[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 189 (Thursday, September 30, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60398-60403]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24001]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[EPA-R09-RCRA-2010-0598; FRL-9205-1]
California: Proposed Authorization of State Hazardous Waste
Management Program Revision
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: California has applied to EPA for final authorization of
certain changes to its hazardous waste program under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has reviewed California's
application and made the tentative decision that these changes satisfy
all requirements needed to qualify for final authorization, and is
proposing to authorize the State's changes. EPA is also proposing that
the State's requirements regulating facilities that are conditionally
exempt from the federal rules as Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity
Generators (``CESQGs'') be treated as more stringent than federal
requirements, thereby making these provisions federally enforceable.
DATES: EPA must receive written comments on California's application
for authorization for changes to its hazardous waste management program
by November 1, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
RCRA-2010-0598 by one of the following methods:
http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected].
Fax: (415) 947-3533 (prior to faxing, please notify
Rebecca Smith at 415-972-3313)
Mail: Send written comments to: Rebecca Smith, WST-2, EPA
Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Rebecca Smith, EPA Region 9
(WST-2), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the office's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: We must receive your comments by November 1, 2010.
Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R09-RCRA-2010-0598. EPA's
policy is that all comments received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov including any personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is
restricted by statute, or you make special arrangements with the EPA
contact. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or
otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If you do so, this information will become a part of the public
record, unless you have made arrangements with EPA prior to the
submittal of your comments. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. (For additional information about EPA's public
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm).
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy.
You may view and copy California's application at the following
addresses: California Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental
Services Center, 1001 I Street, 22nd Floor, Sacramento,
[[Page 60399]]
CA 95814, Phone: (916) 324-0912, from 8 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4
p.m., Monday through Thursday (appointment preferred but not required);
and U.S. EPA Region 9 Library-Information Center, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105, Phone: (415) 947-4406, from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m.
and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through Thursday. Copy services are not
available in Sacramento, but should be arranged by the viewer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Smith, EPA Region 9 (WST-2),
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Phone: (415) 972-3313. E-
mail: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Why are revisions to state programs necessary?
States which have received final authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous waste
program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes, States must
revise their programs and ask EPA to authorize the revisions. Revisions
to state programs may be necessary when Federal or state statutory or
regulatory authority is modified or when certain other changes occur.
Most commonly, states must change their programs because of changes to
EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124,
260 through 266, 268, 270, 273 and 279.
B. What decisions have we made in this rule?
EPA has made the tentative determination that California's
application to revise its authorized program meets all of the statutory
and regulatory requirements established by RCRA. Therefore, we are
proposing to grant California final authorization to operate its
hazardous waste program with the changes described in this
authorization application. California will have responsibility for
permitting treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) within
its borders (except in Indian country) and for carrying out all
authorized aspects of the RCRA program described in its revised program
application, subject to the limitations of RCRA's Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New Federal requirements and
prohibitions imposed by HSWA regulations take effect as a matter of
Federal law in authorized states before those states are authorized for
such requirements. Thus, EPA will implement those requirements and
prohibitions in California, including issuing permits, until the State
is granted authorization to do so.
C. What is the effect of this authorization decision?
If California is authorized for these changes, a facility in
California subject to RCRA will have to comply with the authorized
State requirements instead of the corresponding Federal requirements in
order to comply with RCRA. Additionally, facilities must comply with
certain Federal requirements, i.e., HSWA regulations issued by EPA for
which California has not received authorization, and RCRA requirements
that are not supplanted by authorized State-issued requirements such as
requirements for the exportation of hazardous waste. California
continues to have enforcement responsibilities under its State law to
pursue violations of its hazardous waste management program. EPA
continues to have independent enforcement authority under RCRA sections
3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003, which include, among others, the authority
to:
Do inspections, and require monitoring, tests, analyses or
reports;
Enforce RCRA requirements (including State-issued statutes
and regulations that are authorized by EPA and any applicable
Federally-issued statutes and regulations) and suspend or revoke
permits; and
Take enforcement actions regardless of whether the State
has taken its own actions.
The action to approve these revisions would not impose additional
requirements on the regulated community because the regulations for
which California will be authorized are already effective under State
law and are not changed by the act of authorization.
D. What happens if EPA receives comments that oppose this action?
If EPA receives comments that oppose this authorization, we will
address those 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. For what has California previously been authorized?
California initially received final authorization for the base RCRA
program on July 23, 1992, effective August 1, 1992 (57 FR 32726). EPA
granted authorization for changes to California's program on September
26, 2001, effective September 26, 2001 (66 FR 49118).
F. What changes are we proposing with this action?
On August 2, 2004 and August 17, 2004 California submitted final
complete program revision applications, seeking authorization of those
changes in accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. We have made a tentative
determination that California's hazardous waste program revisions
satisfy all of the requirements necessary to qualify for final
authorization.
California has applied for only the Federal changes relating to the
corrective action management units, the Bevill exclusion and the land
disposal restrictions. There are several changes to the Federal program
for which California has not yet applied for authorization. The major
areas of changes for which California has not yet applied for
authorization are: The used oil regulations; consolidated liability
requirements; military munitions; universal waste; modification to the
hazardous waste manifest system; standardized permit requirements;
burden reduction regulations; and the NESHAPS: Final Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Hazardous Waste Combustors (MACT Rule).
California submits packages to EPA relating to its efforts to seek
authorization for updates to its program based on revisions to the
Federal program. EPA publishes a series of checklists to aid California
and the other states in such efforts (see EPA's RCRA State
Authorization Web page at http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/state/revision/program.htm). Each checklist generally reflects changes made
to the Federal regulations pursuant to a particular Federal Register
notice. California's submittals have been grouped into general
categories (e.g., Corrective Action Management Units, Land Disposal
Restrictions, etc.). Each submittal may have reflected changes based on
one or more Federal Register notices and would have thus referenced one
or more corresponding checklists.
What follows is a summary, for each general category identified by
California in its submittals, of the specific subjects of changes to
the Federal program for that category. Although the changes to the
Federal program are identified in the summary, California did not
necessarily make revisions to its program as a result of each Federal
revision noted. For example, certain revisions to the Federal program
may have resulted in less stringent regulation than that which
previously existed. Since states may maintain programs which are more
stringent than the Federal program,
[[Page 60400]]
states have the option whether or not to adopt such revisions.
1. Changes California Identified as Relating to Corrective Action
Management Units
We are proposing to grant California final authorization for all
revisions to its program due to certain changes to the Federal
Corrective Action Management Unit program.
2. Changes California Identified as Relating to Land Disposal
Restrictions Phases 3 and 4
We are proposing to grant California final authorization for all
revisions, if any, to its program due to certain changes to the Federal
program in the following areas: (1) Land Disposal Restrictions Phase
III--Decharacterized Wastewaters; (2) Emergency Extension of the K088
Capacity Variance; (3) Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV--Treatment
Standards for Wood Preserving Wastes, Paperwork Reduction and
Streamlining, Exemptions From RCRA for Certain Processed Materials; (4)
Emergency Revision of the Carbamate Land Disposal Restrictions; (5)
Clarification of Standards for Hazardous Waste LDR Treatment Variances;
(6) Treatment Standards for Metal Wastes and Mineral Processing Wastes;
(7) Hazardous Soils Treatment Standards and Exclusions; (8)
Administrative Stay for Zinc Micronutrient Fertilizers; (9) Emergency
Revision of the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) Treatment Standards
for Listed Hazardous Wastes from Carbamate Production; (10) Extension
of Compliance Date for Characteristic Slags; (11) Treatment Standards
for Spent Potliners from Primary Aluminum Reduction (K088); (12)
Chlorinated Aliphatics Listing and LDRs for Newly Identified Wastes;
(13) Deferral for PCBs in Soil; and (14) Certain Land Disposal
Restrictions Technical Corrections and Clarifications. Note that
California has not yet adopted the provisions addressed by the
following Federal final rules which are also part of Phase IV of the
land disposal restrictions requirements: LDR Revision Checklist 195 (66
FR 58258, November 20, 2001, as amended by 67 FR 17119, April 9, 2002);
non-LDR Revision Checklist 200 (67 FR 28393, July 24, 2002); and LDR
Revision Checklist 201 (67 FR 62618, October 7, 2002).
3. Changes California Identified as Relating to the Bevill Exclusion
We are proposing to grant California final authorization for all
revisions to its program due to certain changes to the Federal program
in the Bevill Exclusion requirements.
The following table shows the Federal and analogous State
provisions involved in this tentative decision and the relevant
corresponding checklists:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of Federal
requirement (checklist Federal Register Analogous State
) page and date authority
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 Code of Federal (196) 67 FR 2962, (196) Title 22,
Regulations (40 CFR), Jan. 22, 2002. California code of
260.10 Corrective Action Regulations (22
Management Units (CAMU), CCR) 66260.10,
checklist 196. amended July 19,
2004.
40 CFR 261.1 Land Disposal (157) 62 FR 25998, (157) California did
Restrictions (LDR), May 12, 1997. not adopt these
checklist 157. exclusions.
40 CFR 261.2 LDR, checklists (179) 64 FR 2548, (157, 179)
157, 179. May 11, 1999. California did not
adopt these
regulations.
40 CFR 261.3, Bevill (167E) 63 FR 28556, (167E) 66261.3,
Exclusion, checklist 167E. May 26, 1998. amended March 15,
2003.
40 CFR 261.4, Bevill .................... (167E) 66261.4,
Exclusion, checklist 167E. amended November
12, 1998.
40 CFR 262.34 LDR, (183) 64 FR 56469, (179, 183) 22 CCR
checklists 179, 183. October 20, 1999. 66262.34, amended
Sept. 11, 2000.
40 CFR 264.550 through .................... (196) 22 CCR
264.552 CAMU, checklist 196. 66264.550 through
66264.552, amended
July 19, 2004.
40 CFR 264.554 and 264.555 .................... (196) California did
CAMU, checklist 196. not adopt these
regulations.
40 CFR 268.1 LDR, checklists (151) 61 FR 15566 (151, 157) 22 CCR
151, 157. April 8, 1996; 66268.1, amended
[amended 61 FR June 4, 1999
15660 April 8,
1996; 61 FR 19117
April 30, 1996; 61
FR 33680 June 28,
1996; 61 FR 36419
July 10, 1996; 61
FR 43924 August 26,
1996; and 62 FR
7502 February 19,
1997].
40 CFR 268.2 LDR, checklists (167A, 167B) 63 FR (151, 167A, 167B,
151, 167A, 167B, 179. 28556, May 26, 1998 179) 22 CCR
[amended 63 FR 66260.10, amended
31266 June 8, 1998]. Feb. 26, 2004.
40 CFR 268.3(b) LDR .................... (151) California
checklist 151. Health and Safety
Code (HSC) Division
20, 25179.2(e)
enacted 1995.
California did not
adopt the dilution
exception.
40 CFR 268.3(c) and (d) LDR .................... (151, 167A) 22 CCR
checklists 151, 167A. 66268.3(b) and (c)
amended June 4,
1999
40 CFR 268.4 LDR checklist (167C) 63 FR 28556, (167C) HSC, Division
167C. May 26, 1998 20, 25179.11
[amended 63 FR amended 1996. 22
31266, June 8, CCR 66268.1 amended
1998]. June 4, 1999.
40 CFR 268.7 LDR, checklists .................... (151, 157, 167B,
151, 157, 167B, 167C, 179, 167C, 179, 183) 22
183. CCR 66268.7 amended
Feb. 26, 2004;
(157) California
did not adopt the
Federal exemption
at 40 CFR
268.7(b)(6).
40 CFR 268.9 LDR checklists .................... (151, 157, 179) 22
151, 157, 179. CCR 66268.9 amended
Feb. 26, 2004.
40 CFR 268.30 LDR checklist .................... (157) 22 CCR
157. 66268.30 amended
June 4, 1999.
40 CFR 268.32 LDR checklists (190) 65 FR 81373 (157, 190) 22 CCR
157, 190. December 26, 2000. 66268.31.5 amended
July 3, 2002.
40 CFR 268.33 LDR checklist (189) 65 FR 67068, (189) 22 CCR
189. November 8, 2000. 66268.33 amended
July 3, 2002.
[[Page 60401]]
40 CFR 268.34 LDR checklists (167A, 172) 63 FR (167A, 172) 22 CCR
167A, 172. 48124, September 9, 66268.34 amended
1998. Sept. 11, 2000.
40 CFR 268.39 LDR checklists (155) 62 FR 1992, (151, 155, 159, 160,
151, 155, 159, 160, 173. January 14, 1997; 173) 22 CCR
(160) 62 FR 37694, 66268.39 amended
July 14, 1997; Sept. 11, 2000.
(173) 63 FR 51254,
September 24, 1998.
40 CFR 268.40 LDR checklists (161) 62 FR 45568, (151, 161, 167A,
151, 161, 167A, 167C, 171, August 28, 1997; 167C, 171, 179,
179, 183. (170) 63 FR 46332 183) 22 CCR
August 31, 1998; 66268.40 amended
(171) 63 FR 47410, July 3, 2002.
September 4, 1998.
40 CFR 268.40/Table .................... (151, 157, 167A,
checklists 151, 157, 167A, 167C, 171, 173 179,
167C, 171, 173 179, 183, 183, 189) 22 CCR
189. 66268.40/Table
amended July 3,
2002.
40 CFR 268.42 LDR checklists .................... (151, 157, 167C) 22
151, 157, 167C. CCR 66268.42
amended Feb. 26,
2004.
40 CFR 268.44(a) LDR (162) 62 FR 64504, (162) California is
checklist 162. December 5, 1997. not seeking to have
this provision
delegated.
40 CFR 268.44(h), (m) LDR .................... (162, 167B) 22 CCR
checklists 162, 167B. 66268.44 amended
June 4, 1999.
40 CFR 268.45 LDR checklist .................... (167C) 22 CCR
167C. 66268.45 amended
June 4, 1999.
40 CFR 268.48(a)/Table UTS .................... (151, 161, 167A,
LDR checklists 151, 161, 167C, 171, 179,
167A, 167C, 171, 179, 189, 189, 190) 22 CCR
190. 66268.48(a)/Table
UTS amended July 3,
2002.
40 CFR 268.49 LDR checklists .................... (167B, 183, 179,
167B, 183, 179, 190. 190) 22 CCR
66268.49 amended
July 3, 2002.
40 CFR 268, Appendices I, .................... (157) 22 CCR,
II, X LDR checklist 157. Chapter 18,
Appendices I, II, X
[reserved] amended
June 4, 1999.
40 CFR 268, Appendix III LDR .................... (157, 190) 22 CCR
checklists 157, 190. Chapter 18,
Appendices III
amended July 3,
2002.
40 CFR 268, Appendix VI LDR .................... (157) 22 CCR Chapter
checklist 157. 18, Appendices VI
amended June 4,
1999.
40 CFR 268, Appendix VII/ (192B) 66 FR 27266, (157, 167C, 192B) 22
Table 1 LDR checklists 157, May 16, 2001. CCR Chapter 18,
167C, 192B. Appendix VII/Table
1 amended July 3,
2002.
40 CFR 268, Appendix VII/ .................... (157, 167C) 22 CCR
Table 2 and Appendix VIII Chapter 18,
LDR checklists 157, 167C. Appendix VII/Table
2 amended June 4,
1999.
40 CFR 268, Appendix XI LDR .................... (151) 22 CCR Chapter
checklist 151. 18, Appendix XI
amended June 4,
1999.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Where are the revised state rules different from the federal rules?
State requirements that go beyond the scope of the Federal program
are not part of the authorized program and EPA cannot enforce them.
Although you must comply with these requirements in accordance with
California law, they are not RCRA requirements. We consider that the
following State requirements, which pertain to the revisions involved
in this tentative decision, go beyond the scope of the Federal program.
1. The definition of ``remediation waste'' at 22 CCR. 66260.10 is
broader in scope than the Federal definition at 40 CFR 260.10 only to
the extent California's definition includes hazardous substances which
are neither ``hazardous wastes'' nor ```solid wastes.''
2. California regulation subjects CAMUs for non-RCRA hazardous
waste to state-specific requirements under 22 CCR 66264.552.5. The
state requirement at 22 CCR 66264.552.5 is broader in scope because the
federal program does not consider these wastes to be hazardous. In
addition, 22 CCR 66264.550(a) is also considered broader in scope to
the extent that it subjects non-RCRA wastes to the state-only CAMU
requirements.
3. California did not adopt the Federal definitions at 40 CFR
261.1(c)(9)-(12), 261.4(a)(13)-(14), and 261.6(a)(3)(ii) addressing
scrap metals or the related Federal changes to 40 CFR 261.2(c)(4)/
Table. California is broader in scope to the extent that its statutory
provisions at HS&C Sec. 25143.2(a) and (e), do not exclude these scrap
metals from regulation.
4. The California provisions at 22 CCR 66268.7(a)-(c) are broader
in scope than the Federal land disposal treatment provisions at 40 CFR
268.7(a)-(c) to the extent that the State's provisions also apply to
non-RCRA wastes. Similarly, California's variance petition provisions
at 22 CCR 66268.44(c) and 66268.44(h) are also broader in scope to the
extent that they apply to non-RCRA wastes.
H. What is EPA's position on California's regulation of conditionally
exempt small quantity generators?
When California initially received final authorization for the base
RCRA program on July 23, 1992, effective August 1, 1992 (57 FR 32726),
EPA Pacific Southwest Region (Region IX) identified California's
failure to adopt the federal exclusion for conditionally exempt small
quantity generators (``CESQGs'') (found, generally, at 40 CFR 261.5) as
``broader in scope'' than the federal program. (See also 40 CFR
270.1(c)(2)(iii).) However, EPA's position regarding the absence of the
conditional exclusion for CESQGs in a state program has changed and EPA
now clearly regards the absence of any such exclusion as more stringent
than the federal program, making state regulation of CESQGs federally
enforceable when authorized. See United States v. Southern Union Co.,
643 F. Supp. 2d 201 (D.R.I. 2009). In order to harmonize our
authorization of California's program with EPA's position with respect
to CESQGs, EPA is hereby proposing to redesignate California's
regulation of CESQGs as more stringent than the federal program. EPA is
also seeking public comment on this proposed change to California's
authorization. If EPA makes a final determination that California's
regulation of CESQGs is more stringent than the federal program, then
the State's regulation of such federally exempt CESQGs will be part of
the authorized state program and will be
[[Page 60402]]
federally enforceable within the State of California. Specifically,
this change will allow federal enforcement of State requirements
applicable to CESQGs who are conditionally exempt under the federal
provisions found at 40 CFR 261.5, 266.100(b)(3) and 270.1(c)(2)(iii).
This change will not result in any new requirements on CESQGs, but will
only mean that the more stringent State requirements for CESQGs will be
federally enforceable.
I. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect?
California will issue permits for all the provisions for which it
is authorized and will administer the permits it issues. All permits
issued by EPA prior to California being authorized for these revisions,
if any, will continue in force until the effective date of the State's
issuance or denial of a State RCRA permit, or the permit otherwise
expires or is revoked. California will administer any RCRA hazardous
waste permits or portions of permits which EPA issued prior to the
effective date of this authorization until such time as California has
issued a corresponding State permit. EPA will not issue any more new
permits or new portions of permits for provisions for which California
is authorized after the effective date of this authorization. EPA will
retain responsibility to issue permits needed for HSWA requirements for
which California is not yet authorized.
J. How would authorizing California for these revisions affect Indian
country (18 U.S.C. Section 1151) in California?
California is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste
program in Indian country within the State. Indian country includes all
lands within the exterior boundaries of an Indian reservation, any land
held in trust by the United States for an Indian tribe whether or not
formally designated as an Indian reservation, and any other land,
whether within or outside of an Indian reservation, that qualifies as
Indian country under 18 U.S.C. 1151. A list of Indian Tribes in
California can be found on the Web at http://www.doi.gov/bureau-indian-affairs.html under Tribal Leaders Directory. Therefore, this proposed
action would have no effect on the Indian country within the State's
borders. EPA will continue to implement and administer the RCRA program
in Indian country within the State.
K. What is codification and is EPA codifying California's hazardous
waste management program as authorized in this rule?
Codification is the process of placing the State's statutes and
regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste
management program into the Code of Federal Regulations. We do this by
referencing the authorized State rules in 40 CFR part 272. We reserve
the amendment of 40 CFR part 272, subpart F for this authorization of
California's program changes until a later date.
L. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This proposed rule only authorizes hazardous waste requirements
pursuant to RCRA 3006 and imposes no requirements other than those
imposed by State law. Therefore, this rule complies with applicable
executive orders and statutory provisions as follows:
1. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning Review
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this proposed rule
from its review under Executive Order (EO) 12866, (58 FR 51735, October
4, 1993), and therefore this action is not subject to review by OMB.
2. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden
under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
3. Regulatory Flexibility Act
After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule on
small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, I certify that
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this proposed rule approves preexisting requirements under
state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond
that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
EO 13132 does not apply to this proposed rule because it will not
have federalism implications (i.e., substantial direct effects on the
State, 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 described in EO 13132.
6. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
EO13175 does not apply to this proposed rule because it will not
have tribal implications (i.e., substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government
and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes). As stated
previously, this proposed action would have no effect on the Indian
country within the State's borders and EPA will continue to implement
and administer the RCRA program in Indian country within the State.
7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health & Safety Risks
This proposed rule is not subject to EO 13045 because it is not
economically significant and it is not based on health or safety risks.
8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to EO 13211 because it is not a
significant regulatory action as defined in EO 12866.
9. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
EPA approves State programs as long as they meet criteria required
by RCRA, so it would be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, in
its review of a State program, to require the use of any particular
voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard that meets
the requirements of RCRA. Thus, Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advance Act does not apply to this proposed
rule.
10. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations
Because this rule addresses authorizing pre-existing State rules
and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law and there are no anticipated significant adverse human health or
environmental effects, the rule is not subject to Executive Order
12898.
11. Executive Order 12988
As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729,
February 7,
[[Page 60403]]
1996), in issuing this proposed 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.
12. Executive Order 12630: Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of
Unanticipated Takings
EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15,
1988) by examining the takings implications of the proposed rule in
accordance with the Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the
Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings issued under
the Executive Order.
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 notice 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: September 13, 2010.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region 9.
[FR Doc. 2010-24001 Filed 9-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P