Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 28375

the Port of Chicago by the Ninth Coast

Guard District Local Notice to Mariners,

Marine information broadcasts, and

facsimile broadcasts may also be made.

Additionally, the Coast Guard has not

received any negative reports from small

entities affected during this display in

previous years.

If you think that your business,

organization, or governmental

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity

and that this rule would have a

significant economic impact on it,

please submit a comment (see

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it

qualifies and how and to what degree

this rule would economically affect it.

Assistance for Small Entities

Under section 213(a) of the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–

121), we want to assist small entities in

understanding this rule so that they can

better evaluate its effects and participate

in the rulemaking process. If the rule

would affect your small business,

organization, or governmental

jurisdiction and you have questions

concerning its provisions or options for

compliance, please contact Marine

Safety Office Chicago (see ADDRESSES.)

Small businesses may send comments

on the actions of Federal employees

who enforce, or otherwise determine

compliance with, Federal regulations to

the Small Business and Agriculture

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman

and the Regional Small Business

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The

Ombudsman evaluates these actions

annually and rates each agency’s

responsiveness to small business. If you

wish to comment on actions by

employees of the Coast Guard, call 1–

888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247).

Collection of Information

This rule would call for no new

collection of information under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

U.S.C. 3501–3520).

Federalism

We have analyzed this rule under

Executive Order 13132 and have

determined that this rule does not have

implications for federalism under that

Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) governs

the issuance of Federal regulations that

require unfunded mandates. An

unfunded mandate is a regulation that

requires a state, local, or tribal

government or the private sector to

incur direct costs without the Federal

Government’s having first provided the

funds to pay those costs. This rule

would not impose an unfunded

mandate.

Taking of Private Property

This rule would not effect a taking of

private property or otherwise have

taking implications under Executive

Order 12630, Governmental Actions and

Interference with Constitutionally

Protected Property Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

This rule meets applicable standards

in sections 3(a) and 3(b) (2) of Executive

Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to

minimize litigation, eliminate

ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

rule under Executive Order 13045,

Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks. This rule is not an economically

significant rule and does not concern an

environmental risk to health or risk to

safety that may disproportionately affect

children.

Environment

We have considered the

environmental impact of this rule and

concluded that, under figure 2–1,

paragraph 32(g) of Commandant

Instruction M16475.1C, this rule is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation. A

written categorical exclusion

determination is available in the docket

for inspection or copying where

indicated under ADDRESSES.

Indian Tribal Governments

This rule does not have tribal

implications under Executive Order

13175, Consultation and Coordination

with Indian Tribal Governments,

because it does not have a substantial

direct effect on one or more Indian

tribes, on the relationship between the

Federal Government and Indian tribes,

or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities between the Federal

Government and Indian tribes.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation

(water), Reporting and record keeping

requirements, Security measures,

Waterways.

For the reasons discussed in the

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33

CFR Part 165 as follows:

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

1. The authority citation for Part 165

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191,

33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5;

49 CFR 1.46.

2. A new temporary section 165.T09–

013 is added to read as follows:

§ 165.T09–013 Safety Zone: Chicago

Harbor, Chicago, Illinois.

(a) Location. The safety zone will

encompass the waters of the Chicago

Harbor, including a portion of the

Monroe Street Harbor and the entrance

to the Monroe Street Harbor, bounded

by the following positions: starting at

41°52.43 N, 087°36.43 W, thence East to

41°52.43 N, 087°36.16 W, thence South

to 41°52.28 N, 087°36.16 W, thence

West to 41°52.28 N, 087°36.43 W,

thence North back to the first position.

(b) Effective time and date. This

section is effective from 9 p.m. (local

time) until 10 p.m. (local time) on May

26, 2001. In the event the fireworks

display is cancelled due to inclement

weather, this section is effective during

these same times on May 27, 2001. The

Coast Guard Captain of the Port,

Chicago, and the designated Patrol

Commander have the authority to

terminate this event at any time. The

designated on scene Patrol Commander

may be contacted via VHF Channel 16.

(c) Regulations. In accordance with

the general regulations in 165.23 of this

part, entry into this zone is prohibited

unless authorized by the Coast Guard

Captain of the Port Chicago, or his

designated on scene representative.

Dated: May 11, 2001.

R.E. Seebald,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the

Port Chicago.

[FR Doc. 01–12978 Filed 5–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[WV–042–6011a ; FRL–6983–6]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Plans for Designated Facilities and

Pollutants; State of West Virginia;

Control of Emissions from Existing

Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: This action approves the

municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill

28376 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

111(d) plan submitted by the State of

West Virginia, Division of

Environmental Protection (DEP), for the

purpose of controlling landfill gas

emissions from existing landfills. Also,

this action delegates EPA authority to

enforce the Federal landfill 111(d)

plan’s compliance schedules. The plan

was submitted to fulfill requirements of

the Clean Air Act (CAA). The West

Virginia (WV) plan establishes emission

limits for existing MSW landfills, and

provides for the implementation and

enforcement of those limits. Except as

noted, herein, upon the effective date of

this rule approving West Virginia’s

111(d) plan for landfills, the Federal

plan promulgated on November 8, 1999,

will no longer apply in West Virginia.

DATES: This final rule is effective July

23, 2001 unless within June 22, 2001

adverse or critical comments are

received. If adverse comment is

received, EPA 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: Comments may be mailed to

David L. Arnold, Chief, Air Quality

Planning and Information Services

Branch, Mailcode 3AP21,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

Copies of the documents relevant to this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations: Air

Protection Division, Environmental

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;

and the West Virginia Division of

Environmental Protection, Office of Air

Quality, 7012 MacCorkle Avenue, South

East, Charleston, West Virginia 25304–

2943.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James B. Topsale at (215) 814–2190, or

by e-mail at topsale.jim@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This document is divided into Sections I—

V, and answers the questions posed below.

I. General Provisions

What action is EPA approving?

What is a State 111(d) plan?

What pollutant(s) will this action control?

What are the expected environmental and

public health benefits from controlling

landfill gas (LFG) emissions?

II. Federal Requirements the West Virginia

DEP 111(d) Plan Must Meet for Approval

What general EPA requirements must the

DEP meet to receive approval of its landfill

111(d) plan?

What does the West Virginia State Plan

contain?

Does the West Virginia plan meet all EPA

requirements for approval?

III. Requirements for Affected MSW Landfill

Owners/Operators Must Meet

How do I determine if my MSW landfill is

subject to the WV 111(d) plan?

What general requirements must I meet as an

affected landfill owner/operator who is

subject to the EPA approved WV plan?

If my landfill is subject to the plan’s

requirement for installation of a LFG

collection and control system, what

emissions limits must I meet, and in what

time frame?

Are there any operational requirements for

my installed LFG collection and control

system?

What are the testing, monitoring,

recordkeeping, and reporting requirements

for my landfill?

Am I required to apply for a Title V permit?

If I modify or expand the capacity of my

landfill, what additional requirements

must I meet?

IV. Final EPA Action

V. Administrative Requirements

I. General Provisions

Question: What action is EPA

approving?

Answer: EPA is approving the State of

West Virginia (WV) landfill 111(d) plan,

as submitted by the WV Division of

Environmental Protection (DEP), Office

of Air Quality, on May 29, 1998, and as

amended on May 15, 2000, and

December 20, 2000. Also, EPA is

approving the requested delegation of

the November 8, 1999 promulgated

Federal landfill 111(d) plan (64 FR

60689) generic compliance schedule,

including the requirements for the

initial design capacity and non-methane

organic compound (NMOC) emissions

reports. EPA is publishing this approval

action without prior proposal because

we view this as a noncontroversial

action and anticipate no adverse

comments.

Question: What is a State 111(d) plan?

Answer: Section 111(d) of the Clean

Air Act (CAA) requires that

‘‘designated’’ pollutants, controlled

under section 111(b) standards of

performance for new stationary sources,

must also be controlled at existing

sources (i.e., designated facilities) in the

same source category. Furthermore,

section 111(d) requires EPA to establish

procedures for state submittal and EPA

approval of state plans that implement

state adopted emissions guidelines (EG),

promulgated by EPA, for the control of

designated pollutants and facilities.

State 111(d) plans, approved by EPA,

implement and provide for federal

enforcement of the EG requirements.

Question: What pollutant(s) will this

action control?

Answer: The promulgated March 12,

1996 EPA EG (61 FR 9919) are

applicable to existing municipal solid

waste (MSW) landfills (i.e., the

designated facilities) that emit landfill

gas (LFG). LFG consists primarily of

carbon dioxide, methane, and

nonmethane organic compounds

(NMOC). MSW landfills are the largest

manmade source of methane emissions

in the United States. The designated

pollutant, NMOC, is a mixture of more

than 100 different compounds,

including volatile organic compounds

(VOC), and hazardous pollutants (HAP),

such as vinyl chloride, toluene, and

benzene. A collateral benefit in the

control of landfill NMOC is the control

of methane.

Question: What are the expected

environmental and public health

benefits from controlling Landfill Gas

emissions?

Answer: Studies indicate that MSW

landfill gas (LFG) emissions at certain

levels can have adverse effects on both

public health and welfare. EPA

presented its concerns regarding the

health and welfare effects of landfill

gases in the preamble to the MSW

landfill regulations (61 FR 9905). As

noted above, MSW landfills emit NMOC

that contains HAP, and VOC, including

odorous compounds. Exposure to HAP

can lead to cancer, respiratory irritation,

and damage to the nervous system. VOC

emissions contribute to the formation of

ozone which can result in adverse

affects on human health and vegetation.

Methane contributes to global climate

change and can also result in fires or

explosions, if the gas accumulates in

physical structures on or off the landfill

site. The WV 111(d) plan will serve to

significantly reduce these potential

problems associated with LFG

emissions.

II. Federal Requirements the West

Virginia DEP’s 111(d) Plan Must Meet

for Approval

Question: What general EPA

requirements must the West Virginia

DEP meet to receive approval of the WV

111(d) plan ( the ‘‘plan’’)?

Answer: EPA promulgated detailed

procedures for submitting and

approving State plans in 40 CFR part 60,

subpart B. Also, EPA promulgated the

MSW landfill EG (subpart Cc) and a

related NSPS (subpart WWW) on March

12, 1996, and amended them both on

June 16, 1998 and February 24, 1999.

The West Virginia plan must meet the

requirements of (1) 40 CFR part 60,

subpart Cc, §§ 60.30c through 60.36c,

and the related subpart WWW; and (2)

40 CFR part 60, subpart B, §§ 60.23

through 26. In addition, a State

requesting delegation of authority under

the Federal 111(d) plan must

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 28377

demonstrate that it has adequate

resources and the legal authority to

administer and enforce the program.

The DEP has made the required

demonstration with respect to the

delegated tasks.

States were required to submit their

MSW landfill 111(d) plans to EPA on

December 12, 1996, pursuant to the

provisions of section 111(d) of the CAA

and 40 CFR part 60, subpart B, and the

promulgated MSW landfill EG. As a

result of litigation over the landfill rule,

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. Pursuant to the proposed

settlement agreement, EPA published,

in the Federal Register, a direct final

rulemaking on June 16, 1998, in which

EPA amended 40 CFR part 60, subparts

Cc and WWW, to add clarifying

language, to make editorial

amendments, and to correct

typographical errors. The proposed

settlement did not vacate or void the

March 12, 1996 MSW landfill EG or

NSPS. See 63 FR 32743–32753, 32783–

32784. In part, these amendments

clarified the EG regulatory text with

respect to landfill mass and volume

applicability and Title V permit

requirements. On February 24, 1999 (64

FR 9258), EPA amended the MSW

landfill rule to further clarify the

regulatory text and correct errors with

respect to the due date for the submittal

of the initial landfill design capacity

and emissions rate reports, and the

definition of landfill ‘‘modification’’. In

summary, these amendments relate to

four substantive EG changes: (1) Landfill

mass ‘‘and ‘‘ volume applicability

threshold language, (2) timely Title V

permit applications, (3) the definition of

landfill ‘‘modification’’, and (4) the due

date for submittal of initial design

capacity and NMOC emissions rate

reports. Additional technical corrections

to the NSPS were published on April

10, 2000 (65 FR 18906).

Question: What does the West

Virginia State Plan contain?

Answer: Consistent with the

requirements of subparts B and Cc, as

amended, the West Virginia Plan

contains the following:

1. A demonstration of the State’s legal

authority to implement the section

111(d) State Plan;

2. West Virginia Rule 45CSR23, as the

enforceable mechanism;

3. A source inventory of known

designated facilities, including NMOC

emissions rate estimates;

4. Emission collection and control

requirements that are no less stringent

than those in subpart Cc;

5. A description of the West Virginia

process for the review and approval of

site-specific gas collection and control

design plans

6. A source compliance schedule that

requires final compliance no later than

that required in EPA’s November 8,

1999 Federal 111(d) plan (64 FR 60703);

7. Source testing, monitoring,

recordkeeping, and reporting

requirements;

8. Records of the public hearings on

the State Plan; and

9. Provision for State submittal to EPA

of annual reports on progress in plan

enforcement.

On May 29, 1998, the DEP submitted

the WV 111(d) plan that identifies

existing MSW landfills in the State of

West Virginia and establishes standards

for the control of landfill gas emissions

from these facilities. The plan is

entitled: ‘‘West Virginia Division of

Environmental Protection Office of Air

Quality State Plan for Municipal Solid

Waste (MSW) Landfills’’. The State has

adopted 40 CFR part 60, subparts Cc

and WWW, as amended, by reference,

such that they apply to both new and

existing municipal solid waste (MSW)

landfills under one regulation. The

adoption of this regulation is

incorporated into the State of West

Virginia ‘‘Title 45 Legislative Rule

Division of Environmental Protection

Office of Air Quality’’ in Series 23 to

Prevent and Control Emissions from

Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.

On May 1, 1998, the DEP MSW

landfill regulation 45CSR23 became

effective. In response to the amended

EG and NSPS requirements, the

regulation was amended, and became

effective on May 1, 2000. 45CFR23

applies to existing MSW landfills and

incorporates by reference (IBR) related

and applicable new source performance

standards, subpart WWW, requirements.

Also the amended plan, submitted to

EPA on May 15, 2000, contains a

request for delegation of EPA’s

November 8, 1999 Federal landfill

111(d) plan (i.e., 40 CFR part 60, subpart

GGG) compliance schedule

requirements. In a December 20, 2000

letter to EPA, the DEP clarified that its

delegation request included the Federal

plan’s initial design capacity and NMOC

emission rate reporting requirements.

Question: Does the West Virginia plan

meet all EPA requirements for approval?

Answer: Yes. The DEP has submitted

a 111(d) plan that conforms to all EPA

requirements under 40 CFR part 60,

subparts B, Cc, and WWW. Details

regarding the approvability of plan

elements are included in the technical

support document (TSD) associated

with this action. A copy of the TSD is

available, upon request, from the EPA

Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES

section of this document.

III. Requirements Affected MSW

Landfill Owners/Operators Must Meet

Question: How do I determine if my

MSW landfill is subject to the WV

111(d) plan?

Answer: If you commenced

construction, reconstruction, or

modification of your MSW landfill

before May 30, 1991, and have accepted

waste at any time since November 8,

1987, or the landfill has additional

capacity for future waste deposition,

then it is subject to the 111(d) plan

requirements.

Question: What general requirements

must I meet as an affected landfill

owner/operator who is subject to the

EPA approved WV plan?

Answer: The plan requires you to

submit an initial design capacity report,

and possibly a NMOC emissions rate

report. If the design capacity of your

landfill is equal to or greater than 2.5

million megagrams and 2.5 million

cubic meters of MSW, the plan requires

you to also submit, concurrently with

the design capacity report, an initial

NMOC emissions rate report. As

required under 40 CFR 62.14355(a) of

the Federal landfill 111(d) plan, both

the initial capacity and NMOC

emissions rate reports were due April 6,

2000. The initial NMOC and any

subsequent emissions rate

determinations are required to be

calculated according to methods

specified in the regulation. If your

calculated landfill NMOC emissions rate

were 50 megagrams/year, or more per

year, then you are required to install a

MSW landfill gas collection and control

system that meets the design and

operational requirements specified in

45CSR 23–3 and 3.3, which incorporates

by reference all related and applicable

NSPS, Subpart WWW, requirements at

40 CFR 60.759 and 753.

Question: If my landfill is subject to

the plan’s requirement for installation of

a LFG collection and control system,

what emissions limits must I meet, and

in what time frame?

Answer: You must install a landfill

gas collection and control system to

reduce the collected NMOC emissions

by 98 weight-percent, or reduce the

emissions from the control device to a

concentration of 20 parts per million by

volume, or less, for an enclosed

combustor. Your final compliance date

28378 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

and the related increments of progress

are dependent upon when your annual

emissions rate report initially shows

that NMOC emissions are ≥ 50

megagrams per year (Mg/yr). Based on

the Federal plan requirements at 40 CFR

62.14356(c), you must meet the

following compliance schedule and

increments of progress, except as

provided in 40 CFR 62.14356(d):

DELEGATED COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE AND INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS

Increment(s)

Compliance date(s)

4/6/00 annual report showing NMOC

emissions ≥50 Mg/yr

1st subsequent annual report showing NMOC

emissions ≥50 Mg/yr.

Submit final control plan ..................................... April 6, 2001 ..................................................... 1 year after report.

Award Contracts ................................................. December 6, 2001 ........................................... 20 months after report.

Begin on-site construction .................................. April 6, 2002 ..................................................... 24 months after report.

Complete on-site construction ............................ October 6, 2002 ............................................... 30 months after report.

Final compliance ................................................ October 6, 2002 ............................................... 30 months after report.

Question: Are there any operation

requirements for my installed LFG

collection and control system?

Answer: Yes, there are operational

requirements. The operational

requirements are summarized below:

1. Operate the collection system

wellheads at negative pressure;

2. Operate the interior collection

wellheads with a landfill gas

temperature less than 550°C and with

either a nitrogen level less than 20

percent, or an oxygen level less than 5

percent;

3. Operate the collection system so

that the methane gas concentration is

less than 500 parts per million by

volume above background at the surface

of the landfill;

4. Operate the collection system so

that the colleted gases are vented to the

control system; and

5. Operate the collection and control

system at all times.

Details regarding all operational

requirements are stipulated in Subpart

WWW, 40 CFR 60.753

Question: What are the testing,

monitoring, recordkeeping, and

reporting requirements for my landfill?

Answer: Your testing, monitoring,

recordkeeping, and reporting

requirements are summarized below:

Performance testing, to determine

compliance with 98 weight-percent

efficiency or the 20 ppmv outlet

concentration level, must be completed

within 180 days after construction

completion on the collection and

control system. Testing methods must

be consistent with EPA source test

methods referenced in the DEP landfill

regulation.

Monitoring temperature on a

continuous basis is required for

enclosed combustion control devices,

and flares. Measurement of the gas flow

rate from the collection system to an

enclosed combustion device, or flare, is

required at least once every 15 minutes,

unless the bypass line valves are

secured in a closed position. Monthly

monitoring requirements are specified

in the regulation for the gas collection

system. Gas wellhead monitored

parameters include gauge pressure,

nitrogen or oxygen concentration, and

temperature. Quarterly monitoring is

required of NMOC surface

concentrations.

Reporting requirements relate to

landfill design capacity and NMOC

emission rates; submittal of a collection

and control system design plan; and

system start-up, performance testing,

operations, closure notification, and

equipment removal.

Records must be keep on-site of

maximum design capacity, current

amount of solid waste in-place, year-byyear waste acceptance rate; up-to-date

readily accessible records for the life of

the control equipment of certain data

measured during the initial performance

test or compliance determination; and

control device vendor specifications

until removal.

Details regarding testing, monitoring,

recordkeeping, and reporting

requirements are stipulated in subpart

WWW, 40 CFR 60.754, 60.755, 60.756,

and 60.757.

Question: Am I required to apply for

a Title V permit?

Answer: Yes, if your landfill design

capacity is equal to or greater than 2.5

million Mg and 2.5 million cubic

meters. As provided under the delegated

provisions of the Federal plan, you are

required to apply for a Title V permit no

later than April 7, 2001.

Question: If I modify or expand the

capacity of my landfill, what additional

requirements must I meet?

Answer: Any MSW landfill that

commences construction, modification,

or reconstruction on or after May 30,

1991 is subject to the EPA new source

performance standards (NSPS) for

landfills, 40 CFR part 60, subpart

WWW.

IV. Final EPA Action

Based upon the rationale discussed,

herein, and in further detail in the TSD

associated with this action, EPA is

approving the West Virginia MSW

landfill 111(d) plan, including the

delegation of the Federal plan’s

compliance schedule and initial

reporting requirements. Except as noted,

herein, upon the effective date of this

rule approving West Virginia’s 111(d)

plan for landfills, the Federal plan

promulgated on November 8, 1999, will

no longer apply in West Virginia. As

provided by 40 CFR 60.28(c), any

revisions to the WV section 111(d) plan

or associated regulations will not be

considered part of the applicable plan

until submitted by the DEP 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, requirements.

EPA is publishing this action without

prior proposal because the Agency

views this as a noncontroversial

amendment 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 111(d) plan

should relevant adverse or critical

comments be filed. This rule will be

effective July 23, 2001 without further

notice unless the Agency receives

relevant adverse comments by June 22,

2001. If EPA receives such comments,

then EPA will publish a document

withdrawing the final rule and

informing the public that the rule will

not take effect. All public comments

received will then be addressed in a

subsequent final rule based on the

proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

this rule. Only parties interested in

commenting on this rule should do so

at this time. If no such comments are

received, the public is advised that this

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 100 / Wednesday, May 23, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 28379

rule will be effective on July 23, 2001

and no further action will be taken on

the proposed rule.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. General 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).

This rule also does not have a

substantial direct effect on one or more

Indian tribes, on the relationship

between the Federal Government and

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities between the

Federal Government and Indian tribes,

as specified by Executive Order 13175

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor

will it 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 rule also is not

subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR

19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not

economically significant. In reviewing

111(d) 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 111(d) plan submission for

failure to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a 111(d) plan

submission, to use VCS in place of a

111(d) 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 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.).

B. 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. 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 publication of the rule in

the Federal Register. This rule is not a

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

C. 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 July 23, 2001.

Filing a petition for reconsideration by

the Administrator of this final rule

approving West Virginia’s 111(d) plan

for Municipal Solid Waste landfills 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, Hydrocarbons,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: May 1, 2000.

William C. Early,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

40 CFR Part 62, Subpart XX, 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.

Subpart XX—West Virginia

2. A new center heading, and

§§ 62.12125, 62.12126, and 62.12127 are

added to read as follows:

Landfill Gas Emissions From Existing

Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

(Section 111(d)) Plan)

§ 62.12125 Identification of plan.

West Virginia 111(d) plan for

municipal solid waste landfills,

including delegation of Federal plan (64

FR 60689) compliance schedule and

reporting requirements, as submitted to

the Environmental Protection Agency

on May 29, 1998, and as amended on

May 15, 2000, and December 20, 2000.

§ 62.12126 Identification of sources.

The plan applies to all existing West

Virginia municipal solid waste landfills

for which construction, reconstruction,

or modification was commenced before

May 30, 1991 and 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.

§ 62.12127 Effective date.

The effective date of the plan for

municipal solid waste landfills is July

23, 2001.

[FR Doc. 01–12888 Filed 5–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[FRL–6982–1]

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone:

Notice 15 for Significant New

Alternatives Policy Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of acceptability.

SUMMARY: This document expands the

list of acceptable substitutes for ozonedepleting substances (ODS) under the