Idaho: Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revisions, 45068-45071 [2018-19259]
Download as PDF
45068
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Takings’’ issued under the Executive
Order. This proposed rule does not
impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
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 rule authorizes pre-existing
State rules which are at least equivalent
to, and no less stringent than existing
federal requirements, and impose no
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law, and there are no
anticipated significant adverse human
health or environmental effects, the
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, Indian lands,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: This action is issued under the
authority of sections 2002(a), 3006, and
7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as
amended 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).
Dated: August 28, 2018.
David Gray,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2018–19195 Filed 9–4–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
[EPA–R10–RCRA–2018–0298; FRL–9983–
15—Region 10]
Idaho: Authorization of State
Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Idaho has applied to the EPA
for authorization of certain changes to
its hazardous waste program under the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Sep 04, 2018
Jkt 244001
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), as amended. The EPA has
reviewed Idaho’s application and has
determined that these changes satisfy all
requirements needed to qualify for final
authorization and is proposing to
authorize the State’s changes. The EPA
seeks public comment prior to taking
final action.
DATES: Comments on this proposed
action must be received on or before
October 5, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
RCRA–2018–0298 by one of the
following methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: mccullough.barbara@
epa.gov.
• Mail: Barbara McCullough, U.S.
EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Suite 155, Mail Stop OAW–150, Seattle,
Washington 98101.
• Hand Delivery: Barbara
McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region 10, 1200
Sixth Avenue, Suite 155, Mail Stop
OAW–150, Seattle, Washington 98101.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the normal business hours of
operation; special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R10–RCRA–2018–
0298. 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 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
website 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 through
www.regulations.gov, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
www.epa.gov/dockets.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Region 10 Library, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, First Floor Lobby, Seattle,
Washington 98101. The EPA Region 10
Library is open from 9:00 a.m. to noon,
and 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. PST Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The EPA Region 10 Library
telephone number is (206) 553–1289.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region
10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155, Mail
Stop OAW–150, Seattle, Washington
98101, email: mccullough.barbara@
epa.gov or phone number (206) 553–
2416.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Proposed Authorization Revision
A. Why are revisions to state programs
necessary?
States that have received final
authorization from the 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 the EPA to authorize
their 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 the EPA’s
regulations codified in Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts
124, 260 through 268, 270, 273, and 279.
B. What decisions have we made in this
proposed rule?
The EPA has determined that Idaho’s
application to revise its authorized
program meets the statutory and
E:\FR\FM\05SEP1.SGM
05SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
regulatory requirements established by
RCRA. Therefore, we propose to grant
Idaho final authorization to operate its
hazardous waste management program
with the changes described in the
authorization application. Idaho will
continue to have responsibility for
permitting Treatment, Storage, and
Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) within its
borders (except in Indian country) and
for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA
program described in its revised
program application, subject to the
limitations of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA).
New Federal requirements and
prohibitions imposed by Federal
regulations that the EPA promulgates
under the authority of HSWA, and
which are not less stringent than
existing requirements, take effect in
authorized States before the States are
authorized for the requirements. Thus,
the EPA will implement those
requirements and prohibitions in Idaho,
including issuing permits, until Idaho is
granted authorization to do so.
C. What is the effect of this proposed
authorization decision?
If Idaho is authorized for these
changes, a facility in Idaho subject to
RCRA will have to comply with the
authorized State requirements in lieu of
the corresponding Federal requirements
to comply with RCRA. Additionally,
such facilities will have to comply with
any applicable Federal requirements,
such as HSWA regulations issued by the
EPA for which the State has not
received authorization and RCRA
requirements that are not supplanted by
authorized State requirements. Idaho
continues to have enforcement
authorities and responsibilities under its
State hazardous waste management
program for violations of its program.
However, the EPA retains authority
under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013,
and 7003, which includes, among
others, the authority to:
• Conduct inspections, which may
include but is not limited to requiring
monitoring, tests, analyses, and/or
reports;
• Enforce RCRA requirements, which
may include but is not limited to
suspending, terminating, modifying,
and/or revoking permits; and
• Take enforcement actions regardless
of whether Idaho has taken its own
actions.
The action to approve these revisions
will not impose additional requirements
on the regulated community because the
regulations for which Idaho is
requesting authorization are already
effective under State law and are not
changed by the act of authorization.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Sep 04, 2018
Jkt 244001
D. What happens if the EPA receives
comments on this action?
If the EPA receives comments on this
action, we will address those comments
in a later final action. You may not have
another opportunity to comment. If you
want to comment on this proposed
authorization, you should do so at this
time.
E. What has Idaho previously been
authorized for?
Idaho initially received final
authorization for its hazardous waste
management program effective April 9,
1990 (55 FR 11015, March 26, 1990).
Subsequently, the EPA authorized
revisions to the State’s program effective
June 5, 1992 (57 FR 11580, April 6,
1992), August 10, 1992 (57 FR 24757,
June 11, 1992), June 11, 1995 (60 FR
18549, April 12, 1995), January 19, 1999
(63 FR 56086, October 21, 1998), July 1,
2002 (67 FR 44069, July 1, 2002), March
10, 2004 (69 FR 11322, March 10, 2004),
July 22, 2005 (70 FR 42273, July 22,
2005), February 26, 2007 (72 FR 8283,
February 26, 2007), December 23, 2008
(73 FR 78647, December 23, 2008), July
11, 2012 (77 FR 34229, June 11, 2012)
and September 21, 2015 (80 FR 20726,
August 20, 2015).
F. What changes are we proposing to
authorize?
On March 29, 2018, Idaho submitted
a program revision application to the
EPA requesting authorization for all
delegable Federal hazardous waste
regulations codified as of July 1, 2016,
incorporated by reference in IDAPA
58.01.05.000 et seq., which were
adopted and effective in the State of
Idaho on March 29, 2017. This
authorization revision request includes
the following federal rules for which
Idaho is being authorized for the first
time: Conditional Exclusions from Solid
and Hazardous Waste for Solvent
Contaminated Wipes (78 FR 46448, July
31, 2013); Conditional Exclusion for
Carbon Dioxide Streams in Geologic
Sequestration Activities (79 FR 350,
January 3, 2014); Modification of the
Hazardous Waste Manifest System—
Electronic Manifests (79 FR 7518,
February 7, 2014); Identification and
Listing of Hazardous Waste—CFR
Correction (79 FR 35290, June 20, 2014);
Revisions to the Export Provisions of
Cathode Ray Tube Rule (79 FR 36220,
June 26, 2014); Definition of Solid
Waste (80 FR 1694, January 13, 2015);
Response to Vacaturs of the Comparable
Fuels Rule and the Gasification Rule (80
FR 18777, April 8, 2015); Disposal of
Coal Combustion Residuals from
Electric Utilities (80 FR 21302, April 17,
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45069
2015); Disposal of Coal Combustion
Residuals from Electric Utilities—
Correction of the Effective Date (80 FR
37988, July 2, 2015); and Transboundary
Shipments of Hazardous Wastes
Between OECD Member Countries—
Revisions to the List of OECD Member
Countries (80 FR 37992, July 2, 2015).
The EPA proposes to authorize
Idaho’s revised hazardous waste
program in its entirety through July 1,
2016, as described above. The EPA
seeks public comment prior to taking
final action.
G. Where are the revised State rules
different from the Federal rules?
Under RCRA section 3009, the EPA
may not authorize State law that is less
stringent than the Federal program. Any
State law that is less stringent does not
supplant the Federal regulations. State
law that is broader in scope than the
Federal program requirements is not
authorized. State law that is equivalent
to, and State law that is more stringent
than, the Federal program may be
authorized, in which case those
provisions are enforceable by the EPA.
This section discusses certain rules in
this proposed action where the EPA has
made the finding that Idaho’s program
is broader in scope, and discusses
certain portions of the Federal program
that are not delegable to the State
because of the Federal government’s
special role in foreign policy matters
and because of national concerns that
arise with certain decisions.
Idaho is currently 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 IDAPA
58.01.05.004 and 58.01.05.005. 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 found at 40 CFR 260.43
(2018) and 40 CFR 261.4(a)(24) and (25)
(2018), which were reinstated from the
2008 DSW Rule. Idaho will be revising
its regulations to include this update as
required by the vacatur to be equivalent
to the Federal program.
The EPA cannot delegate certain
Federal requirements associated with
the following rules: Modification of the
Hazardous Waste Manifest System—
Electronic Manifests (79 FR 7518,
February 7, 2014), Revisions to the
Export Provisions of Cathode Ray Tube
Rule (79 FR 36220, June 26, 2014), and
Transboundary Shipments of Hazardous
Wastes Between OECD Member
Countries—Revisions to the List of
OECD Member Countries (80 FR 37992,
July 2, 2015). Idaho has adopted these
requirements and appropriately
E:\FR\FM\05SEP1.SGM
05SEP1
45070
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
preserved EPA’s authority to implement
them.
H. Who handles permits after the
authorization takes effect?
Idaho will continue to issue permits
for all the provisions for which it is
authorized and will administer the
permits it issues. If the EPA issued
permits prior to authorizing Idaho for
these revisions, these permits would
continue in force until the effective date
of the State’s issuance or denial of a
State hazardous waste permit, at which
time the EPA would modify the existing
EPA permit to expire at an earlier date,
terminate the existing EPA permit for
cause, or allow the existing EPA permit
to otherwise expire by its terms, except
for those facilities located in Indian
country. The EPA will not issue new
permits or new portions of permits for
provisions for which Idaho is
authorized. The EPA will continue to
implement and issue permits for HSWA
requirements for which Idaho is not
authorized.
I. How does this action affect Indian
country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in Idaho?
Idaho is not authorized to carry out its
hazardous waste program in Indian
country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151.
Indian country includes:
1. All lands within the exterior
boundaries of Indian reservations
within or abutting the State of Idaho;
2. Any land held in trust by the U.S.
for an Indian tribe; and
3. Any other land, whether on or off
an Indian reservation, that qualifies as
Indian country. Therefore, this program
revision does not extend to Indian
country where the EPA will continue to
implement and administer the RCRA
program.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
II. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action proposes to revise the
State of Idaho’s authorized hazardous
waste management program pursuant to
section 3006 of RCRA and imposes no
requirements other than those currently
imposed by State law. This
authorization complies with applicable
executive orders and statutory
provisions as follows:
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866
(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), Federal
agencies must determine whether the
regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’, and
therefore subject to OMB review and the
requirements of the E.O. The E.O.
defines ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
as one that is likely to result in a rule
that may: (1) Have an annual effect on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Sep 04, 2018
Jkt 244001
the economy of $100 million or more, or
adversely affect in a material way, the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities; (2) create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by
another agency; (3) materially alter the
budgetary impact of entitlements,
grants, user fees, or loan programs, or
the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy
issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the E.O. The EPA has
determined that this proposed
authorization is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
E.O. 12866 and is therefore not subject
to OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., because this
proposed authorization does not
establish or modify any information or
recordkeeping requirements for the
regulated community and only seeks to
propose authorization for the preexisting requirements under State law
and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law.
Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons
to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
or provide information to or for a
Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology
and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing, and
maintaining information, and disclosing
and providing information; adjust the
existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and
requirements; train personnel to be able
to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for the EPA’s regulations in
title 40 of the CFR are listed in 40 CFR
part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
generally requires Federal agencies to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of any rule subject to notice and
comment rulemaking requirements
under the Administrative Procedure Act
or any other statute unless the agency
certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. For
purposes of assessing the impacts of this
proposed authorization on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A
small business defined by the Small
Business Administration’s size
regulations at 13 CFR part 121.201; (2)
a small governmental jurisdiction that is
a government of a city, county, town,
school district, or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3)
a small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. I certify that this
proposed authorization will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
because the proposed authorization will
only have the effect of authorizing preexisting requirements under State law
and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub. L.
104–4) establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
the EPA generally must prepare a
written statement, including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final
rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or to the private sector, of $100 million
or more in any one year. Before
promulgating an EPA rule for which a
written statement is needed, Section 205
of the UMRA generally requires the EPA
to identify and consider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and
adopt the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule.
The provisions of Section 205 do not
apply when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, Section 205
allows the EPA to adopt an alternative
other than the least costly, most costeffective, or least burdensome
alternative if the Administrator
publishes with the rule an explanation
why the alternative was not adopted.
Before the EPA establishes any
regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small
E:\FR\FM\05SEP1.SGM
05SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 172 / Wednesday, September 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules
governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed
under Section 203 of the UMRA a small
government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments
to have meaningful and timely input in
the development of the EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements. This
proposed authorization contains no
Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for
state, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector. It proposes to impose no
new enforceable duty on any state, local
or tribal governments or the private
sector. Similarly, the EPA has also
determined that this proposed
authorization contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small government
entities. Thus, this proposed
authorization is not subject to the
requirements of Sections 202 and 203 of
the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This proposed authorization 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 various levels of
government, as specified in E.O. 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This
document proposes to authorize preexisting State rules. Thus, E.O. 13132
does not apply to this proposed
authorization.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR
22951, November 9, 2000), requires the
EPA to develop an accountable process
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input
by tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ This proposed
authorization does not have tribal
implications, as specified in E.O. 13175
because the EPA retains its authority
over Indian Country. Thus, E.O. 13175
does not apply to this proposed
authorization.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Sep 04, 2018
Jkt 244001
45071
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required
under Section 5–501 of the E.O. has the
potential to influence the regulation.
This action is not subject to E.O. 13045
because it proposes to approve a state
program.
populations in the United States. The
EPA has determined that this proposed
authorization will not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority or low-income populations.
This proposed authorization does not
affect the level of protection provided to
human health or the environment
because this document proposes to
authorize pre-existing State rules which
are equivalent to and no less stringent
than existing Federal requirements.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This proposed authorization 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’’ as defined under E.O.
12866, as discussed in detail above.
K. The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801–808
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), (Pub. L. 104–
113, 12(d)) (15 U.S.C. 272), directs the
EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus bodies. The
NTTAA directs the EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Federal agency decides not to
use available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards. This proposed
authorization does not involve technical
standards. Therefore, the EPA is not
considering the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
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
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801–808, generally provides that
before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a
rule report, which includes a copy of
the rule, to each House of the Congress
and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report
containing this document and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication in the
Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is
published in the Federal Register. This
action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined
by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information,
Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indians—lands,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority
This proposed action is issued under
the authority of sections 1006, 2002(a),
3006, and 3024 of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
6905, 6912(a), 6926, and 6939g.
Dated: August 22, 2018.
Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2018–19259 Filed 9–4–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\05SEP1.SGM
05SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 172 (Wednesday, September 5, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45068-45071]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19259]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[EPA-R10-RCRA-2018-0298; FRL-9983-15--Region 10]
Idaho: Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program
Revisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Idaho has applied to the EPA for authorization of certain
changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended. The EPA has reviewed Idaho's
application and has determined that these changes satisfy all
requirements needed to qualify for final authorization and is proposing
to authorize the State's changes. The EPA seeks public comment prior to
taking final action.
DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received on or before
October 5, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
RCRA-2018-0298 by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: [email protected].
Mail: Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 155, Mail Stop OAW-150, Seattle, Washington 98101.
Hand Delivery: Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region 10,
1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155, Mail Stop OAW-150, Seattle, Washington
98101. Such deliveries are only accepted during the normal business
hours of operation; special arrangements should be made for deliveries
of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-RCRA-
2018-0298. 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 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 website 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
through www.regulations.gov, 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
www.epa.gov/dockets.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Region 10 Library,
1200 Sixth Avenue, First Floor Lobby, Seattle, Washington 98101. The
EPA Region 10 Library is open from 9:00 a.m. to noon, and 1:00 to 4:00
p.m. PST Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA
Region 10 Library telephone number is (206) 553-1289.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara McCullough, U.S. EPA, Region
10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155, Mail Stop OAW-150, Seattle,
Washington 98101, email: [email protected] or phone number
(206) 553-2416.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Proposed Authorization Revision
A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary?
States that have received final authorization from the 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 the EPA to authorize their
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 the EPA's regulations codified in Title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 124, 260 through 268, 270, 273,
and 279.
B. What decisions have we made in this proposed rule?
The EPA has determined that Idaho's application to revise its
authorized program meets the statutory and
[[Page 45069]]
regulatory requirements established by RCRA. Therefore, we propose to
grant Idaho final authorization to operate its hazardous waste
management program with the changes described in the authorization
application. Idaho will continue to have responsibility for permitting
Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) within its borders
(except in Indian country) and for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA
program described in its revised program application, subject to the
limitations of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA).
New Federal requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal
regulations that the EPA promulgates under the authority of HSWA, and
which are not less stringent than existing requirements, take effect in
authorized States before the States are authorized for the
requirements. Thus, the EPA will implement those requirements and
prohibitions in Idaho, including issuing permits, until Idaho is
granted authorization to do so.
C. What is the effect of this proposed authorization decision?
If Idaho is authorized for these changes, a facility in Idaho
subject to RCRA will have to comply with the authorized State
requirements in lieu of the corresponding Federal requirements to
comply with RCRA. Additionally, such facilities will have to comply
with any applicable Federal requirements, such as HSWA regulations
issued by the EPA for which the State has not received authorization
and RCRA requirements that are not supplanted by authorized State
requirements. Idaho continues to have enforcement authorities and
responsibilities under its State hazardous waste management program for
violations of its program. However, the EPA retains authority under
RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003, which includes, among others,
the authority to:
Conduct inspections, which may include but is not limited
to requiring monitoring, tests, analyses, and/or reports;
Enforce RCRA requirements, which may include but is not
limited to suspending, terminating, modifying, and/or revoking permits;
and
Take enforcement actions regardless of whether Idaho has
taken its own actions.
The action to approve these revisions will not impose additional
requirements on the regulated community because the regulations for
which Idaho is requesting authorization are already effective under
State law and are not changed by the act of authorization.
D. What happens if the EPA receives comments on this action?
If the EPA receives comments on this action, we will address those
comments in a later final action. You may not have another opportunity
to comment. If you want to comment on this proposed authorization, you
should do so at this time.
E. What has Idaho previously been authorized for?
Idaho initially received final authorization for its hazardous
waste management program effective April 9, 1990 (55 FR 11015, March
26, 1990). Subsequently, the EPA authorized revisions to the State's
program effective June 5, 1992 (57 FR 11580, April 6, 1992), August 10,
1992 (57 FR 24757, June 11, 1992), June 11, 1995 (60 FR 18549, April
12, 1995), January 19, 1999 (63 FR 56086, October 21, 1998), July 1,
2002 (67 FR 44069, July 1, 2002), March 10, 2004 (69 FR 11322, March
10, 2004), July 22, 2005 (70 FR 42273, July 22, 2005), February 26,
2007 (72 FR 8283, February 26, 2007), December 23, 2008 (73 FR 78647,
December 23, 2008), July 11, 2012 (77 FR 34229, June 11, 2012) and
September 21, 2015 (80 FR 20726, August 20, 2015).
F. What changes are we proposing to authorize?
On March 29, 2018, Idaho submitted a program revision application
to the EPA requesting authorization for all delegable Federal hazardous
waste regulations codified as of July 1, 2016, incorporated by
reference in IDAPA 58.01.05.000 et seq., which were adopted and
effective in the State of Idaho on March 29, 2017. This authorization
revision request includes the following federal rules for which Idaho
is being authorized for the first time: Conditional Exclusions from
Solid and Hazardous Waste for Solvent Contaminated Wipes (78 FR 46448,
July 31, 2013); Conditional Exclusion for Carbon Dioxide Streams in
Geologic Sequestration Activities (79 FR 350, January 3, 2014);
Modification of the Hazardous Waste Manifest System--Electronic
Manifests (79 FR 7518, February 7, 2014); Identification and Listing of
Hazardous Waste--CFR Correction (79 FR 35290, June 20, 2014); Revisions
to the Export Provisions of Cathode Ray Tube Rule (79 FR 36220, June
26, 2014); Definition of Solid Waste (80 FR 1694, January 13, 2015);
Response to Vacaturs of the Comparable Fuels Rule and the Gasification
Rule (80 FR 18777, April 8, 2015); Disposal of Coal Combustion
Residuals from Electric Utilities (80 FR 21302, April 17, 2015);
Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities--
Correction of the Effective Date (80 FR 37988, July 2, 2015); and
Transboundary Shipments of Hazardous Wastes Between OECD Member
Countries--Revisions to the List of OECD Member Countries (80 FR 37992,
July 2, 2015).
The EPA proposes to authorize Idaho's revised hazardous waste
program in its entirety through July 1, 2016, as described above. The
EPA seeks public comment prior to taking final action.
G. Where are the revised State rules different from the Federal rules?
Under RCRA section 3009, the EPA may not authorize State law that
is less stringent than the Federal program. Any State law that is less
stringent does not supplant the Federal regulations. State law that is
broader in scope than the Federal program requirements is not
authorized. State law that is equivalent to, and State law that is more
stringent than, the Federal program may be authorized, in which case
those provisions are enforceable by the EPA. This section discusses
certain rules in this proposed action where the EPA has made the
finding that Idaho's program is broader in scope, and discusses certain
portions of the Federal program that are not delegable to the State
because of the Federal government's special role in foreign policy
matters and because of national concerns that arise with certain
decisions.
Idaho is currently 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
IDAPA 58.01.05.004 and 58.01.05.005. 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 found at
40 CFR 260.43 (2018) and 40 CFR 261.4(a)(24) and (25) (2018), which
were reinstated from the 2008 DSW Rule. Idaho will be revising its
regulations to include this update as required by the vacatur to be
equivalent to the Federal program.
The EPA cannot delegate certain Federal requirements associated
with the following rules: Modification of the Hazardous Waste Manifest
System--Electronic Manifests (79 FR 7518, February 7, 2014), Revisions
to the Export Provisions of Cathode Ray Tube Rule (79 FR 36220, June
26, 2014), and Transboundary Shipments of Hazardous Wastes Between OECD
Member Countries--Revisions to the List of OECD Member Countries (80 FR
37992, July 2, 2015). Idaho has adopted these requirements and
appropriately
[[Page 45070]]
preserved EPA's authority to implement them.
H. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect?
Idaho will continue to issue permits for all the provisions for
which it is authorized and will administer the permits it issues. If
the EPA issued permits prior to authorizing Idaho for these revisions,
these permits would continue in force until the effective date of the
State's issuance or denial of a State hazardous waste permit, at which
time the EPA would modify the existing EPA permit to expire at an
earlier date, terminate the existing EPA permit for cause, or allow the
existing EPA permit to otherwise expire by its terms, except for those
facilities located in Indian country. The EPA will not issue new
permits or new portions of permits for provisions for which Idaho is
authorized. The EPA will continue to implement and issue permits for
HSWA requirements for which Idaho is not authorized.
I. How does this action affect Indian country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in
Idaho?
Idaho is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste program in
Indian country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. Indian country includes:
1. All lands within the exterior boundaries of Indian reservations
within or abutting the State of Idaho;
2. Any land held in trust by the U.S. for an Indian tribe; and
3. Any other land, whether on or off an Indian reservation, that
qualifies as Indian country. Therefore, this program revision does not
extend to Indian country where the EPA will continue to implement and
administer the RCRA program.
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action proposes to revise the State of Idaho's authorized
hazardous waste management program pursuant to section 3006 of RCRA and
imposes no requirements other than those currently imposed by State
law. This authorization complies with applicable executive orders and
statutory provisions as follows:
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993),
Federal agencies must determine whether the regulatory action is
``significant'', and therefore subject to OMB review and the
requirements of the E.O. The E.O. defines ``significant regulatory
action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have
an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely
affect in a material way, the economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2)
create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action
taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the
rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal
or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's
priorities, or the principles set forth in the E.O. The EPA has
determined that this proposed authorization is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of E.O. 12866 and is therefore not
subject to OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
because this proposed authorization does not establish or modify any
information or recordkeeping requirements for the regulated community
and only seeks to propose authorization for the pre-existing
requirements under State law and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing, and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires Federal agencies
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes
of assessing the impacts of this proposed authorization on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business defined by
the Small Business Administration's size regulations at 13 CFR part
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district, or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field. I certify that this proposed
authorization will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities because the proposed authorization
will only have the effect of authorizing pre-existing requirements
under State law and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104-4) establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the
EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million or more in any one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for
which a written statement is needed, Section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires the EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of
regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective
or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the
rule. The provisions of Section 205 do not apply when they are
inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, Section 205 allows the EPA
to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-
effective, or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator
publishes with the rule an explanation why the alternative was not
adopted. Before the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that
may significantly or uniquely affect small
[[Page 45071]]
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
Section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of the EPA regulatory proposals with
significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing,
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the
regulatory requirements. This proposed authorization contains no
Federal mandates (under the regulatory provisions of Title II of the
UMRA) for state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. It
proposes to impose no new enforceable duty on any state, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. Similarly, the EPA has also
determined that this proposed authorization contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
government entities. Thus, this proposed authorization is not subject
to the requirements of Sections 202 and 203 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This proposed authorization 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 various levels of
government, as specified in E.O. 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This document proposes to authorize pre-existing State rules. Thus,
E.O. 13132 does not apply to this proposed authorization.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000),
requires the EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed
authorization does not have tribal implications, as specified in E.O.
13175 because the EPA retains its authority over Indian Country. Thus,
E.O. 13175 does not apply to this proposed authorization.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997) as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health
or safety risks, such that the analysis required under Section 5-501 of
the E.O. has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is
not subject to E.O. 13045 because it proposes to approve a state
program.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This proposed authorization 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'' as defined under
E.O. 12866, as discussed in detail above.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), (Pub. L. 104-113, 12(d)) (15 U.S.C. 272),
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Federal agency decides not
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This
proposed authorization does not involve technical standards. Therefore,
the EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus
standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
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. The EPA has determined that this
proposed authorization will not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income
populations. This proposed authorization does not affect the level of
protection provided to human health or the environment because this
document proposes to authorize pre-existing State rules which are
equivalent to and no less stringent than existing Federal requirements.
K. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801-808
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801-808, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule
must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each
House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States. EPA will submit a report containing this document and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This
action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous materials transportation,
Hazardous waste, Indians--lands, Intergovernmental relations,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority
This proposed action is issued under the authority of sections
1006, 2002(a), 3006, and 3024 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6926, and 6939g.
Dated: August 22, 2018.
Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2018-19259 Filed 9-4-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P