41872 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 149 / Monday, August 4, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

(h) Modifications

18 AAC 50.305. Construction Permit

Provisions Requested by the Owner or

Operator (effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.310. Constructon Permits:

Application (effective 1/18/97)

(a) Application Required

(b) Operating Permit Coordination

(c) General Information

(d) Prevention of Significant Deterioration

Information Table 6. Significant

Concentrations

(e) Excluded Ambient Air Monitoring

(f) Nonattainment Information

(g) Demonstration Required Near A

Nonattainment Area

(h) Hazardous Air Contaminant

Information

(j) Nonattainment Air Contaminant

Reductions

(k) Revising Permit Terms

(l) Requested Limits

(m) Stack Injection

18 AAC 50.320. Construction Permits:

Content and Duration (effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.325. Operating Permits:

Classifications (effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.330. Operating Permits:

Exemptions (effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.335. Operating Permits:

Application (effective 1/18/97)

(a) Application Required

(b) Identification

(c) General Emission Information

(d) Fees

(e) Regulated Source Information

(f) Facility-wide Information: Ambient Air

Quality

(g) Facility-wide Information: Owner

Requested Limits

(h) Facility-wide Information: Emissions

Trading

(i) Compliance Information

(j) Proposed Terms and Conditions

(k) Compliance Certifications

(l) Permit Shield

(m) Supporting Documentation

(n) Additional Information

(o) Certification of Accuracy and

Completeness

(p) Renewals

(q) Insignificant Sources

(r) Insignificant Sources: Emission Rate

Basis

(s) Insignificant Sources: Category Basis

(t) Insignificance Sources: Size or

Production Rate Basis

(u) Insignificant Sources: Case-by-Case

Basis

(v) Administratively Insignificant Sources

18 AAC 50.340. Operating Permits: Review

and Issuance (effective 1/18/97)

(a) Review for Completeness

(b) Evaluation of Complete Applications

(c) Expiration of Application Shield

(d) Preliminary Decision

(e) Public Comment

(f) Record of Public Comment

(g) Final Permit Decision

(I) Permit Continuity

18 AAC 50.345. Opearting Permits: Standard

Conditions (effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.350. Operating Permits: Content

(effective 1/18/97)

(a) Purpose of Section

(b) Standard Requirements

(c) Fee Information

(d) Source-Specific Permit Requirements

(e) Facility-Wide Permit Requirements

(f) Other Requirements

(g) Monitoring Requirements

(h) Records

(i) Reporting Requirements

(j) Compliance Certification

(k) Compliance Plan and Schedule

(l) Permit Shield

18 AAC 50.355. Operating Permits: Changes

to a Permitted Facility (effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.360. Operating Permits: Facility

Changes that Violate a Permit Condition

(effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.365. Operating Permits: Facility

Changes that do not Violate a Permit

Condition (effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.370. Operating Permits:

Administrative Revisions (effective

1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.375. Operating Permits: Minor

and Significant Permit Revisions

(effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.380. General Operating Permits

(effective 1/18/97)

Article 4. User Fees

18 AAC 50.400. Permit Administration Fees

(effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.410. Emission Fees (effective

1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.420. Billing Procedures (effective

1/18/97)

Article 9. General Provisions

18 AAC 50.910. Establishing Level of Actual

Emissions (effective 1/18/97)

18 AAC 50.990. Definitions (effective

1/18/97)

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–20469 Filed 8–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[FRL–5868–3]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Plans for Designated Facilities and

Pollutants; States of Iowa, Kansas,

Missouri, and Nebraska

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: On December 19, 1995, the

EPA promulgated Clean Air Act (CAA)

section 111(d)/129 emission guidelines

for existing Municipal Waste

Combustors (MWC) with the capacity to

combust in aggregate greater than 35

megagrams (Mg) per day of municipal

solid waste (MSW). Section 111(d)

requires that states with designated

facilities subject to these emission

guidelines submit to the EPA plans to

control the designated pollutants

addressed in the guidelines. If no

designated facility is located within a

state, the state may submit a letter of

certification to that effect, i.e., a negative

declaration, in lieu of a plan. The EPA

has received negative declarations from

Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska

regarding designated facilities in their

states. Today the EPA is taking action to

approve those negative declarations.

DATES: This action is effective October

3, 1997, unless by September 3, 1997,

adverse or critical comments are

received.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents

relevant to this action are available for

public inspection during normal

business hours at the: Environmental

Protection Agency, Air Planning and

Development Branch, 726 Minnesota

Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Aaron J. Worstell at (913) 551–7787.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 111(d) of the CAA requires

states to submit plans to control certain

pollutants (designated pollutants) at

existing facilities (designated facilities)

whenever standards of performance

have been established under section

111(b) for new sources of the same type,

and the EPA has established emission

guidelines for such existing sources. A

designated pollutant is any pollutant for

which no air quality criteria have been

issued, and which is not included on a

list published under section 108(a) or

section 112(b)(1)(A) of the Act, but

emissions of which are subject to a

standard of performance for new

stationary sources.

On February 11, 1991, the EPA

promulgated section 111(d) emission

guidelines for existing MWC (56 FR

5523). The emission guidelines were

codified at 40 CFR 60 subpart Ca and

applied to existing MWC units with the

capacity to combust greater than 225 Mg

per day of MSW. Section 129 of the Act,

added by the 1990 Amendments,

required that these emission guidelines

be revised to: (1) reflect maximum

available control technology; (2) specify

guideline emission levels for additional

pollutants; and (3) apply to MWC with

capacities less than 225 Mg per day of

MSW. Accordingly, the EPA, on

December 19, 1995, promulgated

emission guidelines that meet both the

requirement of section 111(d) and

section 129 of the CAA. These emission

guidelines were codified at 40 CFR 60

subpart Cb, replacing subpart Ca. The

subpart Cb emission guidelines apply to

existing MWC plants with aggregate

charging capacities greater than 35 Mg

per day of MSW and establish the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 149 / Monday, August 4, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 41873

emission limits for MWC metals, MWC

acid gases, MWC organics, and MWC

nitrogen oxides. Refer to 60 FR 65415

for a complete discussion of subpart Cb.

Subpart B of 40 CFR part 60

establishes procedures to be followed

and requirements to be met in the

development and submission of state

plans for controlling designated

pollutants. Part 62 of the Code of

Federal Regulations provides the

procedural framework for the

submission of these plans. When

designated facilities are located in a

state, a state must develop and submit

a plan for the control of the designated

pollutant. However, 40 CFR 62.06

provides that if there are no existing

sources of the designated pollutant in

the state, the state may submit a letter

of certification to that effect, or negative

declaration, in lieu of a plan. The

negative declaration exempts the state

from the requirements of subpart B for

that designated pollutant.

II. Final Action

The EPA is taking final action to

approve the negative declarations

submitted by the states of Iowa, Kansas,

Missouri, and Nebraska.

The EPA is publishing this action

without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, the EPA is proposing to

approve this action should adverse or

critical comments be filed. This action

is effective October 3, 1997, unless, by

September 3, 1997, adverse or critical

comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments,

this action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public

comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time. If no such comments are

received, the public is advised that this

action is effective October 3, 1997.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request relating to revision to any 111(d)

plan. Each request shall be considered

separately in light of specific technical,

economic, and environmental factors,

and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this regulatory action

from Executive Order 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., the EPA must

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 603

and 604). Alternatively, the EPA may

certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small entities

include small businesses, small not-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000. I hereby

certify that approval of these negative

declarations will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, the EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact

statement to accompany any proposed

or final rule that includes a Federal

mandate that may result in estimated

costs to state, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate; or to

private sector, of $100 million or more.

Under section 205, the EPA must select

the most cost-effective and least

burdensome alternative that achieves

the objectives of the rule and is

consistent with statutory requirements.

Section 203 requires the EPA to

establish a plan for informing and

advising any small governments that

may be significantly or uniquely

impacted by the rule.

The EPA has determined that the

approval action promulgated does not

include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to either state, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector. This Federal action

approves negative declarations in lieu of

regulatory plans, and imposes no new

requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to state, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

D. 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, the

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 this rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5

U.S.C. 804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by October 3, 1997. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the

Administrator of this final rule does not

affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review, nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Municipal waste

incinerators, Nitrogen dioxide,

Particulate matter, and Sulfur oxides.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: July 11, 1997.

Dennis Grams, P.E.,

Regional Administrator.

Part 62, Chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 62—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 62

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Subpart Q—Iowa

2. Subpart Q is amended by adding an

undesignated center heading and

paragraph § 62.3912 to read as follows:

Emissions from Existing Municipal

Waste Combustors With the Capacity to

Burn Greater than 35 Megagrams Per

Day of Municipal Solid Waste

§ 62.3912 Identification of plan-negative

declaration.

Letter from the Iowa Department of

Natural Resources submitted December

27, 1996, certifying that there are no

municipal waste combustors in the state

of Iowa subject to part 60, subpart Cb of

this chapter.
41874 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 149 / Monday, August 4, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Subpart R—Kansas

3. Subpart R is amended by adding an

undesignated center heading and

paragraph § 62.4177 to read as follows:

Emissions From Existing Municipal

Waste Combustors With the Capacity

To Burn Greater than 35 Megagrams

Per Day of Municipal Solid Waste

§ 62.4177 Identification of plan—negative

declaration.

Letter from the Kansas Department of

Health submitted April 26 1996,

certifying that there are no municipal

waste combustors in the state of Kansas

subject to part 60, subpart Cb of this

chapter.

Subpart AA—Missouri

4. Subpart AA is amended by adding

an undesignated center heading and

paragraph § 62.6356 to read as follows:

Emissions From Existing Municipal

Waste Combustors With the Capacity

To Burn Greater than 35 Megagrams

Per Day of Municipal Solid Waste

§ 62.6356 Identification of plan—negative

declaration.

Letter from the Air Pollution Control

Program of the Department of Natural

Resources submitted June 3, 1996,

certifying that there are no municipal

waste combustors in the state of

Missouri subject to part 60, subpart Cb

of this chapter.

Subpart CC—Nebraska

5. Subpart CC is amended by adding

an undesignated center heading and

paragraph § 62.6912 to read as follows:

Emissions From Existing Municipal

Waste Combustors With the Capacity

To Burn Greater than 35 Megagrams

Per Day of Municipal Solid Waste

§ 62.6912 Identification of plan—negative

declaration.

Letter from the Air Quality Section of

the Nebraska Department of

Environmental Quality submitted May

13, 1996, certifying that there are no

municipal waste combustors in the state

of Nebraska subject to part 60, subpart

Cb of this chapter.

[FR Doc. 97–20475 Filed 8–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[OPP–300526; FRL–5735–6]

RIN 2070–AB78

Bacillus Cereus Strain BP01;

Exemption From the Requirement of a

Tolerance.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final Rule.

SUMMARY: This rule establishes an

exemption from the requirement of a

tolerance for residues of the biological

pesticide Bacillus cereus strain BP01 for

use on cotton. Micro Flo Company,

acting through their agent SRA

International, submitted a petition to

EPA under the Federal Food, Drug and

Cosmetic Act as amended by the Food

Quality Protection Act of 1996

requesting the tolerance exemption.

This regulation eliminates the need to

establish a maximum permissible level

for residues of Bacillus cereus strain

BP01 on growing crops.

DATES: This regulation is effective

August 4, 1997. Objections and requests

for hearings must be received by EPA on

or before October 3, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written objections and

hearing requests, identified by the

docket control number [OPP–300526],

must be submitted to: Hearing Clerk

(1900), Environmental Protection

Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. Fees

accompanying objections and hearing

requests shall be labeled ‘‘Tolerance

Petition Fees’’ and forwarded to: EPA

Headquarters Accounting Operations

Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box

360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. A copy

of any objections and hearing requests

filed with the Hearing Clerk identified

by the docket control number, [OPP–

300526], must also be submitted to:

Public Information and Records

Integrity Branch, Information Resources

and Services Division (7506C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring

a copy of objections and hearing

requests to Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA.

A copy of objections and hearing

requests filed with the Hearing Clerk

may be submitted electronically by

sending electronic mail (e-mail) to: oppdocket@epamail.epa.gov. Copies of

electronic objections and hearing

requests must be submitted as an ASCII

file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

Copies of electronic objections and

hearing requests will also be accepted

on disks in WordPerfect 5.1 file format

or ASCII file format. All copies of

electronic objections and hearing

requests must be identified by the

docket number [OPP–300526]. No

Confidential Business Information (CBI)

should be submitted through e-mail.

Copies of electronic objections and

hearing requests on this rule may be

filed online at many Federal Depository

Libraries.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By

mail: James J. Boland, c/o Product

Manager (PM) 90, Biopesticides and

Pollution Prevention Division (7501W),

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.

Office location, telephone number and

e-mail address: 5th fl., CS #1 2800

Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202,

(703) 308–8728, e-mail:

boland.james@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the

Federal Register of June 25, 1997 (62 FR

34277)(FRL–5727–1) EPA issued a

notice pursuant to section 408(d), of the

Federal Food Drug & Cosmetic Act

(FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), announcing

the filing of a pesticide tolerance

petition by SRA International, 1850 M

Street NW., Suite 290, Washington DC,

20036, on behalf of the Micro Flo

Company, P.O. Box 5948, Lakeland

Florida 33807–5948. The notice

contained a summary of the petition

prepared by the petitioner and this

summary contained conclusions and

arguments to support its conclusion that

the petition complied with the Food

Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996.

The petition requested that 40 CFR part

180 be amended by establishing an

exemption from the requirement of a

tolerance for residues of the biological

pest control agent Bacillus cereus strain

BP01 on growing crops.

There were no comments or requests

for referral to an advisory committee

received in response to the notice of

filing.

The data submitted in the petition

and other material have been evaluated.

The toxicology data requirements in

support of this exemption from the

requirement of a tolerance were

satisfied.

I. Risk Assessment and Statutory

Findings

New section 408(c)(2)(A)(i) of the

FFDCA allows EPA to establish an

exemption from the requirement for a

tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide

chemical residue in or on a food) only

if EPA determines that the tolerance is