68904 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 15, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

agencies to evaluate existing technical

standards when developing a new

regulation. To comply with NTTAA,

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available

and applicable when developing

programs and policies unless doing so

would be inconsistent with applicable

law or otherwise impractical.

The EPA believes that VCS are

inapplicable to this action. Today’s

action does not require the public to

perform activities conducive to the use

of VCS.

I. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by January 16, 2001.

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

§ 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Intergovermental

relations, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Dated: October 27, 2000.

Gary Guleziah,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

Title 40, Chapter I of the Code of

Federal Regulations, is amended as

follows:

PART 52—APPROVAL AND

PROMULGATION OF

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

2. Section 52.2575 is amended by

adding paragraph (b)(3) to read as

follows:

§ 52.2575 Control strategy: Sulfur dioxide.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(3) An SO2 maintenance plan was

submitted by the State of Wisconsin on

November 5, 1999, for the City of

Rhinelander, Oneida County.

PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS

FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING

PURPOSES

1. The authority citation for part 81

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

2. Section 81.350 is amended by

revising the entry for Oneida County in

the table entitled ‘‘Wisconsin-SO2’’ to

read as follows:

§ 81.350 Wisconsin.

WISCONSIN—SO2

Designated area Does not meet primary standards

Does not meet secondary standards Cannot be classified Better than national

standards

*******

Oneida County ................................................ .................................... .................................... .................................... X

*******

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 00–29221 Filed 11–14–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[MO 117–1117a; FRL–6900–8]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Plans for Designated Facilities and

Pollutants; Control of Landfill

Emissions From Municipal Solid Waste

Landfills; State of Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a revision to

the state of Missouri’s section 111(d)

plan for controlling emissions from

existing municipal solid waste (MSW)

landfills. The plan adopts the revisions

to the Federal Emission Guidelines

published June 16, 1998, and February

24, 1999. Approval of the revised plan

will ensure that the state plan contains

the most current Federal requirements.

DATES: This rule is effective on January

16, 2001 without further notice, unless

EPA receives adverse comment by

December 15, 2000. If EPA receives such

comments, it will publish a timely

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the

Federal Register and inform the public

that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments must be

submitted to Wayne Kaiser, Air

Planning and Development Branch, 901

North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas

66101.

Copies of documents relative to this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the above listed Region 7

location. The interested persons

wanting to examine these documents

should make an appointment with the

office at least 24 hours in advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Wayne Kaiser at (913) 551–7603.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document whenever

‘‘we, us, or our’’ is used, we mean EPA.

Background

Standards and guidelines for new and

existing MSW landfills were

promulgated under the authority of

sections 111 and 129 of the CAA. These

standards are 40 CFR part 60, subpart

WWW, new source performance

standards (NSPS) for new MSW

landfills, and subpart Cc, emission

guidelines (EG) for existing MSW

landfills. The final NSPS and EG were

published in the Federal Register on

March 12, 1996.

EPA subsequently revised these

landfill rules twice, on June 16, 1998,

and February 24, 1999. These actions

amend, correct errors, and clarify

regulatory text of the March 12, 1996

rule.

We first approved Missouri’s 111(d)

plan for MSW landfills on April 24 1998

(63 FR 20320.) The state’s plan consists

primarily of two state rules which adopt

the Federal landfill requirements

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 221 / Wednesday, November 15, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 68905

promulgated on March 12, 1996. One

state rule is applicable to the St. Louis

area, 10 CSR 10–5.490, and the other is

applicable to the remainder of the state,

10 CSR 10–6.310.

The Missouri Department of Natural

Resources (MDNR) recently revised

these two rules to incorporate the EPA

revisions. The state rules became

effective on July 30, 2000. The state has

incorporated these revised rules into its

revised 111(d) plan and submitted the

plan and rules to us for approval

pursuant to 111(d).

We have evaluated the state plan

revision against criteria in the EG and

against the plan approval criteria at 40

CFR 60.23 through 60.26, subpart B,

‘‘Adoption and Submittal of State Plans

for Designated Facilities.’’

The state plan meets all of the

applicable requirements of 40 CFR part

60, subpart B and subpart Cc.

Final Action

We are approving a revision to the

Missouri 111(d) plan for MSW landfills

which incorporates the most recent EPA

requirements.

Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and

therefore is not subject to review by the

Office of Management and Budget. This

action merely approves state law as

meeting Federal requirements and

imposes no additional requirements

beyond those imposed by state law.

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies

that this rule 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 rule approves

preexisting 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 (Public Law 104–4).

For the same reason, this rule also does

not significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of tribal governments, as

specified by Executive Order 13084 (63

FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule 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 (64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999), because it merely

approves a state rule implementing a

Federal standard, and does not alter the

relationship or the distribution of power

and responsibilities established in the

CAA. This rule also is not subject to

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,

April 23, 1997), because it is not

economically significant.

In reviewing state plan submissions,

our role is to approve state choices,

provided that they meet the criteria of

the CAA. In this context, in the absence

of a prior existing requirement for the

state to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS), we have no authority

to disapprove a state plan for failure to

use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent

with applicable law for EPA, when it

reviews a state plan, to use VCS in place

of a state plan that otherwise satisfies

the provisions of the CAA. 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 (61

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing

this rule, we have 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 (53 FR

8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the

takings implications of 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. We will submit a

report containing this rule and other

required information to the United

States Senate, the United States House

of Representatives, and the Comptroller

General of the United States prior to

publication of the rule 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).

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 January 16, 2001. 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, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur

oxides.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Dated: October 25, 2000.

Dennis Grams,

Regional Administrator, Region 7.

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 AA—Missouri

2. Section 62.6357 is amended by

adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 62.6357 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(d) Amended plan for the control of

air emissions from Municipal Solid

Waste Landfills submitted by the

Missouri Department of Natural

Resources on September 8, 2000. The

effective date of the amended plan is

January 16, 2001.

[FR Doc. 00–29058 Filed 11–14–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[FL–86–200028(a); FRL–6902–4]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Plans for Designated Facilities and

Pollutants: Florida

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is approving the section

111(d) Plan submitted by the Florida