[Federal Register: September 28, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 187)]
[Rules and Regulations]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 281
Virginia; Final Approval of Underground Storage Tank Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of final determination on Virginia's application for
SUMMARY: The Commonwealth of Virginia (State) has applied for approval
of its underground storage tank program under Subtitle I of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed the State's application and has
made a final determination that the State's underground storage tank
program satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify for
approval. Thus, EPA is granting final approval to the State to operate
EFFECTIVE DATES: Program approval for Virginia shall be effective on
October 28, 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosemarie Nino, State Programs Branch,
Waste & Chemicals Management Division (3WC21), U.S. EPA Region III,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029, (215) 814-
Section 9004 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
authorizes EPA to approve a State's underground storage tank program to
operate in the State in lieu of the Federal underground storage tank
(UST) program. To qualify for approval, a State's program must be ``no
less stringent'' than the Federal program in all seven elements set
forth at section 9004(a)(1) through (7) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991c(a)(1)
through (7), as well as the notification requirements of section
9004(a)(8) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6991c(a)(8) and must provide for adequate
enforcement of compliance with UST standards (section 9004(a) of RCRA,
42 U.S.C. 6991c(a)).
On July 15, 1998, the State submitted an official application for
EPA approval to administer its underground storage tank program. On
July 30, 1998, EPA published a tentative determination announcing its
intent to approve the State's program. Further background on the
tentative decision to grant approval appears at 63 FR 40683-40685,
(July 30, 1998).
Along with the tentative determination, EPA announced the
availability of the application for public review and comment, and the
date of a tentative public hearing on the application and EPA's
tentative determination. EPA requested advance notice for testimony and
reserved the right to cancel the public hearing in the event of
insufficient public interest. EPA did not receive any public comments
and since there were no requests to hold a public hearing, it was
B. Final Decision
I conclude that the State's application for program approval meets
all of the statutory and regulatory requirements established by
Subtitle I of RCRA and 40 CFR part 281. Accordingly, the State is
granted approval to operate its underground storage tank program in
lieu of the Federal program.
C. Compliance With Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from
the requirements of Section 6 of Executive Order 12866.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub.
L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of certain regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under sections 202 and 205 of the
UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written statement of economic and
regulatory alternatives analyses for proposed and final rules with
Federal mandates, as defined by the UMRA, 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. The
section 202 and 205 requirements do not apply to today's action because
it is not a ``Federal mandate'' and because it does not impose annual
costs of $100 million or more.
Today's rule contains no Federal mandates for State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector for two reasons. First,
today's action does not impose new or additional enforceable duties on
any State, local or tribal governments or the private sector because
the requirements of the State program are already imposed by the State
and subject to State law. Second, the Act also generally excludes from
the definition of a ``Federal mandate'' duties that arise from
participation in a voluntary Federal program. A State's participation
in an authorized UST program is voluntary.
Even if today's rule did contain a Federal mandate, this rule will
not 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.
The requirements of section 203 of UMRA also do not apply to
today's action. Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that
may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, section 203 of
the UMRA requires EPA to develop a small government agency plan. This
rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. The Agency recognizes that although
small governments may own and/or operate USTs, they are already subject
to the regulatory requirements under existing state law which are being
authorized by EPA, and, thus, are not subject to any additional
significant or unique requirements by virtue of this program approval.
E. Certification Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
EPA has determined that this authorization will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Such small entities which own and/or operate USTs are already subject
to the regulatory requirements under existing State law which are being
authorized by EPA pursuant to this Final Rule. EPA's authorization does
not impose any additional burdens on these small entities; rather EPA's
authorization of Virginia's UST program today simply results in an
administrative change, rather than a change in the substantive
requirements imposed on these small entities.
Therefore, EPA provides the following certification under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. Pursuant to the provision at 5 U.S.C. 605(b),
I hereby certify that this authorization will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
authorization approves regulatory requirements under existing State law
to which small entities are already subject. It does not impose any new
burdens on small entities. This rule, therefore, does not require a
regulatory flexibility analysis.
F. Compliance With Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that the Office of
Management and Budget determines is ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and that EPA determines that the
environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule has 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.
The Agency has determined that the final rule is not a covered
regulatory action as defined in the Executive Order because it is not
economically significant and does not address environmental health and
safety risks. As such, the final rule is not subject to the
requirements of Executive Order 13045.
G. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted 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
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 281
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Hazardous materials, State program approval, Underground storage tanks.
Authority: This document is issued under the authority of
Section 9004 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6991c.
Dated: September 17, 1998.
Stanley L. Laskowski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 3.
[FR Doc. 98-25888 Filed 9-25-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Top of page