Georgia: Proposed Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revisions, 39975-39978 [2018-17206]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules The conclusions of Minnesota’s analysis are consistent with EPA’s expanded review of its January 23, 2017 submittal. All areas that Minnesota sources potentially contribute to attain and maintain the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and as demonstrated in its submittal, Minnesota will not contribute to projected nonattainment or maintenance issues at any sites in 2021. Minnesota’s analysis shows that through permanent and enforceable measures currently contained in its SIP, and other emissions reductions occurring in Minnesota and in other states, monitored PM2.5 air quality in all identified areas that Minnesota sources may impact will continue to improve, and that no further measures are necessary to satisfy Minnesota’s responsibilities under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Therefore, EPA is proposing that prongs one and two of the interstate pollution transport element of Minnesota’s infrastructure SIP are approvable. IV. What action is EPA taking? EPA is proposing to approve a portion of Minnesota’s January 23, 2017 submittal certifying that the current Minnesota SIP is sufficient to meet the required infrastructure requirements under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), specifically prongs one and two, as set forth above. EPA is requesting comments on the proposed approval. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866. • Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:58 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 244001 • Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • 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); • Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because this rulemaking does not involve technical standards; and • Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: July 30, 2018. Cathy Stepp, Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. 2018–17362 Filed 8–10–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 39975 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 271 [EPA–R04–RCRA–2018–0255; FRL– 9981– 48—Region 4] Georgia: Proposed Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revisions Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: Georgia has applied to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for final authorization of changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended. EPA has reviewed Georgia’s application and has determined that these changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for final authorization. Therefore, we are proposing to authorize the state’s changes. EPA seeks public comment prior to taking final action. DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 12, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– RCRA–2018–0255, at https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from www.regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https:// www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thornell Cheeks, Materials and Waste Management Branch, RCR Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960; telephone number: (404) 562–8479: fax SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1 39976 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules number: (404) 562–9964; email address: cheeks.thornell@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary? States that have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the Federal program. 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 268, 270, 273, and 279. New Federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal regulations that EPA promulgates pursuant to the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) take effect in authorized states at the same time that they take effect in unauthorized states. Thus, EPA will implement those requirements and prohibitions in Georgia, including the issuance of new permits implementing those requirements, until the state is granted authorization to do so. B. What decisions has EPA made in this rule? sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS On September 22, 2015, September 12, 2016, and November 7, 2017, Georgia submitted program revision applications seeking authorization of changes to its hazardous waste program that correspond to certain Federal rules promulgated between July 1, 2005 and June 30, 2017 (also known as RCRA Clusters XVI, XIX and XXII through XXV). EPA concludes that Georgia’s applications to revise its authorized program meet all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA, as set forth in RCRA section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), and 40 CFR part 271. Therefore, EPA proposes to grant Georgia final authorization to operate its hazardous waste program with the changes described in its Checklist 213, Burden Reduction Initiative Checklist 228, Hazardous Waste Technical Corrections and Clarifications. 17:58 Aug 10, 2018 D. What happens if EPA receives comments that oppose this action? If EPA receives comments on this proposed action, we will address all such comments in a later final rule. You may not have another opportunity to comment. If you want to comment on this authorization, you must do so at this time. E. What has Georgia previously been authorized for? Georgia initially received final authorization on August 7, 1984, effective August 21, 1984 (49 FR 31417), to implement the RCRA hazardous waste management program. EPA Federal Register date and page Description of federal requirement VerDate Sep<11>2014 granted authorization for changes to Georgia’s program on the following dates: July 7, 1986, effective September 18, 1986 (51 FR 24549); July 28, 1988, effective September 26, 1988 (53 FR 28383); July 24, 1990, effective September 24, 1990 (55 FR 30000); February 12, 1991, effective April 15, 1991 (56 FR 5656); May 11, 1992, effective July 10, 1992 (57 FR 20055); November 25, 1992, effective January 25, 1993 (57 FR 55466); February 26, C. What is the effect of this proposed 1993, effective April 27, 1993 (58 FR authorization decision? 11539); November 16, 1993, effective If Georgia is authorized for the January 18, 1994 (58 FR 60388); April changes described in Georgia’s 26, 1994, effective June 27, 1994 (59 FR authorization applications, these 21664); May 10, 1995, effective July 10, changes will become part of the 1995 (60 FR 24790); August 30, 1995, authorized state hazardous waste program, and therefore will be federally effective October 30, 1995 (60 FR 45069); March 7, 1996, effective May 6, enforceable. Georgia will continue to have primary enforcement authority and 1996 (61 FR 9108); September, 18, 1998, effective November 17, 1998 (63 FR responsibility for its state hazardous 49852); October 14, 1999, effective waste program. EPA would retain its December 13, 1999 (64 FR 55629); authorities under RCRA sections 3007, November 28, 2000, effective March 30, 3008, 3013, and 7003, including its 2001 (66 FR 8090); July 16, 2002, authority to: effective September 16, 2002 (67 FR • Conduct inspections, and require 46600); November 19, 2002, effective monitoring, tests, analyses or reports; January 21, 2003 (67 FR 69690); July 18, • Enforce RCRA requirements, 2003, effective September 16, 2003 (68 including authorized state program FR 42605); January 27, 2005, effective requirements, and suspend or revoke April 20, 2005 (70 FR 12973); April 25, permits; and • Take enforcement actions regardless 2006, effective June 26, 2006 (71 FR of whether the state has taken its own 23864); May 2, 2013, effective July 1, actions. 2013 (78 FR 25579); and January 26, This action will not impose additional 2015, effective March 27, 2015 (80 FR requirements on the regulated 3888). community because the regulations for F. What changes are we proposing with which EPA is proposing to authorize this action? Georgia are already effective, and are not changed by this proposed action. On September 22, 2015, September authorization applications, and as outlined below in Section F of this document. Georgia has responsibility for permitting treatment, storage, and disposal facilities within its borders and for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program described in its revised program applications, subject to the limitations of HSWA, as discussed above. Jkt 244001 71 FR 16862; 4/4/06. 77 FR 22229; 4/13/12. PO 00000 12, 2016, and November 7, 2017, Georgia submitted program revision applications seeking authorization of changes to its hazardous waste management program in accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. EPA proposes to determine, subject to receipt of written comments that oppose this action, that Georgia’s hazardous waste program revisions are equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent than the Federal program, and therefore satisfy all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization. Therefore, EPA is proposing to authorize Georgia for the following program changes: Analogous state authority 1 391–3–11–.05(1)–(2); 391–3–11–.07(1)–(2); 391–3–11–.10(1)–(3); 391–3–11–.11(3)(h) and (7)(d); and 391–3–11–.16. 391–3–11–.07(1) and 391–3–11–.10(3). Frm 00060 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules Description of federal requirement Federal Register date and page Checklist 229, Conditional Exclusions for Solvent Contaminated Wipes. Checklist 231, Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Rule. Checklist 232, Revisions to the Export Provisions of the Cathode Ray Tube Rule. Checklists 219 and 233, Revisions to the Definition of Solid Waste. 78 FR 46448; 7/31/13. 79 FR 7518; ... 2/7/14 ............. 79 FR 36220; 6/26/14. 391–3–11–.02(1) and 391–3–11–.07(1). 391–3–11–.02(1); 391–3–11–.05(5); 391–3–11–.07(1)–(2); and 391–3–11–.11(7)(d). Checklist 236, Imports and Exports of Hazardous Waste. 73 FR 64668; 10/30/08;. 80 FR 1694; 1/ 13/15. 81 FR 85696; 11/28/16. Checklist 237, Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule. 81 FR 85732; 11/28/16. 1 The Analogous state authority 1 391–3–11–.02(1); 391–3–11–.08(1); 91–3–11–.09; and 391–3–11–.10(1)–(2). 391–3–11–.02(1) and 391–3–11–.07(1). 391–3–11–.02(1); 391–3–11–.07(1); 391–3–11–.08(1); 391–3–11–.09; 391–3–11–.10(1)–(3); and 391–3–11–.18. 391–3–11–.01(2)(e); 391–3–11–.02(1); 391–3–11–.07(1); 391–3–11–.08(1); 391–3–11–.09; 391–3–11–.10(1)–(3); 391–3–11–.11(1)(a), (5), and (7)(d); 391–3–11–.16; 391–3–11–.17; and 391–3–11–.18. Georgia provisions are from the Georgia Rules for Hazardous Waste Management Chapter 391–3–11, effective September 28, 2017. G. Where are the revised state rules different from the Federal rules? sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 39977 EPA considers the following state requirements to go beyond the scope of the Federal program: • Georgia is broader in scope than the Federal program in its adoption of 40 CFR 260.43 (2015) and 40 CFR 261.4(a)(24) (2015) at Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 391–3–11–.07(1). Both of these regulations include provisions from the 2015 Definition of Solid Waste (DSW) Rule that have been vacated and replaced with the less stringent requirements of 40 CFR 260.43 (2008) and 40 CFR 261.4(a)(24) and (25) (2008) from the 2008 DSW Rule. • Georgia is also broader in scope than the Federal program by not adopting the conditional exclusion for carbon dioxide streams in geologic sequestration activities (Checklist 230) at 40 CFR 261.4(h) (see Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 391–3–11–.01(2)). Georgia’s continued regulation of these waste streams is broader in scope than the Federal program. Broader-in-scope requirements are not part of the authorized program and EPA cannot enforce them. Although regulated entities must comply with these requirements in accordance with state law, they are not RCRA requirements. EPA cannot delegate certain Federal requirements associated with the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Rule (Checklist 231), the Imports and Exports of Hazardous Waste Rule (Checklist 236), and the Revisions to the Export Provisions of the Cathode Ray Tube Rule (Checklist 232) (40 CFR 261.39(a)(5) and 261.41). Georgia has adopted these requirements and VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:58 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 244001 appropriately preserved EPA’s authority to implement them (see Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. R. 391–3–11–.01(2)(c)) H. Who handles permits after the final authorization takes effect? Georgia will issue permits for all the provisions for which it is authorized and will administer the permits it issues. EPA will continue to administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits or portions of permits which EPA issued prior to the effective date of this authorization until they are terminated. EPA will not issue any new permits or new portions of permits for the provisions listed in the Table above after the effective date of the final authorization. EPA will continue to implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements for which Georgia is not yet authorized. I. What is codification and will EPA codify Georgia’s hazardous waste program as proposed in this rule? Codification is the process of placing the state’s statutes and regulations that comprise the state’s authorized hazardous waste program into the Code of Federal Regulations. EPA does this by referencing the authorized state rules in 40 CFR part 272. EPA is not proposing to codify the authorization of Georgia’s changes at this time. However, EPA reserves the amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart L, for the authorization of Georgia’s program changes at a later date. J. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action from the requirements of Executive Order PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). This action proposes to authorize state requirements for the purpose of RCRA section 3006 and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Therefore, this action is not subject to review by OMB. This action is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) regulatory action because actions such as this proposed authorization of Georgia’s revised hazardous waste program under RCRA are exempted under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this action proposes to authorize 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 (2 U.S.C. 1531– 1538). For the same reason, this action also does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely proposes to authorize state requirements E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 39978 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules as part of the state RCRA hazardous waste program without altering the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established by RCRA. This action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant and it does not make decisions based on environmental health or safety risks. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Under RCRA section 3006(b), EPA grants a state’s application for authorization as long as the state meets the criteria required by RCRA. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state authorization application, to require the use of any particular voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard that otherwise satisfies the 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. As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in proposing 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. EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of this action in accordance with the ‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under the executive order. This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). ‘‘Burden’’ is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. Because this action proposes authorization of pre-existing state rules VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:58 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 244001 which are at least equivalent to, and no less stringent than existing Federal requirements, and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law, and there are no anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental effects, this proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste transportation, 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, and 6974(b). Dated: July 10, 2018. Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III, Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2018–17206 Filed 8–10–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 300 [EPA–HQ–OLEM–2017–0603; FRL–9981– 49–OLEM] Documentation Supporting the Proposal of the Orange County North Basin Site; Addendum Availability Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of data availability. AGENCY: This notice provides an opportunity to comment on additional reference documentation for the Orange County North Basin site in Orange County, California. The site was proposed to the National Priorities List (NPL) on January 18, 2018. DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked) on or before September 12, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket number EPA–HQ– OLEM–2017–0603, at https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. To send a comment via the United States Postal Service, use the following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Superfund Docket Center, Mailcode 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460. Use the Docket Center address below if you are using express mail, commercial delivery, hand delivery or courier. Delivery verification signatures will be available only during regular business hours: EPA Superfund Docket Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Wendel, phone: (404) 562– 8799, email: wendel.jennifer@epa.gov, Site Assessment and Remedy Decisions Branch, Assessment and Remediation Division, Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (Mail Code 5204P), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The site was proposed to the National Priorities List (NPL) on January 18, 2018 (83 FR 2576). Site Geological Information One commenter questioned the EPA’s use of a reference in the HRS documentation record (HRS Reference 110—the 3DVA Technical Memorandum) to support aquifer interconnection and contaminant migration. EPA notes that the reference in question is a model, and analysis, of the hydrology and geology in the vicinity of the Orange County North Basin site. The commenter stated that the EPA cites to HRS Reference 110 and presents conclusions in the HRS documentation record based on the model in the reference that used well borehole and lithology data that was not E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 156 (Monday, August 13, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39975-39978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17206]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[EPA-R04-RCRA-2018-0255; FRL- 9981-48--Region 4]


Georgia: Proposed Authorization of State Hazardous Waste 
Management Program Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Georgia has applied to the Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) for final authorization of changes to its hazardous waste program 
under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended. 
EPA has reviewed Georgia's application and has determined that these 
changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for final 
authorization. Therefore, we are proposing to authorize the state's 
changes. EPA seeks public comment prior to taking final action.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 12, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
RCRA-2018-0255, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from www.regulations.gov. EPA may publish any 
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment 
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thornell Cheeks, Materials and Waste 
Management Branch, RCR Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-
8960; telephone number: (404) 562-8479: fax

[[Page 39976]]

number: (404) 562-9964; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary?

    States that have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA 
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste 
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent 
than the Federal program. 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 268, 270, 273, and 279.
    New Federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal 
regulations that EPA promulgates pursuant to the Hazardous and Solid 
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA) take effect in authorized states at the 
same time that they take effect in unauthorized states. Thus, EPA will 
implement those requirements and prohibitions in Georgia, including the 
issuance of new permits implementing those requirements, until the 
state is granted authorization to do so.

B. What decisions has EPA made in this rule?

    On September 22, 2015, September 12, 2016, and November 7, 2017, 
Georgia submitted program revision applications seeking authorization 
of changes to its hazardous waste program that correspond to certain 
Federal rules promulgated between July 1, 2005 and June 30, 2017 (also 
known as RCRA Clusters XVI, XIX and XXII through XXV). EPA concludes 
that Georgia's applications to revise its authorized program meet all 
of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by RCRA, as 
set forth in RCRA section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), and 40 CFR part 
271. Therefore, EPA proposes to grant Georgia final authorization to 
operate its hazardous waste program with the changes described in its 
authorization applications, and as outlined below in Section F of this 
document.
    Georgia has responsibility for permitting treatment, storage, and 
disposal facilities within its borders and for carrying out the aspects 
of the RCRA program described in its revised program applications, 
subject to the limitations of HSWA, as discussed above.

C. What is the effect of this proposed authorization decision?

    If Georgia is authorized for the changes described in Georgia's 
authorization applications, these changes will become part of the 
authorized state hazardous waste program, and therefore will be 
federally enforceable. Georgia will continue to have primary 
enforcement authority and responsibility for its state hazardous waste 
program. EPA would retain its authorities under RCRA sections 3007, 
3008, 3013, and 7003, including its authority to:
     Conduct inspections, and require monitoring, tests, 
analyses or reports;
     Enforce RCRA requirements, including authorized state 
program requirements, and suspend or revoke permits; and
     Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the state 
has taken its own actions.
    This action will not impose additional requirements on the 
regulated community because the regulations for which EPA is proposing 
to authorize Georgia are already effective, and are not changed by this 
proposed action.

D. What happens if EPA receives comments that oppose this action?

    If EPA receives comments on this proposed action, we will address 
all such comments in a later final rule. You may not have another 
opportunity to comment. If you want to comment on this authorization, 
you must do so at this time.

E. What has Georgia previously been authorized for?

    Georgia initially received final authorization on August 7, 1984, 
effective August 21, 1984 (49 FR 31417), to implement the RCRA 
hazardous waste management program. EPA granted authorization for 
changes to Georgia's program on the following dates: July 7, 1986, 
effective September 18, 1986 (51 FR 24549); July 28, 1988, effective 
September 26, 1988 (53 FR 28383); July 24, 1990, effective September 
24, 1990 (55 FR 30000); February 12, 1991, effective April 15, 1991 (56 
FR 5656); May 11, 1992, effective July 10, 1992 (57 FR 20055); November 
25, 1992, effective January 25, 1993 (57 FR 55466); February 26, 1993, 
effective April 27, 1993 (58 FR 11539); November 16, 1993, effective 
January 18, 1994 (58 FR 60388); April 26, 1994, effective June 27, 1994 
(59 FR 21664); May 10, 1995, effective July 10, 1995 (60 FR 24790); 
August 30, 1995, effective October 30, 1995 (60 FR 45069); March 7, 
1996, effective May 6, 1996 (61 FR 9108); September, 18, 1998, 
effective November 17, 1998 (63 FR 49852); October 14, 1999, effective 
December 13, 1999 (64 FR 55629); November 28, 2000, effective March 30, 
2001 (66 FR 8090); July 16, 2002, effective September 16, 2002 (67 FR 
46600); November 19, 2002, effective January 21, 2003 (67 FR 69690); 
July 18, 2003, effective September 16, 2003 (68 FR 42605); January 27, 
2005, effective April 20, 2005 (70 FR 12973); April 25, 2006, effective 
June 26, 2006 (71 FR 23864); May 2, 2013, effective July 1, 2013 (78 FR 
25579); and January 26, 2015, effective March 27, 2015 (80 FR 3888).

F. What changes are we proposing with this action?

    On September 22, 2015, September 12, 2016, and November 7, 2017, 
Georgia submitted program revision applications seeking authorization 
of changes to its hazardous waste management program in accordance with 
40 CFR 271.21. EPA proposes to determine, subject to receipt of written 
comments that oppose this action, that Georgia's hazardous waste 
program revisions are equivalent to, consistent with, and no less 
stringent than the Federal program, and therefore satisfy all of the 
requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization. Therefore, 
EPA is proposing to authorize Georgia for the following program 
changes:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Description of federal       Federal Register      Analogous state
         requirement              date and page         authority \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Checklist 213, Burden          71 FR 16862; 4/4/06  391-3-11-.05(1)-(2);
 Reduction Initiative.                               391-3-11-.07(1)-(2)
                                                     ;
                                                    391-3-11-.10(1)-(3);
                                                     391-3-11-.11(3)(h)
                                                     and (7)(d); and 391-
                                                     3-11-.16.
Checklist 228, Hazardous       77 FR 22229; 4/13/   391-3-11-.07(1) and
 Waste Technical Corrections    12.                  391-3-11-.10(3).
 and Clarifications.

[[Page 39977]]

 
Checklist 229, Conditional     78 FR 46448; 7/31/   391-3-11-.02(1) and
 Exclusions for Solvent         13.                  391-3-11-.07(1).
 Contaminated Wipes.
Checklist 231, Hazardous       79 FR 7518;........  391-3-11-.02(1); 391-
 Waste Electronic Manifest     2/7/14.............   3-11-.08(1);
 Rule.                                              91-3-11-.09; and 391-
                                                     3-11-.10(1)-(2).
Checklist 232, Revisions to    79 FR 36220; 6/26/   391-3-11-.02(1) and
 the Export Provisions of the   14.                  391-3-11-.07(1).
 Cathode Ray Tube Rule.
Checklists 219 and 233,        73 FR 64668; 10/30/  391-3-11-.02(1); 391-
 Revisions to the Definition    08;.                 3-11-.05(5);
 of Solid Waste.               80 FR 1694; 1/13/15  391-3-11-.07(1)-(2);
                                                     and 391-3-11-
                                                     .11(7)(d).
Checklist 236, Imports and     81 FR 85696; 11/28/  391-3-11-.02(1); 391-
 Exports of Hazardous Waste.    16.                  3-11-.07(1);
                                                    391-3-11-.08(1); 391-
                                                     3-11-.09;
                                                    391-3-11-.10(1)-(3);
                                                     and 391-3-11-.18.
Checklist 237, Hazardous       81 FR 85732; 11/28/  391-3-11-.01(2)(e);
 Waste Generator Improvements   16.                  391-3-11-.02(1);
 Rule.                                              391-3-11-.07(1); 391-
                                                     3-11-.08(1);
                                                    391-3-11-.09; 391-3-
                                                     11-.10(1)-(3);
                                                    391-3-11-.11(1)(a),
                                                     (5), and (7)(d);
                                                    391-3-11-.16; 391-3-
                                                     11-.17; and 391-3-
                                                     11-.18.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Georgia provisions are from the Georgia Rules for Hazardous
  Waste Management Chapter 391-3-11, effective September 28, 2017.

G. Where are the revised state rules different from the Federal rules?

    EPA considers the following state requirements to go beyond the 
scope of the Federal program:
     Georgia is broader in scope than the Federal program in 
its adoption of 40 CFR 260.43 (2015) and 40 CFR 261.4(a)(24) (2015) at 
Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 391-3-11-.07(1). Both of these regulations 
include provisions from the 2015 Definition of Solid Waste (DSW) Rule 
that have been vacated and replaced with the less stringent 
requirements of 40 CFR 260.43 (2008) and 40 CFR 261.4(a)(24) and (25) 
(2008) from the 2008 DSW Rule.
     Georgia is also broader in scope than the Federal program 
by not adopting the conditional exclusion for carbon dioxide streams in 
geologic sequestration activities (Checklist 230) at 40 CFR 261.4(h) 
(see Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 391-3-11-.01(2)). Georgia's continued 
regulation of these waste streams is broader in scope than the Federal 
program.
    Broader-in-scope requirements are not part of the authorized 
program and EPA cannot enforce them. Although regulated entities must 
comply with these requirements in accordance with state law, they are 
not RCRA requirements.
    EPA cannot delegate certain Federal requirements associated with 
the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest Rule (Checklist 231), the 
Imports and Exports of Hazardous Waste Rule (Checklist 236), and the 
Revisions to the Export Provisions of the Cathode Ray Tube Rule 
(Checklist 232) (40 CFR 261.39(a)(5) and 261.41). Georgia has adopted 
these requirements and appropriately preserved EPA's authority to 
implement them (see Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. R. 391-3-11-.01(2)(c))

H. Who handles permits after the final authorization takes effect?

    Georgia will issue permits for all the provisions for which it is 
authorized and will administer the permits it issues. EPA will continue 
to administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits or portions of permits 
which EPA issued prior to the effective date of this authorization 
until they are terminated. EPA will not issue any new permits or new 
portions of permits for the provisions listed in the Table above after 
the effective date of the final authorization. EPA will continue to 
implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements for which Georgia is 
not yet authorized.

I. What is codification and will EPA codify Georgia's hazardous waste 
program as proposed in this rule?

    Codification is the process of placing the state's statutes and 
regulations that comprise the state's authorized hazardous waste 
program into the Code of Federal Regulations. EPA does this by 
referencing the authorized state rules in 40 CFR part 272. EPA is not 
proposing to codify the authorization of Georgia's changes at this 
time. However, EPA reserves the amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart 
L, for the authorization of Georgia's program changes at a later date.

J. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action 
from the requirements of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 
1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). This action proposes to 
authorize state requirements for the purpose of RCRA section 3006 and 
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Therefore, this action is not subject to review by OMB. This action is 
not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 3, 2017) regulatory 
action because actions such as this proposed authorization of Georgia's 
revised hazardous waste program under RCRA are exempted under Executive 
Order 12866. Accordingly, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this action proposes to authorize 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 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538). For the same 
reason, this action also does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action will not have 
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between 
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), 
because it merely proposes to authorize state requirements

[[Page 39978]]

as part of the state RCRA hazardous waste program without altering the 
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities 
established by RCRA. This action also is not subject to Executive Order 
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant and it does not make decisions based on environmental 
health or safety risks. This action is not subject to Executive Order 
13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), 
because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 
12866.
    Under RCRA section 3006(b), EPA grants a state's application for 
authorization as long as the state meets the criteria required by RCRA. 
It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it 
reviews a state authorization application, to require the use of any 
particular voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard 
that otherwise satisfies the 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. As required 
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), 
in proposing 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. EPA has complied 
with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining 
the takings implications of this action in accordance with the 
``Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk 
and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive 
order. This action does not impose an information collection burden 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.). ``Burden'' is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). Executive 
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes Federal 
executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs 
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by 
law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying 
and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse 
human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and 
activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the 
United States. Because this action proposes authorization of pre-
existing state rules which are at least equivalent to, and no less 
stringent than existing Federal requirements, and imposes no additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by state law, and there are no 
anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental effects, 
this proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste 
transportation, 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, and 6974(b).

    Dated: July 10, 2018.
Onis ``Trey'' Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2018-17206 Filed 8-10-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.