[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 91 (Thursday, May 10, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23851-23853]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-11829]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[Region 2 Docket No. NY46-217a, FRL-6977-2]


Approval and Promulgation of State Plans For Designated 
Facilities; NY

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the New York supplementary submittal for 
meeting EPA's conditional approval of the New York State Plan for 
regulating existing MSW Landfills. The State Plan establishes 
performance standards for existing Municipal Solid Waste landfills 
located in New York State and provides for the implementation and 
enforcement of those standards, which will reduce the designated 
pollutants.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on July 9, 2001 without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 11, 2001. 
If EPA receives such comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in 
the Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take 
effect.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Raymond Werner, Chief, 
Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 
290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866.
    Copies of the state submittals are available at the following 
addresses for inspection during normal business hours:
    Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, Air Programs 
Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
    New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division 
of Air Resources, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233.
    Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket and 
Information Center, Air Docket (6102), 401 M Street, SW., Washington, 
DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Flamm, Air Programs Branch, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 
New

[[Page 23852]]

York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4021, email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#21474d404c4c0f4253404846614451400f464e57"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7d1b111c1010531e0f1c141a3d180d1c531a120b">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 19, 1999 (64 FR 38582), EPA conditionally approved the New 
York State Plan for regulating existing Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) 
Landfills. The reader is referred to the July 19, 1999 rulemaking 
action for a more detailed description and the rationale of EPA's 
conditional approval of the New York MSW Landfills State Plan. The 
conditional approval was contingent on New York providing EPA with 
modified Title V or State Operating Permits containing compliance 
schedules with all five increments of progress outlined in Subpart Cc 
of 40 CFR part 60, the Emission Guidelines for existing Municipal Solid 
Waste Landfills. The permits were due within one year of the effective 
date of the conditional approval, September 17, 1999.
    On September 18, 2000, the New York State Department of 
Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) submitted a statement that NYSDEC 
inspected all previously identified landfills in New York that meet the 
criteria for a major source. The NYSDEC identified one landfill out of 
compliance and one newly identified landfill which is currently under 
review by the NSDEC and which might require controls. The NYSDEC stated 
that during the inspections it was confirmed that the rest of the 
landfills in question were in compliance with New York's State Plan 
thereby making increments of progress unnecessary for these landfills.
    The two landfills that are not in compliance currently are the 
Ontario Landfill and the Babylon Landfill. EPA received a timely Title 
V operating permit with appropriate increments of progress and 
compliance deadlines for the Ontario Landfill. The Babylon Landfill was 
discovered only recently by NYSDEC, and EPA is confident that the 
landfill was discovered in good faith and that an appropriate 
applicability determination will be completed in a timely manner and a 
compliance schedule with increments of progress will be submitted to 
the EPA if they are needed. All remaining landfills in New York have 
met the requirements for all five increments of progress. Should New 
York identify any new Municipal Solid Waste Landfills that meet the 
existing landfill criteria and require controls, New York shall submit 
increments of progress for those facilities as well to the EPA.

Conclusion

    EPA has evaluated the Municipal Solid Waste Landfill State Plan 
submitted by New York for consistency with the Act, EPA guidelines and 
policy. EPA has determined that New York's State Plan contains all 
approvable elements and critical compliance dates. Therefore, EPA is 
approving New York's Plan to implement and enforce 40 CFR Subpart Cc, 
as it applies to existing MSW Landfills.
    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the State Plan revision 
should adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective July 9, 
2001 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments 
by June 11, 2001.
    If the EPA receives adverse comments, then EPA will publish a 
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the 
rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a 
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not 
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time.

Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
final action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore 
is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This 
final 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 final 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 pre-existing 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 final 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 final 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 Clean Air Act. This final 
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, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a State Plan submission for failure to use VCS. It would 
thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a 
State Plan submission, to use VCS in place of a State Plan submission 
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. 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 final rule, EPA has 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. 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

[[Page 23853]]

States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This 
rule is not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule 
will be effective July 9, 2001.
    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 July 9, 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, Intergovernmental 
relations, Methane, Municipal solid waste landfills, Nonmethane organic 
compounds, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 19, 2001.
William J. Muszynski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 01-11829 Filed 5-9-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>