[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 143 (Monday, July 27, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40049-40053]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19937]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

[[Page 40050]]

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 on-site 
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.

[[Page 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 lock-and-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

[[Page 40052]]

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


Sec. 62.5860  Identification of plan.

    ``Section 111(d) Plan for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills,'' 
submitted by the State on March 4, 1997.


Sec. 62.5861  Identification of sources.

    The plan applies to all existing municipal solid waste landfills 
for which construction, reconstruction, or

[[Page 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.


Sec. 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