83 FR 39975 - Georgia: Proposed Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management Program Revisions
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 156 (August 13, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 156 (August 13, 2018)
| Page Range | 39975-39978 | |
| FR Document | 2018-17206 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 156 (Monday, August 13, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 39975-39978] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [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 http://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 http://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
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39975
The conclusions of Minnesota’s • Is certified as not having a ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
analysis are consistent with EPA’s significant economic impact on a AGENCY
expanded review of its January 23, 2017 substantial number of small entities
submittal. All areas that Minnesota under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 40 CFR Part 271
sources potentially contribute to attain U.S.C. 601 et seq.); [EPA–R04–RCRA–2018–0255; FRL– 9981–
and maintain the 2012 annual PM2.5
• Does not contain any unfunded 48—Region 4]
NAAQS, and as demonstrated in its
mandate or significantly or uniquely
submittal, Minnesota will not contribute Georgia: Proposed Authorization of
to projected nonattainment or affect small governments, as described
State Hazardous Waste Management
maintenance issues at any sites in 2021. in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Program Revisions
Minnesota’s analysis shows that through of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
permanent and enforceable measures • Does not have Federalism AGENCY: Environmental Protection
currently contained in its SIP, and other implications as specified in Executive Agency (EPA).
emissions reductions occurring in Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, ACTION: Proposed rule.
Minnesota and in other states, 1999);
monitored PM2.5 air quality in all SUMMARY: Georgia has applied to the
• Is not an economically significant Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
identified areas that Minnesota sources regulatory action based on health or
may impact will continue to improve, for final authorization of changes to its
safety risks subject to Executive Order hazardous waste program under the
and that no further measures are
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Resource Conservation and Recovery
necessary to satisfy Minnesota’s
responsibilities under CAA section • Is not a significant regulatory action Act (RCRA), as amended. EPA has
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Therefore, EPA is subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR reviewed Georgia’s application and has
proposing that prongs one and two of 28355, May 22, 2001); determined that these changes satisfy all
the interstate pollution transport requirements needed to qualify for final
• Is not subject to requirements of authorization. Therefore, we are
element of Minnesota’s infrastructure Section 12(d) of the National
SIP are approvable. proposing to authorize the state’s
Technology Transfer and Advancement changes. EPA seeks public comment
IV. What action is EPA taking? Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because prior to taking final action.
this rulemaking does not involve DATES: Comments must be received on
EPA is proposing to approve a portion
technical standards; and or before September 12, 2018.
of Minnesota’s January 23, 2017
submittal certifying that the current • Does not provide EPA with the ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
Minnesota SIP is sufficient to meet the discretionary authority to address, as identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
required infrastructure requirements appropriate, disproportionate human RCRA–2018–0255, at http://
under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), health or environmental effects, using www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
specifically prongs one and two, as set practicable and legally permissible instructions for submitting comments.
forth above. EPA is requesting methods, under Executive Order 12898 Once submitted, comments cannot be
comments on the proposed approval. (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). edited or removed from
In addition, the SIP is not approved www.regulations.gov. EPA may publish
V. Statutory and Executive Order
to apply on any Indian reservation land any comment received to its public
Reviews
or in any other area where EPA or an docket. Do not submit electronically any
Under the CAA, the Administrator is information you consider to be
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
required to approve a SIP submission Confidential Business Information (CBI)
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
that complies with the provisions of the or other information whose disclosure is
CAA and applicable Federal regulations. Indian country, the rule does not have
restricted by statute. Multimedia
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). tribal implications and will not impose submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, substantial direct costs on tribal accompanied by a written comment.
EPA’s role is to approve state choices, governments or preempt tribal law as The written comment is considered the
provided that they meet the criteria of specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 official comment and should include
the CAA. Accordingly, this action FR 67249, November 9, 2000). discussion of all points you wish to
merely approves state law as meeting List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 make. EPA will generally not consider
Federal requirements and does not comments or comment contents located
impose additional requirements beyond Environmental protection, Air outside of the primary submission (i.e.,
those imposed by state law. For that pollution control, Incorporation by on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
reason, this action: reference, Intergovernmental relations, system). For additional submission
• Is not a significant regulatory action Particulate matter, Reporting and methods, the full EPA public comment
subject to review by the Office of recordkeeping requirements. policy, information about CBI or
Management and Budget under multimedia submissions, and general
Dated: July 30, 2018.
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, guidance on making effective
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, Cathy Stepp, comments, please visit http://
January 21, 2011); Regional Administrator, Region 5. www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 [FR Doc. 2018–17362 Filed 8–10–18; 8:45 am] epa-dockets.
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory BILLING CODE 6560–50–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
action because SIP approvals are Thornell Cheeks, Materials and Waste
exempted under Executive Order 12866. Management Branch, RCR Division, U.S.
• Does not impose an information Environmental Protection Agency,
collection burden under the provisions Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960;
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); telephone number: (404) 562–8479: fax
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:58 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_40131/page/1.svg)
![39978 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 156 / Monday, August 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
as part of the state RCRA hazardous which are at least equivalent to, and no information whose disclosure is
waste program without altering the less stringent than existing Federal restricted by statute. Multimedia
relationship or the distribution of power requirements, and imposes no submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
and responsibilities established by additional requirements beyond those accompanied by a written comment.
RCRA. This action also is not subject to imposed by state law, and there are no The written comment is considered the
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, anticipated significant adverse human official comment and should include
April 23, 1997), because it is not health or environmental effects, this discussion of all points you wish to
economically significant and it does not proposed rule is not subject to Executive make. The EPA will generally not
make decisions based on environmental Order 12898. consider comments or comment
health or safety risks. This action is not contents located outside of the primary
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
subject to Executive Order 13211, submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Environmental protection, other file sharing system). For
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Administrative practice and procedure, additional submission methods, the full
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May Confidential business information, EPA public comment policy,
22, 2001), because it is not a significant Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste information about CBI or multimedia
regulatory action under Executive Order transportation, Intergovernmental submissions, and general guidance on
12866. relations, Penalties, Reporting and making effective comments, please visit
Under RCRA section 3006(b), EPA recordkeeping requirements. https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
grants a state’s application for Authority: This action is issued under the commenting-epa-dockets.
authorization as long as the state meets authority of sections 2002(a), 3006, and To send a comment via the United
the criteria required by RCRA. It would 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as States Postal Service, use the following
thus be inconsistent with applicable law amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and address: U.S. Environmental Protection
for EPA, when it reviews a state 6974(b). Agency, EPA Superfund Docket Center,
authorization application, to require the Dated: July 10, 2018. Mailcode 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
use of any particular voluntary Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III, Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
consensus standard in place of another Regional Administrator, Region 4. Use the Docket Center address below if
standard that otherwise satisfies the [FR Doc. 2018–17206 Filed 8–10–18; 8:45 am] you are using express mail, commercial
requirements of RCRA. Thus, the BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
delivery, hand delivery or courier.
requirements of section 12(d) of the Delivery verification signatures will be
National Technology Transfer and available only during regular business
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION hours: EPA Superfund Docket Center,
272 note) do not apply. As required by AGENCY WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301
section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in 40 CFR Part 300 DC 20004.
proposing this rule, EPA has taken the [EPA–HQ–OLEM–2017–0603; FRL–9981– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
necessary steps to eliminate drafting 49–OLEM] Jennifer Wendel, phone: (404) 562–
errors and ambiguity, minimize 8799, email: wendel.jennifer@epa.gov,
potential litigation, and provide a clear Documentation Supporting the Site Assessment and Remedy Decisions
legal standard for affected conduct. EPA Proposal of the Orange County North Branch, Assessment and Remediation
has complied with Executive Order Basin Site; Addendum Availability Division, Office of Superfund
12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by Remediation and Technology
examining the takings implications of AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). Innovation (Mail Code 5204P), U.S.
this action in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of data
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk availability.
DC 20460.
and Avoidance of Unanticipated
Takings’’ issued under the executive SUMMARY: This notice provides an SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
order. This action does not impose an opportunity to comment on additional The site was proposed to the National
information collection burden under the reference documentation for the Orange Priorities List (NPL) on January 18, 2018
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction County North Basin site in Orange (83 FR 2576).
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). County, California. The site was
proposed to the National Priorities List Site Geological Information
‘‘Burden’’ is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, (NPL) on January 18, 2018. One commenter questioned the EPA’s
February 16, 1994) establishes Federal DATES: Comments must be submitted use of a reference in the HRS
executive policy on environmental (postmarked) on or before September 12, documentation record (HRS Reference
justice. Its main provision directs 2018. 110—the 3DVA Technical
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Memorandum) to support aquifer
practicable and permitted by law, to identified by docket number EPA–HQ– interconnection and contaminant
make environmental justice part of their OLEM–2017–0603, at https:// migration. EPA notes that the reference
mission by identifying and addressing, www.regulations.gov. Follow the online in question is a model, and analysis, of
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
as appropriate, disproportionately high instructions for submitting comments. the hydrology and geology in the
and adverse human health or Once submitted, comments cannot be vicinity of the Orange County North
environmental effects of their programs, edited or removed from Regulations.gov. Basin site. The commenter stated that
policies, and activities on minority The EPA may publish any comment the EPA cites to HRS Reference 110 and
populations and low-income received to its public docket. Do not presents conclusions in the HRS
populations in the United States. submit electronically any information documentation record based on the
Because this action proposes you consider to be Confidential model in the reference that used well
authorization of pre-existing state rules Business Information (CBI) or other borehole and lithology data that was not
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:58 Aug 10, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13AUP1.SGM 13AUP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_40131/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-08-11 00:27:56
Document Modified: 2018-08-11 00:27:56
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Comments must be received on or before September 12, 2018. | |
| 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 | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 39975 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Administrative Practice and Procedure; Confidential Business Information; Hazardous Waste; Hazardous Waste Transportation; Intergovernmental Relations; Penalties and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR