Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 40049

3. Subpart PP is amended by adding

a new § 62.10150 and a new

undesignated center heading to read as

follows: Metals, acid gases, organic

compounds and nitrogen oxide

emissions from existing municipal

waste combustors with the capacity to

combust greater than 250 tons per day

of municipal solid waste.

§ 62.10150 Identification of sources.

The plan applies to existing facilities

with a municipal waste combustor

(MWC) unit capacity greater than 250

tons per day of municipal solid waste

(MSW) at the following MWC sites:

(a) Foster Wheeler Charleston

Resource Recovery Facility, Charleston,

South Carolina.

(b) [Reserved]

[FR Doc. 98–19934 Filed 7–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[MN51–01–7276a; FRL–6128–8]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Plans for Designated Facilities and

Pollutants; Minnesota; Control of

Landfill Gas Emissions From Existing

Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The United States

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

is approving the Minnesota State Plan

submittal for implementing the

Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfill

Emission Guidelines. The State’s plan

submittal was made pursuant to

requirements found in the Clean Air Act

(Act). The State’s plan was submitted to

EPA on March 4, 1997, in accordance

with the requirements for adoption and

submittal of State plans for designated

facilities in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B.

It establishes performance standards for

existing MSW landfills and provides for

the implementation and enforcement of

those standards. The EPA finds that

Minnesota’s Plan for existing MSW

landfills adequately addresses all of the

Federal requirements applicable to such

plans. If adverse comments are received

on this action, the EPA will withdraw

this final rule and address the

comments received in response to this

action in a final rule on the related

proposed rule, which is being published

in the proposed rules section of this

Federal Register. A second public

comment period will not be held.

Parties interested in commenting on this

action should do so at this time. This

approval makes federally enforceable

the State’s rule that has been

incorporated by reference.

DATES: The ‘‘direct final’’ is effective on

September 25, 1998, unless EPA

receives adverse or critical comments by

August 26, 1998. Should EPA receive

adverse comments, a timely withdrawal

of the Direct Final Rule will be

published in the Federal Register to

inform the public that the rule will not

take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to: Carlton T. Nash, Chief,

Regulation Development Section , Air

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604.

Copies of the proposed State Plan

submittal and EPA’s analysis are

available for inspection at the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604. (Please telephone

Douglas Aburano at (312) 353–6960

before visiting the Region 5 Office.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Douglas Aburano, Environmental

Engineer, Regulation Development

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),

U.S. EPA, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois

60604, (312) 353–6960.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Under section 111(d) of the Act, EPA

established procedures whereby States

submit plans to control certain existing

sources of ‘‘designated pollutants.’’

Designated pollutants are defined as

pollutants for which a standard of

performance for new sources applies

under section 111, but which are not

‘‘criteria pollutants’’ (i.e., pollutants for

which National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) are set pursuant to

sections 108 and 109 of the Act) or

hazardous air pollutants (HAPs)

regulated under section 112 of the Act

(see 40 CFR 60.21(a)). As required by

section 111(d) of the Act, EPA

established a process at 40 CFR part 60,

subpart B, similar to the process

required by section 110 of the Act

(regarding State Implementation Plan

(SIP) approval) which States must

follow in adopting and submitting a

section 111(d) plan. Whenever EPA

promulgates a new source performance

standard (NSPS) that controls a

designated pollutant, EPA establishes

Emissions Guidelines (EG) in

accordance with 40 CFR 60.22 which

contain information pertinent to the

control of the designated pollutant from

those existing facilities that, but for their

construction prior to the proposal of the

NSPS, would be affected by the

standard (i.e., the ‘‘designated facility’’

as defined at 40 CFR 60.21(b)). Thus, a

State’s section 111(d) plan for a

designated facility must comply with

the EG for that source category as well

as 40 CFR part 60, subpart B.

On March 12, 1996, EPA published

Emissions Guidelines for existing MSW

landfills (EG) at 40 CFR part 60, subpart

Cc (40 CFR 60.30c through 60.36c) and

NSPS for new MSW Landfills at 40 CFR

part 60, subpart WWW (40 CFR 60.750

through 60.759) (see 61 FR 9905–9929).

The pollutant regulated by the NSPS

and EG is MSW landfill emissions,

which contain a mixture of volatile

organic compounds (VOCs), other

organic compounds, methane, and

HAPs. VOC emissions can contribute to

ozone formation which can result in

adverse effects to human health and

vegetation. The health effects of HAPs

include cancer, respiratory irritation,

and damage to the nervous system.

Methane emissions contribute to global

climate change and can result in fires or

explosions when they accumulate in

structures on or off the landfill site. To

determine if control is required,

nonmethane organic compounds

(NMOCs) are measured as a surrogate

for MSW landfill emissions. Thus,

NMOC is considered the designated

pollutant. The designated facility which

is subject to the EG is each existing

MSW landfill (as defined in 40 CFR

60.31c) for which construction,

reconstruction or modification was

commenced before May 30, 1991.

Pursuant to 40 CFR 60.23(a), States

were required to submit a plan for the

control of the designated pollutant to

which the EG applies within nine

months after publication of the EG (i.e.,

by December 12, 1996). If there were no

designated facilities in the State, then

the State was required to submit a

negative declaration by December 12,

1996.

On March 4, 1997, the State of

Minnesota submitted its ‘‘Section 111(d)

Plan for MSW Landfills’’ for

implementing EPA’s MSW landfill EG.

The following provides a brief

discussion of the requirements for an

approvable State plan for existing MSW

landfills and EPA’s review of

Minnesota’s submittal in regard to those

requirements. More detailed

information on the requirements for an

approvable plan and Minnesota’s

submittal can be found in the Technical

Support Document (TSD) accompanying

this document, which is available upon

request.
40050 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

II. Review of Minnesota’s MSW Landfill

Plan

EPA has reviewed Minnesota’s

section 111(d) plan for existing MSW

landfills against the requirements of 40

CFR part 60, subpart B and subpart Cc,

as follows:

A. Identification of Enforceable State

Mechanism for Implementing the EG

40 CFR 60.24(a) requires that the

section 111(d) plan include emissions

standards, defined in 40 CFR 60.21(f) as

‘‘a legally enforceable regulation setting

forth an allowable rate of emissions into

the atmosphere, or prescribing

equipment specifications for control of

air pollution emissions.’’

The State of Minnesota, through the

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

(MPCA), has adopted State rules to

control air emissions from existing

landfills in the State. The rules are

found at Minn. R. 7011.3500 through

7011.3510. They were proposed in the

State Register (21 SR 271) on August 26,

1996, and the notice of adoption

appeared in the State Register (21 SR

993) on January 21, 1997. The rules

became effective five working days after

publication, January 28, 1997. Also

submitted as part of the 111(d) plan

were definitions already adopted at the

State level as part of Solid Waste

regulations. Thus, the State has met the

requirement of 40 CFR 60.24(a) to have

legally enforceable emission standards.

B. Demonstration of the State’s Legal

Authority to Carry out the Section

111(d) State Plan as Submitted

40 CFR 60.26 requires the section

111(d) plan to demonstrate that the

State has legal authority to adopt and

implement the emission standards and

compliance schedules.

MPCA has the legal authority to adopt

and implement the rules governing

landfill gas emissions from existing

MSW landfills. The MPCA enclosed a

letter dated February 3, 1997, from the

Minnesota Assistant Attorney General,

Kathleen Winters, that identifies the

statutory sources of the MPCA’s legal

authority.

EPA has reviewed the Assistant

Attorney General’s opinion and the

State laws and has determined that the

MPCA has adequate legal authority to

adopt and implement the section 111(d)

plan in accordance with 40 CFR 60.26.

C. Inventory of Existing MSW Landfills

in the State Affected by the State Plan

40 CFR 60.25(a) requires the section

111(d) plan to include a complete

source inventory of all existing MSW

landfills (i.e., those MSW landfills that

were constructed, reconstructed, or

modified prior to May 30, 1991) in the

State that are subject to the plan. This

includes all existing landfills that have

accepted waste since November 8, 1987

or that have additional capacity for

future waste deposition.

A list of the existing MSW landfills in

Minnesota and an estimate of NMOC

emissions from each landfill have been

submitted as part of the State’s landfill

111(d) plan.

D. Inventory of Emissions From Existing

MSW Landfills in the State

40 CFR 60.25(a) requires that the plan

include an emissions inventory that

estimates emissions of the pollutant

regulated by the EG, which, in the case

of MSW landfills, is NMOC. Minnesota

included in Attachment V of its section

111(d) plan an estimation of NMOC

emissions for all of the landfills in the

State using the Landfill Air Emissions

Estimation Model and AP–42 default

emission factors.

E. Emission Limitations for MSW

Landfills

40 CFR 60.24(c) specifies that the

State plan must include emission

standards that are no less stringent than

the EG (except as specified in 40 CFR

60.24(f) which allows for less stringent

emission limitations on a case-by-case

basis if certain conditions are met). 40

CFR 60.33c contains the emissions

standards applicable to existing MSW

landfills.

The MPCA rules require existing

MSW landfills to comply with the same

equipment design criteria and level of

control as prescribed in the NSPS. The

controls required by the NSPS are the

same as those required by the EG. Thus,

the emission limitations/standards are

‘‘no less stringent than’’ subpart Cc,

which meets the requirements of 40 CFR

60.24(c).

Section 60.24(f) allows States, in

certain case-by-case situations, to

provide for a less stringent standard or

longer compliance schedule. Minn. R.

7011.3505, subp. 6, requires an owner/

operator seeking to apply a less

stringent standard, or longer compliance

schedule, to submit a written request to

the MPCA and the EPA which

demonstrates compliance with the

criteria set forth in to 40 CFR 60.24(f).

Thus, MPCA’s plan meets the

emission limitation requirements by

requiring emission limitations that are

no less stringent than the EG.

F. A Process for State Review and

Approval of Site-Specific Gas Collection

and Control System Design Plans

40 CFR 60.33c(b) in the EG requires

State plans to include a process for State

review and approval of site-specific

design plans for required gas collection

and control systems.

The MPCA’s rules regulating landfill

gas emissions from MSW landfills

essentially make the federal NSPS

applicable to existing MSW landfills.

The design criteria and the design

specifications for active collection

systems specified in the NSPS also

apply to existing landfills, unless a

request pursuant to 40 CFR 60.24(f) has

been approved by the MPCA and by

EPA. Once a design plan is received,

MPCA will record the date the plan is

received. MPCA will then review the

submittal for completeness and will

request additional information if

necessary. A review of the design plan

will be completed within 180 days of its

receipt.

Thus, Minnesota’s section 111(d) plan

adequately addresses this requirement.

G. Compliance Schedules

The State’s section 111(d) plan must

include a compliance schedule that

owners and operators of affected MSW

landfills must meet in complying with

the requirements of the plan. 40 CFR

60.36c provides that planning, awarding

of contracts, and installation of air

emission collection and control

equipment capable of meeting the EG

must be accomplished within 30

months of the effective date of a State

emission standard for MSW landfills. 40

CFR 60.24(e)(1) provides that any

compliance schedule extending more

than 12 months from the date required

for plan submittal shall include legally

enforceable increments of progress as

specified in 40 CFR 60.21(h), including

deadlines for submittal of a final control

plan, awarding of contracts for emission

control systems, initiation of on-site

construction or installation of emission

control equipment, completion of onsite construction/installation of

emission control equipment, and final

compliance.

MPCA has adopted enforceable

compliance schedules in Minn. R.

7011.3505 Subpart 5. The State’s rules

require landfills that are required to

install collection and control systems be

in final compliance with the

requirements of the State plan no later

than 30 months from the effective date

of State adoption of the State rule or, for

those MSW landfills which are not

currently subject to the collection and

control system requirements, within 30

months of first becoming subject to such

requirements (i.e., within 30 months of

reporting a NMOC emission rate of 50

Mg/yr or greater). Thus, the State’s rule

satisfies the requirement of 40 CFR

60.36c.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 40051

H. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping

and Reporting Requirements

40 CFR 60.34c specifies the testing

and monitoring provisions that State

plans must include (60.34c references

the requirements found in 40 CFR

60.753 to 60.756), and 40 CFR 60.35c

specifies the reporting and

recordkeeping requirements (60.35c

references to the requirements found in

40 CFR 60.757 and 60.758). The MPCA

has adopted by reference 40 CFR 60.750

through 60.759 with certain specific

exceptions that apply only to those

sources subject to the EG standards.

Minn. R. 7011.3505 Subpart 2 allows

an exception to the quarterly monitoring

requirements for surface methane

concentrations in 40 CFR 60.756(f). The

State rule only requires surface methane

concentration monitoring during the

second, third, and fourth quarters of the

calendar year. In a November 14, 1997

letter to EPA, the State submitted

extensive climatological data and

explained why it believes this data

shows that exceedingly cold

temperatures and snow cover during the

winter quarter (essentially the months of

December, January and February) would

make monitoring of surface methane

concentrations nearly impossible. In

examining the data for the MSW

landfills that currently appear to be

subject to the collection and control

system requirements of the State plan,

the State found the following

information:

1. The daily mean temperatures in

range from 8.1 to 17.9 degrees

Fahrenheit during December, January

and February;

2. Average wind chill factors range

from ¥9.0 degrees to 3.0 degrees

Fahrenheit;

3. An average total snowfall receive

each year is between 45 and 50 inches,

of which 27 to 28 inches are received in

December, January and February;

4. At least one inch of snow covers

the area from November 24 to April 1;

and

5. The mean duration of snow on the

ground is:

a. Greater than or equal to 1 inch, 95–

100 days;

b. Greater than or equal to 3 inches,

75–90 days;

c. Greater than or equal to 6 inches,

50–65 days;

d. Greater than or equal to 12 inches,

20–30 days; and

e. Greater than or equal to 24 inches,

5–10 days.

Thus, MPCA contends that, with

mean temperatures during the winter

quarter below freezing and with snow

covering the landfill at depths

sometimes greater than two feet, surface

monitoring for methane during the

winter quarter is not practical and, at

best, extremely difficult.

EPA believes that the State has

provided substantial documentation

showing that the extremely cold

temperatures and wind chill factors, as

well as the snow cover, justify the

exemption from first quarter monitoring

for surface methane concentrations. If

any other existing MSW landfills

become subject to the State’s section

111(d) plan in the future, EPA will need

to re-evaluate the State’s exemption

from first quarter monitoring based on

the location and meteorological data for

that location.

40 CFR 60.756(b)(2) and 60.756(c)(2)

require the installation of a gas flow rate

measuring device (which will record the

flow to the control device) or that the

bypass line valve shall be secured in the

closed position with a car-seal or a lockand-key type configuration. These

requirements assume that there is some

way to bypass the control device. If

there is no bypass, then this

requirement for equipment to monitor

bypasses is obviated. Minn. R 7011.3505

Subp. 3 allows landfill owners or

operators seeking to comply with 40

CFR 60.756(b)(2) and 60.756(c)(2), to

alternatively confirm that there is no

means to bypass the control device in

the design plan. Therefore, MPCA’s

alternative compliance method is

acceptable.

Consequently, EPA finds that the

State’s section 111(d) plan for MSW

landfills adequately addresses the

testing, monitoring, reporting, and

recordkeeping requirements of the EG.

I. A Record of Public Hearings on the

State Plan

40 CFR 60.23 contains the

requirements for public hearings that

must be met by the State in adopting a

section 111(d) plan. Additional

guidance is found in EPA’s ‘‘Summary

of the Requirements for Section 111(d)

State Plans for Implementing the

Municipal Solid Waste Landfill

Emission Guidelines (EPA–456R/96–

005, October 1996).’’ Minnesota

included documents in its plan

submittal demonstrating that these

procedures, as well as the State’s

administrative procedures, were

complied with in adopting the State’s

plan. Therefore, EPA finds that

Minnesota has adequately met this

requirement.

J. Submittal of Annual State Progress

Reports to EPA

40 CFR 60.25(e) and (f) require States

to submit to EPA annual reports on the

progress of plan enforcement.

Minnesota committed in the submittal

letter for its section 111(d) plan to

submit annual progress reports to EPA.

The first progress report will be

submitted by the State one year after

EPA approval of the State plan.

III. Final Action

Based on the rationale discussed

above and in further detail in the TSD

associated with this action, EPA is

approving Minnesota’s March 4, 1997

submittal of its section 111(d) plan for

the control of landfill gas from existing

MSW landfills. As provided by 40 CFR

60.28(c), any revisions to Minnesota’s

section 111(d) plan or associated

regulations will not be considered part

of the applicable plan until submitted

by the State in accordance with 40 CFR

60.28(a) or (b), as applicable, and until

approved by EPA in accordance with 40

CFR part 60, subpart B.

EPA has been involved in litigation

over the requirements of the MSW

landfill EG and NSPS since the summer

of 1996. On November 13, 1997, EPA

issued a notice of proposed settlement

in National Solid Wastes Management

Association v. Browner, et. al., No. 96–

1152 (D.C. Cir), in accordance with

section 113(g) of the Act. (See 62 FR

60898.) It is important to note that the

proposed settlement does not vacate or

void the existing MSW landfill EG or

NSPS. Pursuant to the proposed

settlement agreement, EPA published a

direct final rulemaking on June 16,

1998, in which EPA is amending 40 CFR

part 60, subparts Cc and WWW, to add

clarifying language, make editorial

amendments, and to correct

typographical errors. See 63 FR 32783–

4, 32743–53. EPA regulations at 40 CFR

60.23(a)(2) provide that a State has nine

months to adopt and submit any

necessary State Plan revisions after

publication of a final revised emission

guideline document. Thus, States are

not yet required to submit State Plan

revisions to address the June 16, 1998

direct final amendments to the EG. In

addition, as stated in the June 16, 1998

preamble, the changes to 40 CFR part

60, subparts Cc and WWW, do not

significantly modify the requirements of

those subparts (see 63 FR 32744).

Accordingly, the MSW landfill EG

published on March 12, 1996 was used

as a basis for EPA’s review of

Minnesota’s submittal. Minnesota is not

required to make a subsequent submittal

since its original submittal was

reviewed against the March 12, 1996 EG

and these latest amendments to the EG

do not increase the stringency of the

rule or add additional control

requirements, nor do the amendments
40052 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

alter control, monitoring, recordkeeping,

or reporting requirements of the March

12, 1996 EG (see 63 FR 32750).

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, EPA is proposing to

approve the State Plan should adverse

or critical comments be filed. This

action will be effective September 25,

1998, unless, by August 26, 1998,

adverse or critical comments are

received.

If 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 the companion proposed rule.

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 will be

effective on September 25, 1998.

IV. Administrative

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this regulatory action

from Executive Order 12866 review.

B. Executive Order 13045

This final rule is not subject to

Executive Order 13045, entitled

‘‘Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks,’’ because it is not an

‘‘economically significant’’ action under

Executive Order 12866.

C. Regulatory Flexibility

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

generally requires an agency to conduct

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any

rule subject to notice and comment

rulemaking requirements 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 not-for-profit enterprises, and

small governmental jurisdictions. This

direct final rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities because State

Plan approvals under section 111(d) of

the CAA do not create any new

requirements but simply approve

requirements that the State is already

imposing. Therefore, because the

Federal State Plan approval does not

create any new requirements, I certify

that this action will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-State relationship under the

CAA preparation of a flexibility analysis

would constitute Federal inquiry into

the economic reasonableness of a State

action. The CAA forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S.

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

D. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

undertake various actions in association

with 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 the private sector, of $100 million

or more. This Federal action approves

pre-existing requirements under State

law, and imposes no new requirements.

Accordingly, no additional costs to

state, local, or tribal governments, or the

private sector, result from this action.

E. Audit Privilege and Immunity Law

Nothing in this action should be

construed as making any determination

or expressing any position regarding

Minnesota’s audit privilege and penalty

immunity law sections 114C.20 to

114C.31 of the Minnesota Statute or its

impact upon any approved provision in

the State Plan. The action taken herein

does not express or imply any

viewpoint on the question of whether

there are legal deficiencies in this or any

other Act program resulting from the

effect of Minnesota’s audit privilege and

immunity law. A State audit privilege

and immunity law can affect only State

enforcement and cannot have any

impact on Federal enforcement

authorities. EPA may at any time invoke

its authority under the Act including,

for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211

or 213, to enforce the requirements or

prohibitions of the State plan,

independently of any State enforcement

effort. In addition, citizen enforcement

under section 304 of the CAA is

likewise unaffected by a State audit

privilege or immunity law.

F. Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General

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. The EPA will

submit 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 United States prior to the

publication of the rule in the Federal

Register. This rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’

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

G. 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 September 25, 1998. 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,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Methane, Municipal solid

waste landfills, Nonmethane organic

compounds, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: July 10, 1998.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting 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. 7401–7642.

2. Subpart Y is amended by adding an

undesignated center heading and

sections 62.5860, 62.5861 and 62.5862

to read as follows:

Landfill Gas Emissions From Existing

Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

§ 62.5860 Identification of plan.

‘‘Section 111(d) Plan for Municipal

Solid Waste Landfills,’’ submitted by

the State on March 4, 1997.

§ 62.5861 Identification of sources.

The plan applies to all existing

municipal solid waste landfills for

which construction, reconstruction, or
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 40053

modification was commenced before

May 30, 1991 that accepted waste at any

time since November 8, 1987 or that

have additional capacity available for

future waste deposition, as described in

40 CFR part 60, subpart Cc.

§ 62.5862 Effective date.

The effective date of the plan for

municipal solid waste landfills is

September 25, 1998.

[FR Doc. 98–19937 Filed 7–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[FRL–6129–1]

RIN 2060–AF70

Extension of Operating Permits

Program Interim Approval Expiration

Dates

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This action proposes to

amend Appendix A of the operating

permits regulations codified in part 70

of chapter I of title 40 of the Code of

Federal Regulations. Those regulations

were originally promulgated on July 21,

1992. These amendments to Appendix

A would extend up to June 1, 2000 all

operating permits program interim

approvals. This action would allow the

program revisions necessary to correct

interim approval deficiencies to be

combined with program revisions

necessary to implement the revisions to

part 70 that are anticipated to be

promulgated in December 1999.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be

received on or before August 26, 1998.

For those programs whose interim

approval dates would be amended by

this action, interim approval would

expire on June 1, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments

should be submitted (in duplicate, if

possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket

and Information Center (6102),

Attention Docket Number A–93–50 (see

docket section below), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.

The EPA requests that a separate copy

also be sent to the contact person listed

below.

Docket. Supporting material used in

developing the proposal and final

regulatory revisions is contained in

Docket Number A–93–50. This docket is

available for public inspection and

copying between 8:30 a.m. and 5:30

p.m., Monday through Friday, at the

address listed above, or by calling (202)

260–7548. The Docket is located at the

above address in Room M–1500,

Waterside Mall (ground floor). A

reasonable fee may be charged for

copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Roger Powell, Mail Drop 12, United

States Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning

and Standards, Information Transfer

and Program Integration Division,

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

27711 (telephone 919–541–5331, e-mail:

powell.roger@epa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If no

relevant, adverse comments are timely

received, no further activity is

contemplated in relation to this

proposal, and the direct final rule in the

final rules section of this Federal

Register will automatically go into effect

on the date specified in that final

rulemaking. Public comment received

will be addressed in a subsequent final

rule based on this proposal. Because

EPA will not institute a second

comment period on this proposal, any

parties interested in commenting should

do so during this comment period.

For further supplemental information,

the detailed rationale, and the rule

provisions, see the information

provided in the direct final rule in the

final rules section of this Federal

Register.

Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

The docket for this proposed action is

A–93–50. The docket is an organized

and complete file of all the information

submitted to, or otherwise considered

by, EPA in the development of this

proposed rulemaking. The principal

purposes of the docket are: (1) to allow

interested parties a means to identify

and locate documents so that the parties

can effectively participate in the

rulemaking process, and (2) to serve as

the record in case of judicial review

(except for interagency review

materials). The docket is available for

public inspection at EPA’s Air Docket,

which is listed under the ADDRESSES

section of this notice.

B. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866

Under E.O. 12866 (58 FR 51735,

October 4, 1993), the Agency must

determine whether each regulatory

action is ‘‘significant,’’ and therefore

subject to the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) review and the

requirements of the Order. The Order

defines ‘‘significant’’ regulatory action

as one that is likely to lead to a rule that

may:

1. Have an annual effect on the

economy of $100 million or more,

adversely and materially affecting 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

obligation of recipients thereof.

4. Raise novel legal or policy issues

arising out of legal mandates, the

President’s priorities, or the principles

set forth in E.O. 12866.

Pursuant to the terms of E.O. 12866,

it has been determined that this

proposed action is not a ‘‘significant’’

regulatory action because it would not

substantially change the existing part 70

requirements for States or sources;

requirements which have already

undergone OMB review. Rather than

impose any new requirements, this

action would only extend an existing

mechanism. As such, this action is

exempted from OMB review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Compliance

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.

605(b), the Administrator certifies that

this proposed action would not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. In

developing the original part 70

regulations, the Agency determined that

they would not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Similarly, the

same conclusion was reached in an

initial regulatory flexibility analysis

performed in support of the proposed

part 70 revisions. This action would not

substantially alter the part 70

regulations as they pertain to small

entities and accordingly would not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

The OMB has approved the

information collection requirements

contained in part 70 under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq. and has

assigned OMB control number 2060–

0243. The Information Collection

Request (ICR) prepared for part 70

would not be affected by the action in

this proposed rulemaking action

because the part 70 ICR determined

burden on a nationwide basis, assuming