[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 9, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26755-26757]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-11421]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[FRL-6601-4]


South Dakota: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste 
Management Program Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is granting final authorization to the hazardous waste 
program revisions submitted by South Dakota. The Agency published a 
proposed rule on August 10, 1999 at 64 FR 43331 and provided for public 
comment. The public comment period ended on September 9, 1999. No 
comments were received regarding Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
(RCRA) program issues and no further opportunity for comment will be 
provided.

DATES: This authorization will be effective on June 8, 2000.

ADDRESSES: You can view and copy South Dakota's applications at the 
following addresses:

SDDENR, from 9 AM to 5 PM, Joe Foss Building, 523 E. Capitol, Pierre, 
South Dakota 57501-3181. Contact: Carrie Jacobson, phone number (605) 
773-3153; and
EPA Region VIII, from 8 AM to 4 PM, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, 
CO 80202-2466. Contact: Kris Shurr, phone number: (303) 312-6139.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kris Shurr, EPA Region VIII, 999 18th 
Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202-2466, phone number: (303) 312-6139.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 1, 1997, September 3, 1997, and 
March 23, 1999, South Dakota submitted final complete program revision 
applications seeking authorization of their changes in accordance with 
40 CFR 271.21. We now make a final decision that South Dakota's 
hazardous waste program revisions satisfy all of the requirements 
necessary to qualify for final authorization. For a list of rules that 
become effective with this final rule, please see the proposed rule 
published in the August 10, 1999 Federal Register at 64 FR 43331.

How This Action Affects Indian Country in South Dakota

    South Dakota is not authorized to carry out its hazardous waste 
program in Indian country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. This includes, 
but is not limited to: Lands within the exterior boundaries of the 
following Indian Reservations located within the State of South Dakota:
a. Cheyenne River Indian Reservation.
b. Crow Creek Indian Reservation.
c. Flandreau Indian Reservation.
d. Lower Brule Indian Reservation.
e. Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.
f. Rosebud Indian Reservation.
g. Standing Rock Indian Reservation.
h. Yankton Indian Reservation

    EPA held a public hearing on December 2, 1999, in Badlands National 
Park, South Dakota, and accepted public comments on the question of the 
location and extent of Indian country within the State of South Dakota. 
In a forthcoming Federal Register notice, EPA will respond to comments 
and more specifically identify Indian country areas in the State of 
South Dakota.

Regulatory Analysis and Notices

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 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, 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 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 EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
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

[[Page 26756]]

the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal 
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising 
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    EPA has determined that section 202 and 205 requirements do not 
apply to today's action because this rule does not contain a Federal 
mandate that may result in annual expenditures of $100 million or more 
for State, local, and/or tribal governments in the aggregate, or the 
private sector. Costs to State, local and/or tribal governments already 
exist under the State program, and today's action does not impose any 
additional obligations on regulated entities. In fact, EPA's approval 
of State programs generally may reduce, not increase, compliance costs 
for the private sector. Further, as it applies to the State, this 
action does not impose a Federal intergovernmental mandate because UMRA 
does not include duties arising from participation in a voluntary 
federal program.
    The requirements of section 203 of UMRA also do not apply to 
today's action because this rule contains no regulatory requirements 
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Although 
small governments may be hazardous waste generators, transporters, or 
own and/or operate TSDFs, they are already subject to the regulatory 
requirements under the existing State laws that are being authorized by 
EPA, and, thus, are not subject to any additional significant or unique 
requirements by virtue of this program approval.

Certification Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 
(SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

    The RFA generally requires an agency 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 today's action on small 
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as specified 
in the Small Business Administration regulations; (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.
    After considering the economic impacts of this authorization on 
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This action 
does not impose any new requirements on small entities because small 
entities that are hazardous waste generators, transporters, or that own 
and/or operate TSDFs are already subject to the regulatory requirements 
under the State laws which EPA is now authorizing. This action merely 
authorizes for the purpose of RCRA section 3006 those existing State 
requirements.

Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 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. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule 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 of the rule in today's Federal Register. This rule is 
not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Compliance With Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the 
requirements of Executive Order 12866.

Compliance With Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
    Under section 6 of Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the 
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    This authorization does not have federalism implications. It will 
not have a substantial direct effect on 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, because this rule affects only 
one State. This action simply approves the State's proposal to be 
authorized for updated requirements of the hazardous waste program that 
the State has voluntarily chosen to operate. Further, as a result of 
this action, newly authorized provisions of the State's program now 
apply in lieu of the equivalent Federal program provisions implemented 
by EPA under HSWA. Affected parties are subject only to those 
authorized State program provisions, as opposed to being subject to 
both Federal and State regulatory requirements. Thus, the requirements 
of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply.

Compliance With Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks,'' applies to any rule that: (1) The 
Office of Management and Budget determines is ``economically 
significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866; and (2) concerns 
an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe 
may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory 
action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental 
health or safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain 
why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective 
and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that 
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the 
potential to influence the regulation. This rule is not subject to 
Executive

[[Page 26757]]

Order 13045 because it authorizes a state program.

Compliance With Executive Order 13084

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those 
governments. If EPA complies with consulting, Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13084 because it does 
not significantly or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal 
governments. The State is not authorized to implement the RCRA 
hazardous waste program in Indian country. This action has no effect on 
the hazardous waste program that EPA implements in the Indian country 
within the State.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., Federal 
agencies must consider the paperwork burden imposed by any information 
request contained in a proposed rule or a final rule. This rule will 
not impose any information requirements upon the regulated community.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) directs 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 standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA 
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste 
transportation, Indian country, 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: April 28, 2000.
Jack W. McGraw,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII.
[FR Doc. 00-11421 Filed 5-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U