58328 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 185 / Friday, September 24, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

[FR Doc. 2010–23965 Filed 9–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 271 

[EPA–R07–RCRA–2008–0830; FRL–9205–3] 

Nebraska: Final Authorization of State 

Hazardous Waste Management 

Program Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Solid Waste Disposal Act, 

as amended, commonly referred to as 

the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA), allows the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

to authorize States to operate their 

hazardous waste management programs 

in lieu of the Federal program. Nebraska 

has applied to EPA for final 

authorization of the changes to its 

hazardous waste program under RCRA. 

EPA has determined that these changes 

satisfy all requirements needed to 

qualify for final authorization and is 

authorizing the State’s changes through 

this immediate final action. 

DATES: This Final authorization will 

become effective on September 24, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa 

Haugen, EPA Region 7, AWMD/RESP, 

901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, 

Kansas 66101, (913) 551–7877, or by 

e-mail at haugen.lisa@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 program 

that is equivalent to, consistent with, 

and no less stringent than the Federal 

program. As the Federal program 

changes, a State must change its 

program accordingly 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, 

the State must change its program 

because of changes to EPA’s regulations 

in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

parts 124, 260 through 266, 268, 270, 

273 and 279. 

Nebraska initially received final 

authorization on January 24, 1985, 

effective February 7, 1985 (50 FR 3345), 

to implement the RCRA hazardous 

waste management program. EPA 

granted authorization for changes to 

Nebraska’s program on October 4, 1985, 

effective December 3, 1988 (53 FR 

38950); June 25, 1996, effective August 

26, 1996 (61 FR 32699); April 10, 2003, 

effective June 9, 2003 (68 FR 17553); 

and October 4, 2004, effective December 

3, 2004. 

On April 29, 2008, Nebraska 

submitted a final complete program 

revision application, seeking 

authorization of its changes in 

accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. On 

December 30, 2008, EPA published both 

an Immediate Final Rule (73 FR 79661) 

granting Nebraska final authorization for 

these revisions to its Federallyauthorized hazardous waste program, 

along with a companion Proposed Rule 

announcing EPA’s proposal to grant 

such a final authorization (73 FR 

79761). EPA announced in both 

documents that the Immediate Final 

Rule and the Proposed Rule were 

subject to a thirty-day comment period. 

The public comment period ended on 

January 29, 2009. EPA received written 

comments from one commenter during 

the public comment period. Today’s 

action responds to the comments EPA 

received and publishes EPA’s final 

determination granting Nebraska final 

authorization of its program revisions. 

Further background on EPA’s 

Immediate Final Rule and its tentative 

determination to grant authorization to 

Nebraska for its program revisions 

appears in the aforementioned Federal 

Register notices. The issues raised by 

the commenter are summarized and 

responded to as follows. 

B. What were the comments and 

responses to EPA’s proposal? 

The comments did not address 

specific concerns with EPA’s approval 

of the additional RCRA regulatory 

provisions in Nebraska’s authorized 

hazardous waste program; rather the 

comments address a previous rule 

promulgated by EPA. The commenter’s 

arguments relate specifically to EPA’s 

promulgation of the Zinc Fertilizer Rule 

on July 24, 2002 (67 FR 48393). 

Specifically, the commenter argued that 

the Phase IV Land Disposal Restriction 

(LDR)—which is more stringent than the 

Zinc Fertilizer Rule—resulted from an 

‘‘affirmative finding of safety’’ when 

zinc-containing hazardous wastes were 

disposed in Subtitle C landfills, so it is 

counterintuitive to claim that the same 

zinc-containing hazardous wastes can 

now ‘‘safely’’ be used as fertilizer. For 

the reasons set forth below, we do not 

agree with the commenter. 

EPA promulgated all of the rules 

included in Nebraska’s revision 

pursuant to the authority granted to EPA 

by Congress under RCRA. Those rules, 

including the Zinc Fertilizer Rule, were 

finalized after full consideration of any 

and all comments submitted in a timely 

manner. By adopting the rule 

promulgated by EPA, Nebraska revised 

its hazardous waste program to be 

equivalent to and consistent with the 

Federal program. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

6926(b), EPA has the authority to 

authorize State programs that are 

equivalent to and consistent with the 

Federal program. The comments 

submitted speak directly to the Federal 

rule and not to EPA’s authorization of 

Nebraska’s program revisions. 

Therefore, we have determined that 

there is no basis to deny authorizing 

approval based on these comments. 

In addition, the commenter argues 

that exempting zinc-containing 

hazardous wastes from regulation as 

solid waste is not supported by 

Nebraska Revised Statute 75–362. This 

comment is not relevant to this action. 

The criteria for authorization of a State 

hazardous waste program are set forth at 

section 3006 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 

6926(b). In reviewing an application 

under this section, EPA considers 

whether the State program (1) is 

equivalent to the Federal program under 

subchapter III, which governs hazardous 

waste; (2) is consistent with Federal or 

‘‘State programs applicable to other 

States’’; and (3) provides adequate 

enforcement of compliance with the 

requirements of subchapter III of RCRA. 

As part of this review, EPA considers 

whether the State is imposing 

requirements less stringent than those 

authorized under subchapter III 

respecting the same matter as governed 

by such regulation. The commenter’s 

argument with regard to Nebraska 

Revised Statute 75–362 falls outside the 

scope of our review of Nebraska’s 

application for the hazardous waste 

rules authorized herein. Therefore, the 

comment regarding Nebraska Revised 

Statute 75–362 is not relevant to this 

action. 

C. What decisions have we made in this 

rule? 

Based on EPA’s response to public 

comments, the Agency has determined 

that approval of Nebraska’s RCRA 

program revisions should proceed. EPA 

has made a final determination that 

Nebraska’s application to revise its 

authorized program meets all of the 

statutory and regulatory requirements 

established by RCRA. Therefore, we 

grant Nebraska final authorization to 

operate its hazardous waste program 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 185 / Friday, September 24, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 58329 

with the changes described in its 

application for program revisions. 

Nebraska is responsible for carrying out 

the aspects of the RCRA program 

described in its approved program 

applications, subject to the limitations 

of the Hazardous and Solid Waste 

Amendments (HSWA) of 1984. New 

Federal requirements and prohibitions 

imposed by Federal regulations that 

EPA promulgates under the authority of 

HSWA take effect in authorized States 

before they are authorized for the 

requirements. Thus, EPA will 

implement any such HSWA 

requirements and prohibitions in 

Nebraska, including issuing HSWA 

permits, until the State is granted 

authorization to do so. For further 

background on the scope and effect of 

today’s action to approve Nebraska’s 

RCRA program revisions, please refer to 

the preambles of EPA’s December 30, 

2008, Proposed and Immediate Final 

Rules at 73 FR 79761 and 73 FR 79661 

respectively. 

D. 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 therefore this action is not subject 

to review by OMB. This action 

authorizes state requirements for the 

purpose of RCRA 3006 and imposes no 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. 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 

authorizes 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 

(Pub. L. 104–4). For the same reason, 

this action also does not significantly or 

uniquely affect the communities of 

Tribal governments, as specified by 

Executive Order 13175, ‘‘Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments’’ (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, ‘‘Federalism’’ 

(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because 

it merely authorizes state requirements 

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, ‘‘Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (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 that may affect 

children. This 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 under Executive Order 

12866. 

Under RCRA 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, 

‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ (61 FR 47729, 

February 7, 1996), in issuing 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, 

‘‘Government Actions and Interference 

with Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by 

examining the takings implications the 

rule in accordance with the ‘‘Attorney 

General’s Supplemental Guidelines for 

the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of 

Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under 

the executive order. This rule does not 

impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

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. EPA will submit a 

report containing this document and 

other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication in the Federal Register. A 

major rule cannot take effect until 60 

days after it is published in the Federal 

Register. This action is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This 

action will be effective September 24, 

2010. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Confidential business information, 

Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste 

transportation, Indian lands, 

Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Authority: This action is issued under the 

authority of sections 2002(a), 3006 and 

7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as 

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

Dated: September 13, 2010. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23990 Filed 9–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

41 CFR Part 300–80 

[FTR Amendment 2010–03; FTR Case 2010– 

304; Docket 2010–0016; Sequence 1] 

RIN 3090–ZA01 

Federal Travel Regulation (FTR); 

Relocation Expenses Test Programs 

AGENCY: Office of Governmentwide 

Policy, General Services Administration 

(GSA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule updates the 

Federal Travel Regulation (FTR) to 

reflect statutory changes that extended 

the authority for relocation expenses 

test programs for Federal employees, 

made by the passage of Public Law 111– 

112 on November 30, 2009. 

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective September 24, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

Regulatory Secretariat (MVCB), Room 

4035, GS Building, Washington, DC 

20405, (202) 501–4755, for information 

pertaining to status or publication 

schedules. For clarification of content, 

contact Mr. Henry Maury, Office of 

Governmentwide Policy (M), Office of 

Travel, Transportation and Asset 

Management (MT), General Services 

Administration at (202) 208–7928 or eVerDate Mar<15>2010 16:03 Sep 23, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\24SER1.SGM 24SER1

hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with RULES