF permitting
program which result in it meeting all
of the statutory and regulatory
requirements established by RCRA. The
OMB has previously approved the
information collection activities
contained in the ICR for 40 CFR part
239, Requirements for State Permit
Program Determination of Adequacy
and part 258, MSWLF Criteria. This
action does not impose any additional
reporting requirements.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
EPA certifies that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. In making this
determination, the impact of concern is
any significant adverse economic
impact on small entities. An agency may
certify that a rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities if
the rule relieves regulatory burden, has
no net burden or otherwise has a
positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. This rule
will not create any additional burden for
small entities. Small entities are not
required to take any action as a
consequence of this rule, and this action
will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. We
have therefore concluded that this
E:\FR\FM\28NOR1.SGM
28NOR1
85440
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 228 / Monday, November 28, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
action will have no net regulatory
burden for all directly regulated small
entities.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The action imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector.
The costs involved in this action are
imposed only by voluntary participation
in a federal program.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action 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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13175. The EPA has concluded
that this action will have no new tribal
implications, nor would it present any
additional burden on the tribes. It will
neither impose substantial direct
compliance costs on tribal governments,
nor preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this
action.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045, because it is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because the
EPA does not believe the environmental
health or safety risks addressed by this
action present a disproportionate risk to
children. Washington has incorporated
those requirements from the Federal
MSWLF landfill criteria (40 CFR part
258) not found in Washington’s existing
program and EPA has determined that
Washington’s program includes terms
and conditions that are at least as
protective as the MSWLF landfill
criteria for municipal solid waste
landfills, to assure protection of human
health and the environment.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Nov 25, 2016
Jkt 241001
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The purpose of this action is to
approve amendments to Washington’s
MSWLF permitting program which
result in it meeting all of the statutory
and regulatory requirements established
by RCRA. The EPA believes that the
human health and environmental risk
addressed by this action will not have
a new disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority, low-income or
indigenous populations.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and
the EPA will submit a rule report to
each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 239
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Intergovernmental relations, Waste
treatment and disposal.
40 CFR Part 258
Environmental protection, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Waste
treatment and 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: October 20, 2016.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2016–26754 Filed 11–25–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 372
[EPA–HQ–TRI–2015–0607; FRL–9953–28]
RIN 2025–AA42
Addition of Hexabromocyclododecane
(HBCD) Category; Community Rightto-Know Toxic Chemical Release
Reporting
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is adding a
hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD)
category to the list of toxic chemicals
subject to reporting under section 313 of
the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)
and section 6607 of the Pollution
Prevention Act (PPA). EPA is adding
this chemical category to the EPCRA
section 313 list because EPA has
determined that HBCD meets the
EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B) and (C)
toxicity criteria. Specifically, EPA has
determined that HBCD can reasonably
be anticipated to cause developmental
and reproductive effects in humans and
is highly toxic to aquatic and terrestrial
organisms. In addition, based on the
available bioaccumulation and
persistence data, EPA has determined
that HBCD should be classified as a
persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic
(PBT) chemical and assigned a 100pound reporting threshold.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is
effective November 30, 2016.
Applicability date: This final rule will
apply for the reporting year beginning
January 1, 2017 (reports due July 1,
2018).
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–TRI–2015–0607. All
documents in the docket are listed on
https://www.regulations.gov. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., Confidential
Business Information 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 electronically
through https://www.regulations.gov.
Additional instructions on visiting the
docket, along with more information
about dockets generally, is available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28NOR1.SGM
28NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 228 (Monday, November 28, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 85438-85440]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26754]
[[Page 85438]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 239 and 258
[EPA-R10-RCRA-2016-0629; FRL 9928-27-Region 10]
Determination of Full Program Adequacy of Washington's Municipal
Solid Waste Landfill Permitting Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended
by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments, States must develop and
implement permit programs for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (MSWLFs)
and seek an adequacy determination by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). This rule documents EPA's determination that Washington's
MSWLF permit program is adequate to ensure compliance with Federal
MSWLF requirements.
DATES: This direct final rule will become effective February 27, 2017
without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments on or
before January 27, 2017. If written adverse comments are received, the
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
RCRA-2016-0629 by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: calabro.domenic@epa.gov.
Fax: (206) 553-6640, to the attention of Domenic Calabro.
Mail: Send written comments to Domenic Calabro, U.S. EPA,
Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mailstop: AW-150, Seattle, WA
98101.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to:
Domenic Calabro, Office of Air and Waste, U.S. EPA, Region 10, 1200
Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mailstop: AW-150, Seattle, WA 98101. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Office's normal hours of
operation.
Instructions: Identify your comments as relating to Docket ID No.
EPA-R10-RCRA-2016-0629. The 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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
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 the
EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/.
Docket: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
ID No. EPA-R10-RCRA-2016-0629. 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 the disclosure of which 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 U.S. Region 10
Library, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington by appointment only;
please telephone (206) 553-1289 to make an appointment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Suite 900, Mailcode: AW-150, Seattle, Washington, 98101 Attn: Mr.
Domenic Calabro. Telephone: (206) 553-6640.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On October 9, 1991, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
promulgated the ``Solid Waste Disposal Facility Criteria: Final Rule''
(56 FR 50978). That rule established part 258 of Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR). The criteria set out in 40 CFR part 258
include location restrictions and standards for design, operation,
groundwater monitoring, corrective action, financial assurance, and
closure and post-closure care for MSWLFs. The 40 CFR part 258 criteria
establish minimum Federal standards that take into account the
practical capability of owners and operators of MSWLFs while ensuring
that these facilities are designed and managed in a manner that is
protective of human health and the environment. Section 4005(c)(1)(B)
of subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as
amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984, requires
States to develop and implement permit programs to ensure that MSWLFs
comply with the 40 CFR part 258 criteria. RCRA section 4005(c)(1)(C)
requires EPA to determine whether the permit programs that States
develop and implement for these facilities are adequate.
To fulfill this requirement to determine whether State permit
programs that implement the 40 CFR part 258 criteria are adequate, EPA
promulgated the State Implementation Rule (SIR) (63 FR 57025, Oct. 23,
1998). The SIR, which established part 239 of Title 40 of the CFR, has
the following four purposes: (1) Lay out the requirements that State
programs must satisfy to be determined adequate; (2) confirm the
process for EPA approval or partial approval of State MSWLF permit
programs; (3) provide the procedures for withdrawal of such approvals;
and (4) establish a flexible framework for modifications of approved
programs.
Only those owners and operators located in States with approved
permit programs for MSWLFs can use the site-specific flexibility
provided by 40 CFR part 258, to the extent the State permit program
allows such flexibility. Every standard in the 40 CFR part 258 criteria
is designed to be implemented by the owner or operator with or without
oversight or participation by EPA or the State regulatory agency.
States with approved programs may choose to require facilities to
comply with the 40 CFR part 258 criteria exactly, or they may choose to
allow owners and operators to use site-specific alternative approaches
to meet the Federal criteria. The flexibility that an owner or operator
may be allowed under an approved State program can provide a
significant reduction in the burden associated with complying with the
40 CFR part 258
[[Page 85439]]
criteria. Regardless of the approval status of a State and the permit
status of any facility, the 40 CFR part 258 criteria shall apply to all
permitted and unpermitted MSWLFs. As EPA explained in the preamble to
the revised Federal MSWLF criteria, EPA expects that any owner or
operator complying with provisions in a State program approved by EPA
should be considered to be in compliance with the revised Federal MSWLF
criteria.
To receive a determination of adequacy for a MSWLF permit program
under the SIR, a State must have enforceable standards for new and
existing MSWLFs. These State standards must be technically comparable
to the 40 CFR part 258 criteria. In addition, the State must have the
authority to issue a permit or other notice of prior approval and
conditions to all new and existing MSWLFs in its jurisdiction. The
State also must provide for public participation in permit issuance and
enforcement, as required in RCRA section 7004(b). Finally, the State
must demonstrate that it has sufficient compliance monitoring and
enforcement authorities to take specific action against any owner or
operator that fails to comply with an approved permit program. EPA
expects States to meet all of these requirements for all elements of a
permit program before it gives full approval to a State's program.
On April 9, 1993, Washington submitted an application to obtain a
partial program adequacy determination for the State's MSWLF permit
program under Section 4005 of RCRA. EPA reviewed Washington's
application and published a determination of partial program adequacy
on March 31, 1994 (FR Vol. 59, No. 62) for those portions of the MSWLF
permit program that were adequate to ensure compliance with the revised
Federal MSWLF criteria. Washington made amendments to Chapter 173-351
of the Washington Administrative Code, which became effective in
November 2012 and November 2015. On June 16, 2016, Washington submitted
to EPA an amended application which incorporated the amendments,
seeking a determination of full program adequacy for Washington's MSWLF
permitting program. The amended application included a detailed
description of changes made to Washington's MSWLF permitting program
since the March 31, 1994 EPA determination of partial program adequacy.
Specifically, Washington addressed the following portions of its MSWLF
permit program that were not approved in the March 31, 1994
determination of partial program adequacy:
(1) Revised the definitions of Existing MSWLF Unit and Lateral
Expansion, per the federal regulations found in 40 CFR 258.2.
(2) Eliminated equivalent and arid liner designs in the state rule,
retained composite liner requirements, and incorporated an option for
alternate liner design, consistent with federal regulations.
(3) Revised the rules to require monitoring for total metals in
groundwater.
(4) Adopted revisions to Appendix 3 of WAC 173-351-990 to include
two hazardous organic constituents: 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo- p-
dioxin - [CAS 1746-01-6] and alpha, alpha-Dimethylphenethylamine [CAS
122-09-8]. This revision affects landfills that are required to perform
assessment monitoring under the rule, and is necessary to be consistent
with federal rules in 40 CFR part 258.
(5) Adopted new post-closure care period criteria, which are based
on potential risk to human and environmental receptors, per 40 CFR part
258.61(b).
(6) Made revisions to allow for issuance of Research, Development,
and Demonstration (RD&D) landfill permits, pursuant to the 2004
rulemaking by EPA (69 FR 13242, March 22, 2004).
Washington Assistant Attorney General, Jonathan C. Thompson,
certified in a letter dated June 10, 2016 that the regulations cited in
the Washington Department of Ecology's Amended Application for
Municipal Solid Waste Facilities Program Determination of Adequacy were
enacted and full effective at the time of the application and will
continue to be when the state's permit program is fully approved.
II. Decision
In addition to those portions of the State's MSWLF permit program
that were approved on March 31, 1994, EPA has determined that the
State's revised MSWLF permit program will ensure adequacy with the
Federal criteria in 40 CFR part 258. In addition, Washington has
demonstrated that its MSWLF permit program contains specific provisions
for public participation, compliance monitoring, and enforcement. After
reviewing Washington's amended application, EPA has concluded that
Washington's MSWLF permit program meets all of the statutory and
regulatory requirements established by RCRA. Accordingly, Washington is
granted a determination of full program adequacy for its MSWLF
permitting program.
By finding that Washington's MSWLF permit program is adequate, EPA
does not intend to affect the rights of Federally-recognized Indian
Tribes in Washington, nor does it intend to limit the existing rights
of the State of Washington. RCRA section 4005(a) provides that citizens
may use the citizen suit provisions of RCRA section 7002 to enforce the
40 CFR part 258 criteria independent of any State enforcement program.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new Information Collection Request
(ICR) burden under the PRA. The purpose of this action is to approve
amendments to Washington's MSWLF permitting program which result in it
meeting all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by
RCRA. The OMB has previously approved the information collection
activities contained in the ICR for 40 CFR part 239, Requirements for
State Permit Program Determination of Adequacy and part 258, MSWLF
Criteria. This action does not impose any additional reporting
requirements.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
EPA certifies that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. This rule will not create any additional
burden for small entities. Small entities are not required to take any
action as a consequence of this rule, and this action will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. We have
therefore concluded that this
[[Page 85440]]
action will have no net regulatory burden for all directly regulated
small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local, or tribal governments or the private sector. The costs involved
in this action are imposed only by voluntary participation in a federal
program.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action 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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. The EPA has concluded that this action will have
no new tribal implications, nor would it present any additional burden
on the tribes. It will neither impose substantial direct compliance
costs on tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. Washington has incorporated those requirements from the
Federal MSWLF landfill criteria (40 CFR part 258) not found in
Washington's existing program and EPA has determined that Washington's
program includes terms and conditions that are at least as protective
as the MSWLF landfill criteria for municipal solid waste landfills, to
assure protection of human health and the environment.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations 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 under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The purpose of this action is to approve amendments to Washington's
MSWLF permitting program which result in it meeting all of the
statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA. The EPA
believes that the human health and environmental risk addressed by this
action will not have a new disproportionately high and adverse human
health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous
populations.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 239
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Intergovernmental relations, Waste treatment and disposal.
40 CFR Part 258
Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Waste treatment and 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: October 20, 2016.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2016-26754 Filed 11-25-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P