34674 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

For additional information, see the 

direct final rule which is located in the 

Rules Section of this Federal Register. 

Dated: June 8, 2010. 

Ira W. Leighton, 

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New 

England. 

[FR Doc. 2010–14509 Filed 6–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[EPA–R10–RCRA 2010–0251; FRL–9160–7] 

Washington: Proposed Authorization 

of State Hazardous Waste Management 

Program Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Washington has applied to 

EPA for final authorization of certain 

changes to its hazardous waste 

management program under the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act, as amended, (RCRA). EPA has 

reviewed Washington’s application and 

has preliminarily determined that these 

changes satisfy all requirements needed 

to qualify for final authorization and is 

proposing to authorize Washington’s 

changes. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule 

must be received by July 19, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R10–RCRA–2010–0251 by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: Kocourek.Nina@epa.gov. 

• Mail: Nina Kocourek, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 10, Office of Air, Waste & Toxics 

(AWT–122), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 

900, Seattle, Washington 98101. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID Number EPA–R10–RCRA– 

2010–0251. 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 whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 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 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 or 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 the Washington 

application, during normal business 

hours, at the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of 

Air, Waste & Toxics, Mailstop AWT– 

122, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, 

Seattle, Washington 98101, contact: 

Nina Kocourek, phone number: (206) 

553–6502 or at the Washington State 

Department of Ecology, 300 Desmond 

Drive, Lacey, Washington 98503, 

contact: Robert Rieck, phone number 

(360) 407–6751. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nina Kocourek, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of 

Air, Waste & Toxics (AWT–122), 1200 

Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, 

Washington 98101, phone number: 

(206) 553–6502, e-mail: 

kocourek.nina@epa.gov. 

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 

management 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 Title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) parts 124, 260 

through 266, 268, 270, 273, and 279. 

B. What decisions have we made in this 

rule? 

We have preliminarily determined 

that Washington’s application to revise 

its authorized program meets all of the 

statutory and regulatory requirements 

established by RCRA. Therefore, we 

propose to grant Washington final 

authorization to operate its hazardous 

waste management program with the 

changes as described in its revised 

program application. Washington will 

have responsibility for permitting 

treatment, storage, and disposal 

facilities (TSDFs) within its borders, 

except in Indian country (18 U.S.C. 

1151), 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 EPA promulgates under 

the authority of HSWA, which are more 

stringent than existing requirements, 

take effect in authorized States before 

the State is authorized for these 

requirements. Thus, EPA will 

implement those requirements and 

prohibitions in Washington, including 

issuing permits, until the State is 

granted authorization to do so. 

C. What is the effect of this 

authorization decision? 

If Washington is authorized for these 

changes, a facility in Washington 

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, such persons will 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 34675 

have to comply with any applicable 

Federal requirements, such as HSWA 

regulations issued by EPA for which the 

State has not received authorization and 

RCRA requirements that are not 

supplanted by authorized State-issued 

requirements. Washington has 

enforcement responsibilities under its 

State hazardous waste program for 

violations of its program, but EPA 

retains its independent enforcement 

authority under RCRA sections 3007, 

3008, 3013, and 7003, which include, 

among others, authority to: 

• Conduct inspections; require 

monitoring, tests, analyses, or reports; 

• Enforce RCRA requirements; 

suspend, terminate, modify or revoke 

permits; and 

• Take enforcement actions regardless 

of whether the State has taken its own 

actions. 

The proposed action to approve these 

revisions would not impose additional 

requirements on the regulated 

community because the regulations for 

which Washington 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 on this action? 

If EPA receives comments on this 

proposed action, 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. What has Washington previously 

been authorized for? 

Washington initially received final 

authorization on January 30, 1986, 

effective January 31, 1986 (51 FR 3782), 

to implement the State’s dangerous 

waste management program. EPA 

granted authorization for changes to 

Washington’s program on September 22, 

1987, effective on November 23, 1987 

(52 FR 35556); August 17, 1990, 

effective October 16, 1990 (55 FR 

33695); November 4, 1994, effective 

November 4, 1994 (59 FR 55322); 

February 29, 1996, effective April 29, 

1996 (61 FR 7736); September 22, 1998, 

effective October 22, 1998 (63 FR 

50531); October 12, 1999, effective 

January 11, 2000 (64 FR 55142); April 

11, 2002, effective April 11, 2002 (67 FR 

17636); April 14, 2006, effective June 

13, 2006 (71 FR 19442) and on October 

30, 2006 effective December 29, 2006 

(71 FR 63253). 

F. What changes are we proposing? 

On May 18, 2010, Washington 

submitted a hazardous waste 

management program revision 

application seeking authorization of its 

changes in accordance with 40 CFR 

271.21. On May 28, 2010 we determined 

that Washington’s program revision 

application was complete. We have 

preliminarily determined that 

Washington’s hazardous waste 

management program revision satisfies 

all requirements necessary to qualify for 

final authorization. Therefore, we 

propose to grant Washington final 

authorization for the following program 

changes as identified in Table 1 and 

Table 2 below. Note: The RCRA 

regulations the State is seeking 

authorization for and are incorporated 

by reference are those as published in 

40 CFR parts 260 through 265, 268, 270, 

and 279, as of July 1, 2007, unless 

otherwise noted; and all of the 

referenced analogous State authorities 

were legally adopted and effective State 

rules as of July 31, 2009. 

TABLE 1—EQUIVALENT AND MORE STRINGENT ANALOGUES TO THE FEDERAL PROGRAM

Regulatory 

checklist 1 Federal requirements Federal Register Analogous state authority—Washington’s administrative code (WAC) (WAC 173–303–* * *) 

17S ........................ HSWA Codification Rule— 

Exposure Information.

50 FR 28702, 7/15/85 ....... 800(8); 800(12). 

117B2 .................... Toxicity Characteristic 

Amendment.

57 FR 23062, 6/1/92 ......... 070(3) except 070(3)(a)(iii) and 070(3)(c). 

203 2 ...................... Recycled used Oil Management Standards; 

Clarification.

68 FR 44659, 7/30/03 ....... 070(8)(c); 515(3) Incorporated by Reference (IBR) 045(1); 515(11) IBR 045(1). 

205 ........................ NESHAP: Surface Coating 

of Automobiles and 

Light-Duty Trucks.

69 FR 22601, 4/26/04 ....... 691(1)(g); 400(3)(a). 

207 2 and 207.1 2 ... Uniform Hazardous Waste 

Manifest Rule and 

Amendment.

70 FR 10766, 3/4/05 as 

amended on 6/16/05 at 

70 FR 35034.

040 ‘‘designated facility’’ definition; 040 ‘‘manifest’’ definition; 040 ‘‘manifest tracking 

number’’ definition; 160(2)(a), 160(2)(a)(ii), 160(2)(a)(iii); 180, 180(1), 180(7), 

180(7)(a) IBR 045(1), 180(7)(b), 180(7)(b)(i), 180(7)(b)(ii), 180(7)(b)(iii), 

180(7)(b)(iv), 180(7)(c), 180(8), 180(8)(a), 180(8)(b); 190(3), 190(3)(b), 190(4); 

200, 200(6), 200(6)(a), 200(6)(b); 230 IBR 045(1), 230(2), 230(2)(c), 230(2)(d), 

230(2)(e); 180(1) IBR 045(1); 250, 250(1)(a), 250(1)(b), 250(9), 250(9)(a), 

250(9)(b), 250(9)(c), 250(9)(d), 250(5), 250(6), 250(6)(a), 250(6)(b), 250(6)(b)(i), 

250(6)(b)(ii); 370, 370(1); 370(2), 370(2)(a), 370(2)(b), 370(2)(c), 370(2)(d), 

370(2)(e), 370(3), 370(4)(d), 370(8), 370(5), 370(5)(a), 370(5)(a)(i), 370(5)(a)(ii), 

370(5)(a)(iii), 370(5)(b), 370(5)(c), 370(5)(d)(i), 370(5)(d)(ii), 370(5)(e), 370(5)(e)(i), 

370(5)(e)(ii), 370(5)(e)(iii), 370(5)(e)(iv), 370(5)(e)(v), 370(5)(e)(vi), 370(5)(e)(vii), 

370(5)(f), 370(5)(f)(i), 370(5)(f)(ii), 370(5)(f)(iii), 370(5)(f)(iv), 370(5)(f)(v), 

370(5)(f)(vi), 370(5)(f)(vii), 370(5)(g); 390(1), 390(1)(a), 390(1)(b), 390(1)(c), 

390(1)(d), 390(1)(e), 390(1)(f), 390(1)(g). 

209 2 ...................... Universal Waste Rule: 

Specific Provisions for 

Mercury Containing 

Equipment.

70 FR 45508, 8/5/05 ......... 040 ‘‘mercury-containing equipment’’ definition; 040 ‘‘universal waste’’ definition; 

077(2); 600(3)(o)(ii); 400(2)(c)(xi)(B); 140(2)(a) IBR 045(1); 800(7)(c)(iii)(B); 

573(1)(a)(ii), 573(3)(a), 573(3)(b), 573(3)(b)(i), 573(3)(b)(ii), 573(3)(b)(iii), 

573(3)(c)(i), 573(3)(c)(ii); 040 ‘‘ampule’’ definition; 040 ‘‘large quantity handler of 

universal waste’’ definition; 040 ‘‘mercury containing equipment’’ definition; 040 

‘‘small quantity handler of universal waste’’ definition; 040 ‘‘universal waste’’ definition; 573(9)(b), 573(9)(b)(i), 573(9)(b)(ii), 573(9)(b)(ii)(A), 573(9)(b)(ii)(B), 

573(9)(b)(ii)(C), 573(9)(b)(ii)(D), 573(9)(b)(ii)(E), 573(9)(b)(ii)(F), 573(9)(b)(ii)(G), 

573(9)(b)(ii)(H), 573(9)(b)(iii), 573(9)(b)(iii)(A), 573(9)(b)(iii)(B), 573(9)(b)(iv)(A), 

573(9)(b)(iv)(A)(I), 573(9)(b)(iv)(A)(II), 573(9)(b)(iv)(B), 573(9)(b)(iv)(C), 

573(10)(b)(i), 573(10)(b)(ii), 573(19)(b)(iv), 573(19)(b)(v), 573(20)(b), 573(20(b)(i), 

573(20)(b)(ii), 573(20)(b)(ii)(A), 573(20)(b)(ii)(B), 573(20)(b)(ii)(C), 573(20)(b)(ii)(D), 

573(20)(b)(ii)(E), 573(20)(b)(ii)(F), 573(20)(b)(ii)(G), 573(20)(b)(ii)(H), 

573(20)(b)(iii), 573(20)(b)(iii)(A), 573(20)(b)(iii)(B), 573(20)(b)(iv)(A), 

573(20)(b)(iv)(A)(I), 573(20)(b)(iv)(A)(II), 573(20)(b)(iv)(B), 573(20)(b)(iv)(C), 

573(21)(b)(i), 573(21)(b)(ii). 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
34676 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—EQUIVALENT AND MORE STRINGENT ANALOGUES TO THE FEDERAL PROGRAM—Continued 

Regulatory 

hecklist 1 Federal requirements Federal Register Analogous state authority—Washington’s administrative code (WAC) (WAC 173–303–* * *) 

212 ........................ NESHAP: Final Standards 

for Hazardous Waste 

Combustors (Phase I 

Final Replacement 

Standards and Phase II).

70 FR 59402, 10/12/05 ..... 110(1), 110(3)(g)(viii); 670(1)(b)(i), 670(1)(b)(v); 400(3)(a) IBR 045(1); 110(1), 

110(3), 110(3)(g)(viii); 806 (17), 806(17)(a), 806(17)(a)(i), 806(17)(a)(ii), 

806(17)(a)(iii), 806(17)(a)(iv), 806(17)(a)(v), 806(17)(a)(vi), 806(17)(a)(vii), 

806(17)(a)(viii), 806(17)(a)(ix), 806(17)(b), 806(4)(f)(v), 806(4)(n), 806(4)(j)(iv)(C), 

806(4)(k)(v)(C); 815(2)(b)(iii); 830(4)(j)(i), 830(4)(j)(ii), 830(4)(j)(iii), 830(4)(k), 

830(4)(k)(i), 830(4)(k)(i)(A), 830(4)(k)(i)(B), 830(4)(k)(i)(C), 830(4)(k)(i)(D), 

830(4)(k)(ii), 830(4)(k)(ii)(A), 830(4)(k)(ii)(B), 830 Appendix L 10; 807 introductory 

text; 811 IBR 045(1), 841 IBR 045(1). 

213 2 ...................... Burden Reduction Initiative 71 FR 16862, 4/4/06 ......... 040 ‘‘performance track member facility’’ definition; 017(5)(b)(ii)(B), 017(5)(b)(ii)(C), 

017(5)(b)(ii)(D), 017(5)(b)(ii)(E), 017(5)(b)(ii)(F), 017(5)(b)(ii)(G); 071(3)(w)(iii)(E), 

071(3)(s)(ix); 320(2)(c); 330(i); 350(2); 360(2)(j); 380(1), 380(1)(a), 380(1)(b), 

380(1)(f), 380(1)(g), 380(1)(i); 645(9)(d), 645(9)(g)(ii), 645(9)(g)(iii), 645(10)(f), 

645(10)(g), 645(10)(h)(iii)(A), 645(10)(h)(iii)(B), 645(11)(g); 610(4)(e)(v), 610(6), 

610(11); 620(4)(b), 620(6)(b), 620(8)(e); 630(6); 640(2)(a); 640(2)(c)(v)(B), 

640(3)(a), 640(3)(c), 640(4)(a)(i), 640(4)(a)(ii), 640(6)(b), 640(6)(b)(ii), 640(6)(b)(i), 

640(6)(b)(iii), 640(4)(f), 640(6)(c), 640(6)(d), 640(7)(f); 660(2)(j); 655(8)(b); 

140(4)(b)(i), 140(4)(b)(ii), 140(4)(b)(iii), 140(4)(b)(iv), 140(4)(b)(v), 140(4)(b)(v)(A), 

140(4)(b)(v)(B); 670(4)(a)(ii), 670(7)(c); 64690 IBR 045(1); 675(2)(a), 675(2)(b), 

675(2)(c), 675(4)(a)(iv)(B), 675(4)(g), 675(5)(a); 691(2) IBR 045(1); 695 IBR 

045(1); 400(3)(a) IBR 045(1), 400(3)(c)(v)(A), 400(3)(c)(v)(B), 400(3)(c)(v)(D), 

400(3)(c)(v)(E), 400(3)(c)(vi)(C), 400(3)(c)(vi)(D), 400(3)(c)(vi)(E), 400(3)(c)(vii)(C), 

400(3)(c)(vii)(D), 400(3)(c)(vii)(E), 400(3)(c)(viii)(A), 400(3)(c)(ix)(B), 

400(3)(c)(ix)(C), 400(3)(c)(ix)(D), 400(3)(c)(ix)(E), 400(3)(c)(ix)(G), 400(3)(c)(ix)(H), 

400(3)(c)(ix)(I), 400(3)(c)(ix)(J), 400(3)(c)(ix)(K), 400(3)(c)(ix)(L), 400(3)(c)(x), 

400(3)(c)(xi)(A), 400(3)(c)(xii)(B), 400(3)(a)(xiii), 400(3)(a)(xiii)(B); 140(4)(b)(i), 

140(4)(b)(ii), 140(4)(b)(iii), 140(4)(b)(iv), 140(4)(b)(v), 140(4)(b)(v)(A), 

140(4)(b)(v)(B); 400(3)(c)(xviii)(A), 400(3)(c)(xviii)(B), 400(3)(c)(xviii)(C), 

400(3)(c)(xviii)(D), 400(3)(c)(xviii)(E), 400(3)(c)(xviii)(F), 400(3)(c)(xx)(B), 

400(3)(c)(xx)(A), 400(3)(c)(xx)(C), 400(3)(c)(xxii)(A), 400(3)(c)(xxii)(B); 140(2)(c) 

IBR 045(1), 140(2)(d) IBR 045(1), 140(2)(e) IBR 045(1), 140(2)(a) IBR 045(1), 

140(2)(f) IBR 045(1); 806(4)(a), 806(4)(c)(i), 806(4)(l)(iii)(O); 830(1). 

214 2 ...................... Corrections to Errors in the 

Code of Federal Regulations.

71 FR 40254, 7/14/06 ....... 040 ‘‘incompatible waste’’ definition; 040 ‘‘personnel or facility personnel’’ definition; 

040 ‘‘universal waste’’ definition; 040 ‘‘used oil’’ definition; 525(2), 525(3) introductory paragraph; 016(5)(a); 070(3); 016(5)(a)(i)(B); 071(3)(aa)(i)(B), 071(3)(aa)(ii), 

071(3)(aa)(ii)(A), 071(3)(aa)(ii)(B), 071(3)(aa)(ii)(C), 071(3)(aa)(ii)(D), 

071(3)(aa)(ii)(E), 071(3)(aa)(ii)(F), 071(3)(g)(i), 071(3)(r)(ii)(F), 071(3)(r)(iii)(A); 

120(3)(b), 120(3)(d), 120(3)(g), 120(3)(f), 120(4)(c); 090(5)(a)(iii), 090(5)(a)(iii)(A), 

090(5)(a)(iii)(B), 090(5)(a)(iii)(B)(I), 090(5)(a)(iii)(B)(II), 090(5)(a)(iii)(B)(III), 

090(5)(a)(iii)(B)(IV), 090(5)(a)(iv), 090(5)(a)(iv)(A), 090(5)(a)(iv)(B), 

090(5)(a)(iv)(C), 090(5)(a)(iv)(D), 090(5)(a) Note 1, 090(5)(a) Note 2, 090(5)(a) 

Note 3, 090(5)(a) Note 4, 090(8)(b); 9904 Footnote; 081(2)(a), 81(2)(a)(i); 9903 Introductory, 9903; 081(1); 082(4) IBR 045(1); 9905; 200(1)(b)(i), 200(1)(b)(ii), 

200(1)(b)(iii), 200(1)(b)(iv), 200(1)(b)(v); 230(1) IBR 045(1); 600(3)(f), 600(5); 

280(2); 300(5)(h)(iii)(B); 395(1)(a); 282(3)(g), 282(6)(c)(i)(A); 645(8)(a)(i), 

645(8)(a)(i)(A), 645(8)(i)(v), 645(9)(a)(ii), 645(9)(g)(iv)(A), 645(10)(h)(ii); 64610(3); 

610(2)(b), 610(3)(a)(ix), 610(6), 610(9), 610(8)(c), 610(10)(b)(i)(B); 620(1)(d)(i), 

620(3)(c)(ii), 620(4)(b) IBR 045(1), 620(6)(b) IBR 045(1), 620(8)(b) IBR 045(1), 

620(10) IBR 045(1); 630(7)(a)(i); 640(4)(c)(iv), 630(4)(d)(iv), 640(4)(e)(ii)(B), 

640(4)(e)(ii)(C), 640(4)(e)(ii)(E)(I), 640(4)(e)(ii)(E)(II), 640(4)(e)(iii)(A), 

640(4)(e)(iii)(B), 640(4)(g)(i)(C), 640(4)(g)(i)(D), 640(4)(g)(ii)(A)(I); 650(2)(j)(i)(B), 

650(2)(j)(iii)(B), 650(2)(I)(i), 650(2)(I)(ii)(B), 650(2)(I)(ii)(C), 650(11)(b)(i), 

650(4)(a)(ii); 660(2)(a)(ii)(A)(I), 660(3)(a), 630(3)(b), 660(10)(b); 655(8)(a)(vii), 

655(8)(d), 655(12)(a); 665(2)(h)(ii), 665(2)(j)(ii)(B), 665(8)(a), 665(8)(b), 

665(9)(b)(i); 140(4)(b)(v)(B); 665(11)(a); 670(5)(b); 64660(3)(d)(iii), 

64660(3)(d)(iv)(F), 64660(3)(f)(ii)(E); 64680(5); 64690 IBR 045(1); 646910(5)(f); 

675(4)(a)(i), 675(4)(a)(iv)(A), 675(4)(a)(v), 675(4)(b), 675(4)(m)(ii), 675(4)(m)(iii); 

680(1), 680(2)(a), 680(2)(b)(xi), 680(2)(c)(iv); 690(1)(c), 690(2) IBR 045(1); 

691(1)(f), 691(2) IBR 045(1); 692(1)(a), 692(1)(c), 692(2) IBR 045(1); 695 IBR 

045(1); 380(2)(c), 380(2)(d); 400(2)(c)(ii); 290(1)(a); 310(2)(b); 330(1)(c)(ii); 

400(3)(a) IBR 045(1); 360(2)(b); 400(3)(c)(viii), 400(3)(c)(ix)(G), 400(3)(c)(ix)(K), 

400(3)(c)(xviii)(C); 380(2)(c), 380(2)(d); 525(1)(a); 140(2)(a) IBR 045(1); 803(2); 

800(2); 802(2); 800(7)(c)(i); 040 ‘‘on-site’’ definition, 040 ‘‘publicly owned treatment 

works (POTW)’’; 806(12); 810(13)(a); 803(3)(k)(vii); 806(4)(a); 282(6)(a)(i); 

806(4)(a)(xviii)(C), 806(4)(a)(xxvi), 806(4)(d)(vii), 806(4)(e)(ii), 806(4)(e)(viii), 

806(4)(g)(viii)(B)(vii)(A), 806(4)(g)(viii)(B)(vii)(B), 806(4)(g)(viii)(B)(vii)(C), 

806(4)(g)(viii)(B)(vii)(D), 806(4)(I)(iii)(O); 815(3)(b); 282(2)(i); 830(4)(d)(ii)(A), 830 

Appendix I; 805(1)(b), 805(7)(b)(ii); 040 ‘‘Universal Waste’’ definition; 573(10)(a), 

573(21)(a); 515(2) IBR 045(1), 515(5)(e), 515(4) IBR 045(1), 515(4) Table 1, 

515(8) IBR 045(1), 515(9) IBR 045(1), 515(10) IBR 045(1), 515(11) IBR 045(1). 

215 2 ...................... Cathode Ray Tubes Rule 71 FR 42928, 7/28/06 ....... 040 ‘‘cathode ray tube’’ definition; 040 ‘‘CRT collector’’ definition; 040 ‘‘CRT glass 

manufacturer’’ definition; 040 ‘‘CRT processing’’ definition; 071(3)(oo)(i), 

071(3)(oo)(ii), 071(3)(oo)(iii), 071(3)(oo)(iv). 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 34677 

TABLE 1—EQUIVALENT AND MORE STRINGENT ANALOGUES TO THE FEDERAL PROGRAM—Continued 

Regulatory 

hecklist 1 Federal requirements Federal Register Analogous state authority—Washington’s administrative code (WAC) (WAC 173–303–* * *) 

217 2 ...................... NESHAP: Final Standards 

for Hazardous Waste 

Combustors (Phase I 

Final Replacement 

Standards and Phase II) 

Amendments.

73 FR 18970, 4/8/08 ......... 670(1), 670(1)(b)(i), 670(1)(b)(iii), 670(1)(b)(v). 

1 Regulatory Checklist is a document that addresses specific changes made to the Federal regulations by one or more related final rules published in the FEDERAL

REGISTER. EPA develops these checklists as tools to assist States in developing their authorization application and in documenting specific State regulations analogous to the Federal regulations. For more information on EPA’s RCRA State Authorization Guidance see http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/osw/laws-regs/State/index.htm. 2State rule contains more stringent provisions. For identification of the more stringent State provisions refer to the Docket ID Number EPA–R10–RCRA–2010–0251 

for this proposed rule. 

TABLE 2—STATE INITIATED CHANGES

State citation—Washington’s 

administrative code (WAC) 

(WAC 173–303–* * *) 

Reason for change Analogous federal 40 CFR citation 

030 ........................................................... Clarification—Add acronyms (PODC, DRE, APTI, 

MACT, TEQ, CAMU, TU).

260 related. 

040 ........................................................... Clarify definition for Closure—update to clarify 

closure applies to recyclers, some generators 

and some transporters.

262.10. 

040 ........................................................... Compliance Procedure—removed the cited dates 

and added RCW title.

260 related. 

040 ........................................................... Person definition—Updated to match Federal rule 260.10. 

040 ........................................................... Staging Pile definition—Updated to match Federal rule.260.10. 

040 ........................................................... Surface Impoundment definition—Change language to reflect Federal definition by deleting 

the word ‘‘dangerous’’.

260.10. 

045 ........................................................... Incorporation by reference updated to July 2007 260–280 related. 

070(7)(c) .................................................. Clarify that counting exclusion applies to permitby-rule (PBR), not to treatment by generator 

activity.

261/5(c) Intro. 

070(8)(d) .................................................. Citations corrected for used oil burned for energy 

recovery.

261.5 related. 

071(3)(cc)(ii) ............................................. Deletion of incorrect NAICS codes—487110, 

722310, 425110.

261.4(a)(12)(i), 261.4(a)(12)(ii). 

081(1), 081(1)(a) and 082(1) ................... Clarification on appropriate commercial chemical 

product waste code.

261.33, 261.31(a). 

*083(2)(b)(iii)(A&(B) ................................. Clarification—SW–846 is incorporated by reference at 110(3)(a).261.35(b)(2)(iii)(A), 261.35(b)(2)(iii)(B). 

*090(5)(a)(i) and (6)(a)(i), & (iii) ............... Clarification—SW–846 test method is incorporated by reference at 110(3) Updates to 

ASTM and NACE procedures.

261.21(a)(1), 261.22(a)(1), 261.22(a)(2). 

090(6)(a)(ii) .............................................. Clarify that the NACE test method is the same as 

SW–846 Method 1110A.

261.22(a)(1) and (2). 

110 title .................................................... First sentence revised by adding word ‘‘analytes’’ 260.1, 270.6 related. 

110(2)(a)(vi), (2)(b) .................................. Clarification on selection of sampling device Reference to AC&D liquid sample removed.260.11, 261 (Appendix I, Index). 

*110(3)(a) ................................................. Added ‘‘IIIB Update’’ and ‘‘Final Update IV’’ to 

SW 846 reference.

260.11(a) through (g), related. 

110(3)(c) .................................................. Chemical Testing Methods guidance revisions 

and updates.

Previously authorized as and currently related to 

40 CFR 261 Appendix 1—Test Methods. 

*110(3)(f) .................................................. Clarification—Use test methods in SW–846 

Chapter 2 for identifying toxic constituents.

260.11 Appendix III. 

110(3)(e) through (h) ............................... Updated referenced test methods to latest revision date.260.11. 

110(3)(g)(x) .............................................. Duplicate deleted [see 110(3)(g)(vii)] .................... 260.11(15).

110(5) ...................................................... Citation correction from ‘‘to approve’’ to ‘‘approval 

for the use of’’ an equivalent testing method by 

submitting a petition.

260.21. 

110(6) ...................................................... Clarification—Test method results need to be reported on a dry weight basis.Technical clarification, consistent with and no 

less stringent than the Federal program, related to 260.21. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
34678 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2—STATE INITIATED CHANGES—Continued 

State citation—Washington’s 

administrative code (WAC) 

(WAC 173–303–* * *) 

Reason for change Analogous federal 40 CFR citation 

110(7) ...................................................... ‘‘Ground-Water Monitoring List’’ Appendix IX to 

40 CFR part 264 is replaced with the version in 

Appendix 5 of the State’s ‘‘Chemical Testing 

Methods for Designating Dangerous Waste, 

Publication #97–407, June 2009’’ which is incorporated by reference into the WAC at 173– 

303–110(1).

264 Appendix IX. 

120(4)(c) .................................................. Correct second repeated (c)(vii) by renumbering 

as (c)(ix).

261.6(c)(2). 

*140(2)(a) ................................................. Clarify that section 110 test methods must be 

used.

268 related, conforming change to reflect retention of use of SW–846 methods. 

140(4)(b)(iv)(B)(I) ..................................... ASTM Test method update ................................... 264.314(e). 

200(1)(b)(ii) & (iii) 200(4)(a)(iv)(A)(II) ...... Delete ‘‘stress of installation’’ phrase and insert in 

640 and 675.

262.34(a)(1)Intro, 262.34(a)(1)(ii), 262.34(a)(1)(iii). 

200(1)(b)(iv) ............................................. Correct the Federal references by substituting 

State citations for closure and financial assurance. The word ‘‘shall’’ was changed to ‘‘must’’.

262.34(a)(1)(iv). 

270(3) ...................................................... 49 CFR 171.16 reference—updated transporter 

spill reporting address and method.

263.30(c)(2). 

281(4) ...................................................... Citations corrected from WAC 173–303–840 to 

WAC 173–303–830.

124.31(a). 

*300(5)(f) .................................................. Clarify that section 110 test methods must be 

where specific WAC citations are referenced.

264.13(b)(6), 265.13(b)(6), 264.73(b)(3), 

265.73(b)(3), conforming change to reflect retention of use of SW–846 methods. 

310(1) ...................................................... Reworded to be consistent with Federal rule ....... 264.14, 265.14. 

*380(1)(c) ................................................. Clarify that section 110 test methods must be 

used where specific 40 CFR citations are referenced.

264.73(b)(3), 265.73(b)(3), conforming change to 

reflect retention of use of SW–846 methods. 

*380(1)(f) .................................................. Add ‘‘incorporated by reference’’ for clarity and 

clarified that section 110 test methods must be 

used where specific WAC citations are referenced.

264.73(b)(6), 265.73(b)(6), conforming change to 

reflect retention of use of SW–846 methods. 

380(2)(c) .................................................. Add ‘‘tons (2000 lbs)’’ to unit of measure Table 1 264 Appendix I (2) Table 1, 265 Appendix I (2) 

Table 1. 

400(2)(c)(xiv) 400(2)(c)(xv) ...................... Language added for equivalence with Federal 

rule.

265.1(c)(5). 

400(3)(c) .................................................. Added the word ‘‘qualified’’ to the description of 

an independent registered professional engineer. This occurs nineteen times in the sub 

subsection.

265 related—more stringent State requirement. 

*400(3)(c)(iii) ............................................ Clarify that section 110 test methods must be 

used where specific 40 CFR 265 subparts are 

referenced.

265 related, conforming change to reflect retention of use of SW–846 methods. 

400(3)(c)(iv) Moved from (3)(c)(x) ........... Reference regarding Subpart B is changed because the only part of Subpart B that is incorporated by reference is 265.19.265.19. 

400(3)(c)(xiii)(A) ....................................... Correction—the word carbonaceous replaces carcinogen.265.300 Subpart N—Landfills, related. 

505(1)(b)(iv) ............................................. Citation corrected .................................................. 266.20. 

506(3)(vii) ................................................. Deleted CFC recycling exception from closure 

and financial responsibility requirements.

264.110, 265.110 Subpart G related, 264.140, 

265.140 Subpart H related. 

510(1)(b)(i)(B) .......................................... Correct internal citation ......................................... 260.30(b) Introduction, 260.30(b)(1), 

266.100(b)(1). 

*515(3) ..................................................... Clarify that section 110(3) test methods must be 

used.

279.10, conforming change to reflect retention of 

use of SW–846 methods. 

*515(4) ..................................................... Clarify that section 110(3) test methods must be 

used.

279.11, conforming change to reflect retention of 

use of SW–846 methods. 

*515(8), (9), (10) and (13)(b) ................... Clarify that section 110(3) test methods must be 

used.

279.40–47, 279.50–59, 279.60–67, 279.10, conforming change to reflect retention of use of 

SW–846 methods. 

610(3)(a)(ix), (3)(b)(ii)(D), (8)(b)(iv), and 

(8)(d)(ii)(D).

Citation corrected .................................................. 264.112 related. 

610(6) & (11) ........................................... Add ‘‘qualified’’ to PE description .......................... 264.115, 264.120—more stringent State requirement. 

610(12)(e) 620(1)(e)(ii) ............................ Correction—change ‘‘resource reclamation units’’ 

to ‘‘recycling units’’.

264.143. 

620(4)(d)(iv) ............................................. Clarification that corporate guarantors are also 

subject to a minimum net worth criteria.

264.143. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 34679 

TABLE 2—STATE INITIATED CHANGES—Continued 

State citation—Washington’s 

administrative code (WAC) 

(WAC 173–303–* * *) 

Reason for change Analogous federal 40 CFR citation 

620(4)(c) 620(4)(e)(i) 620(4)(f) ................ New financial instrument option—‘‘assigned security deposit’’ for used oil processors and recyclers.264.143. 

620(4)(d)(i) ............................................... Clarification that used oil processors may use 

partially funded trust funds.

264.143. 

620(4)(d)(iv) ............................................. Clarification that corporate guarantors are also 

subject to a minimum net worth criteria.

264.143. 

620(5)(c), 620(5)(d), 620(7) ..................... Edit—add hyphen to post-closure ......................... 264.143. 

*640(1)(b) ................................................. Provide title for test method Clarification that 

SW–846 is incorporated by reference.

264.190. 

*645(4)(a) and (b) *645(9)(g)(ii), (iii) and 

(iv)(A) 645(10)(g) 64610(4) 

806(4)(a)(xx)(D)(II).

Note that the 40 CFR 264 Appendix IX GroundWater monitoring list is included as Appendix 5 

in the ‘‘Chemical Testing Methods for Dangerous Waste, Publication #97–407, June 

2009’’, which is incorporated by reference at 

WAC 173–303–110(1).

264 Appendix IX. 

645(8)(c) .................................................. Update reference to Chapter 173–160 WAC ........ 264.97(c). 

640(4)(c)(i) & 675(4)(a)(v) ....................... Relocate ‘‘stress of installation’’ phrase from 200 264.573. 264.193. 

64660(3)(d)(iv)(F) ..................................... Correct ‘‘SW846’’ to read ‘‘SW–846’’ .................... 264.552 related (CAMU). 

665(13) .................................................... New subsection Added a reference to the liquid 

waste disposal provision in 140(4)(b).

264.314. 

*690 *691 ................................................. Deleted proposed language requiring use of 

110(3)(a) test methods.

264.1030, 264.1050 (Air Emissions for Vents, 

and Equipment Leaks). 

806(2)(a) .................................................. Citation corrected .................................................. 270.10. 

*806(4)(f)(iii)(A)(III) ................................... Clarification that equivalent analytical techniques 

must be approved by ecology.

270.19. 

806(8) ...................................................... Updated permit application requirements for consistency with Federal rule and clarified that facilities must consult with Ecology about submittal of exposure information.270.10(c). 

*807(2)(a)(iii) ............................................ Clarification that equivalent analytical techniques 

must be approved by Ecology.

270.62. 

810(11)(c) ................................................ Duplicate provision deleted ................................... 270.30(j)(2). 

810(16) .................................................... Citation corrected .................................................. 270.30(m). 

830(4)(b)(vii) ............................................ Citation corrected .................................................. 270.42(b) related. 

*910(2)(d) ................................................. Clarify that approved equivalent test methods will 

be incorporated at 110(3).

260.20(a), 260.21(d). 

910(3) ...................................................... Clarify that exemption petitions also go to EPA 

for Federal listed wastes.

260.22(d)(1)(i). 

9901; 9902 ............................................... Delete obsolete title ............................................... 260 Appendix I, related. 

* These State citations were amended to clarify that SW–846 test methods must be used, or in some cases requiring the use of test methods 

specifically called out in WAC 173–303–110. 

G. Where are the revised State rules 

different from the Federal rules? 

This section does not discuss all the 

program differences, because in most 

instances Washington writes its own 

version of the Federal hazardous waste 

rules. This section highlights those more 

notable differences between the revised 

State rules and the Federal rules. The 

State regulations that EPA is proposing 

to authorize are located in Tables 1 and 

2 in Section F above, and by viewing the 

Docket. There are certain portions of the 

Federal program which are not 

delegable to the States because of the 

Federal government’s special role in 

foreign policy matters and because of 

national concerns that arise with certain 

decisions. For example, EPA does not 

delegate import/export functions. Under 

RCRA regulations found in 40 CFR part 

262, EPA will continue to implement 

requirements for import/export 

functions. However, the State rules 

found at WAC 173–303–230 reference 

EPA’s export and import requirements 

and the State has amended these 

references to include those changes 

promulgated in the Federal rule 

‘‘Corrections to Errors in the Code of 

Federal Regulation, (71 FR 40254, 7/14/ 

06)’’. 

The State did not adopt the Federal 

Methods Innovation Rule (70 FR 34537, 

6/14/05) which amended a variety of 

testing and monitoring requirements 

found in RCRA and removed from the 

Federal regulations a requirement to use 

the methods found in ‘‘EPA’s Test 

Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, 

Physical/Chemical Methods,’’ also 

known as ‘‘SW–846’’ in conducting 

various testing and monitoring. The 

State retained the RCRA-related 

sampling and analysis requirement to 

use the testing methods found in ‘‘SW– 

846,’’ and EPA considers these changes 

to be state-initiated changes within the 

scope of Ecology’s existing 

authorization that are consistent with 

and no less stringent than the Federal 

program. (Note: The State does have an 

existing state-only petition process for 

deviating from ‘‘SW–846’’ for equivalent 

testing methods, found at WAC 173– 

303–110(5) which is not part of its stateonly rule and isn’t part of the federallyauthorized program. In Section F, Table 

2, the State citations identified with an 

asterisk (*) indicate those state 

provisions where the State clarifies that 

‘‘SW–846’’ testing methods must be 

used.) 

We found that the State’s definition of 

‘‘Designated facility’’ found at WAC 

173–303–040 is equivalent to the 

Federal definition found at 40 CFR 

260.10, with the exception of one 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
34680 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

broader in scope phrase that is a stateonly requirement. The broader in scope 

phrase which will not be authorized is: 

‘‘The following are designated facilities 

only for receipt of State-only waste; they 

cannot receive federal hazardous waste 

from off-site: Facilities operating under 

WAC 173–303–500(2)(c).’’ 

States are allowed to seek 

authorization for more stringent 

requirements than the Federal program. 

EPA has the authority to authorize and 

enforce those parts of a State’s program 

EPA finds to be more stringent than the 

Federal program. The State revised its 

previous federally authorized mercurycontaining equipment requirements 

with the adoption of the Federal Rule 

for Mercury-Containing Equipment 

Universal Waste (70 FR 45508, 8/5/06). 

The State’s revised mercury-containing 

equipment universal waste rule is more 

stringent than the Federal rule as the 

State regulates lamps at a lower 

accumulation limit than the Federal 

rule. Specifically, the State’s definitions 

of small and large quantity handlers of 

universal waste found at WAC 173– 

303–040 are more stringent than the 

Federal definitions found at 40 CFR 

273.9; and the State’s large quantity 

handlers of universal waste notification 

standards found at WAC 173–303– 

573(19)(b)(v) are more stringent than the 

Federal notification standards found at 

40 CFR 273.32(b)(5). Additionally, the 

State adopted some portions of the 

Federal Burden Reduction Initiative 

Rule (70 FR 16862, 4/4/06). The State’s 

rule retains many of the Federal 

requirements that were reduced by the 

Federal Burden Reduction Initiative 

Rule, and as a result those requirements 

retained by the State are more stringent 

than their Federal counterparts. The 

State’s definitions of ‘‘Cathode ray tubes 

(CRT) and CRT collector’’ found at WAC 

173–303–040 are more stringent than 

the Federal CRT definitions found at 40 

CFR 260.10, because the State defines a 

CRT to mean all categories of CRTs 

(intact, used and broken) and requires 

that all CRTs be managed (WAC 173– 

303–071(3)(oo)(i)–(iv)) under the same 

standards used in the federal program 

for used and broken CRTs (40 CFR 

261.39). 

H. Who handles permits after this 

authorization takes effect? 

After authorization, Washington will 

continue to issue permits for all the 

provisions for which it is authorized 

and will administer the permits it 

issues. If EPA issued permits prior to 

authorizing Washington for these 

revisions, these permits would continue 

in force according to the terms of such 

permits until the effective date of the 

State’s issuance or denial of a State 

hazardous waste management permit, at 

which time, 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. EPA will not issue 

any new permits, permit components, or 

new portions of permits for the 

provisions listed in Section G after the 

effective date of this authorization. EPA 

will continue to implement and issue 

permits for HSWA requirements for 

which Washington is not yet authorized. 

I. What is codification and is EPA 

codifying Washington’s hazardous 

waste program as authorized in this 

proposed 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. This is done by 

referencing the authorized State rules in 

40 CFR part 272. EPA is reserving the 

amendment of 40 CFR part 272, Subpart 

WW for this authorization of 

Washington’s program revisions until a 

later date. 

J. How does today’s action affect Indian 

Country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in 

Washington? 

EPA’s proposed decision to authorize 

the Washington hazardous waste 

management program does not include 

any land that is, or becomes after the 

date of authorization, ‘‘Indian Country,’’ 

as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151, with the 

exception of the non-trust lands within 

the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup 

Indian Reservation (also referred to as 

the ‘‘1873 Survey Area’’ or ‘‘Survey 

Area’’) located in Tacoma, Washington. 

EPA retains jurisdiction over ‘‘Indian 

Country’’. Effective October 22, 1998 (63 

FR 50531, 9/22/98) the State of 

Washington was authorized to 

implement the State’s Federallyauthorized hazardous waste 

management program on the non-trust 

lands within the 1873 Survey Area of 

the Puyallup Indian Reservation. The 

authorization did not extend to trust 

lands within the reservation. EPA 

retains its authority to implement RCRA 

on trust lands and over Indians and 

Indian activities within the 1873 Survey 

Area. 

K. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This proposed rule seeks to revise the 

State of Washington’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 proposed rule complies with 

applicable executive orders and 

statutory provisions as follows: 

1. Executive Order 12866 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency 

must determine whether the regulatory 

action is ‘‘significant’’, and therefore 

subject to OMB review and the 

requirements of the Executive Order. 

The Executive Order 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 Executive 

Order. EPA has determined that this 

proposed rule is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 and is therefore 

not subject to OMB review. 

2. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed 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 rule does not 

establish or modify any information or 

recordkeeping requirements for the 

regulated community and only seeks to 

authorize 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; 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 34681 

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 

EPA’s regulations in Title 40 of the CFR 

are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

3. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

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 

today’s proposed rule on small entities, 

small entity is defined as: (1) A small 

business defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s size regulations at 13 

CFR 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 rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities because the 

proposed rule will only have the effect 

of authorizing pre-existing requirements 

under State law and imposes no 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by State law. EPA continues to 

be interested in the potential impacts of 

the proposed rule on small entities and 

welcomes comments on issues related to 

such impacts. 

4. 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, 

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 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 rule 

an explanation why the 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 

the development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. Today’s 

proposed rule 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 imposes no new 

enforceable duty on any State, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

Similarly, EPA has also determined that 

this proposed rule contains no 

regulatory requirements that might 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

government entities. Thus, today’s 

proposed rule is not subject to the 

requirements of sections 202 and 203 of 

the UMRA. 

5. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This proposed rule 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 Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999). This rule proposes to authorize 

pre-existing State rules. Thus, Executive 

Order 13132 does not apply to this 

proposed rule. In the spirit of Executive 

Order 13132, and consistent with EPA 

policy to promote communications 

between EPA and State and local 

governments, EPA specifically solicits 

comment on this proposed rule from 

State and local officials. 

6. 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 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 rule does 

not have tribal implications, as specified 

in Executive Order 13175 because EPA 

retains its authority over Indian 

Country. Thus, Executive Order 13175 

does not apply to this proposed rule. 

EPA specifically solicits additional 

comment on this proposed rule from 

tribal officials. 

7. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

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 Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it 

proposes to approve a State program. 

8. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This proposed rule 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 

Executive Order 12866. 

9. 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), 

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 bodies. The 

NTTAA directs EPA to provide 

Congress, through OMB, explanations 

when the Agency decides not to use 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
34682 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

available and applicable voluntary 

consensus standards. This proposed 

rulemaking does not involve technical 

standards. Therefore, EPA is not 

considering the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

10. 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. EPA 

has determined that this proposed rule 

will not have disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or 

low-income populations. This proposed 

rule does not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment because this rule 

proposes to authorize pre-existing State 

rules which are equivalent to, and no 

less stringent than existing Federal 

requirements. 

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 2002(a), 3006 

and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, 

as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b). 

Dated: June 1, 2010. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13851 Filed 6–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

46 CFR Parts 97 and 148 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0091] 

RIN 1625–AB47 

Bulk Solid Hazardous Materials: 

Harmonization With the International 

Maritime Solid Bulk Cargoes (IMSBC) 

Code; Correction 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects the 

preamble to a proposed rule published 

in the Federal Register on June 17, 

2010, entitled ‘‘Bulk Solid Hazardous 

Materials: Harmonization With the 

International Maritime Solid Bulk 

Cargoes (IMSBC) Code.’’ This correction 

provides correct information with 

regard to the preliminary environmental 

analysis checklist. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or e-mail Richard Bornhorst, 

Office of Operating and Environmental 

Standards, Hazardous Materials 

Standards Division (CG–5223), Coast 

Guard, telephone 202–372–1426, e-mail 

Richard.C.Bornhorst@uscg.mil. If you 

have questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast 

Guard is correcting a portion of the 

preamble to the proposed rule 

discussing the preliminary 

environmental analysis checklist. The 

preamble incorrectly refers to section 

2.B.2 Figure 2–1, paragraphs 34(c), (d), 

and (e), of Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD. The correct reference is to 

section 2.B.2 Figure 2–1, paragraphs 

34(a) and (d) of the Instruction. 

Correction 

In the proposed rule ‘‘Bulk Solid 

Hazardous Materials: Harmonization 

With the International Maritime Solid 

Bulk Cargoes (IMSBC) Code,’’ which 

published in the June 17, 2010, issue of 

the Federal Register, make the 

following correction in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. In 

section VII.M., correct the paragraph 

following ‘‘M. Environment’’ to read as 

follows: 

‘‘We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions that do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. A preliminary 

environmental analysis checklist 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under the ‘‘Public Participation and 

Request for Comments’’ section of this 

preamble. This rule involves regulations 

that are editorial or procedural and the 

equipping of vessels, and falls under 

section 2.B.2. Figure 2–1, paragraphs 

34(a) and (d) of Commandant 

Instruction M16475.lD. We seek any 

comments or information that may lead 

to the discovery of a significant 

environmental impact from this 

proposed rule.’’ 

Dated: June 15, 2010. 

Steve G. Venckus, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law, United States Coast 

Guard. 

[FR Doc. 2010–14737 Filed 6–16–10; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS-1