[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 16, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62117-62119]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-29759]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[Docket No. VT-016-1220a; FRL-6474-1]
Approval and Promulgation of State Plans For Designated
Facilities and Pollutants: Vermont; Negative Declaration
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA publishes regulations under Sections 111(d) and 129 of the
Clean Air Act requiring states to submit plans to EPA. These plans show
how states intend to control the emissions of designated pollutants
from designated facilities. 40 CFR 62.06 provides that when no such
designated facilities exist within a state's boundaries, the affected
state may submit a letter of ``negative declaration'' instead of a
control plan. On April 16, 1999, the state of Vermont submitted a
negative declaration adequately certifying that there are no hospital/
medical/infectious waste incinerators (HMIWIs) located within its
boundaries. EPA is approving Vermont's negative declaration.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective on January 18, 2000 without
further notice unless EPA receives significant, material and adverse
comment by December 16, 1999. If EPA receives adverse comment, we 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: You should address your written comments to: Mr. Brian
Hennessey, Acting Chief, Air Permits Unit, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, U.S. EPA, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAP), Boston, MA
02114-2023.
Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for
public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the
Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region I, One Congress Street, 11th floor, Boston, MA.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John J. Courcier, (617) 918-1659.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What action Is EPA taking today?
II. What is the origin of the requirements?
III. When did the HMIWI requirements first become known?
IV. When did Vermont submit its negative declaration?
V. Administrative Requirements
I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
EPA is approving the negative declaration of air emissions from
HMIWIs submitted by the state of Vermont.
EPA is publishing this negative declaration 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, EPA is publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to approve this negative declaration should
relevant adverse comments be filed. If EPA receives no significant,
material, or adverse comment by December 16, 1999, this action will be
effective January 18, 2000.
If EPA receives significant, material, and adverse comments by the
above date, we will withdraw this action before the effective date by
publishing a subsequent document in the Federal Register that will
withdraw this final action. EPA will address all public comments
received in a subsequent final rule based on the parallel proposed rule
published in today's Federal Register. 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 EPA receives no comments,
this action will be effective January 18, 2000.
II. What Is the Origin of the Requirements?
Under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, EPA published
regulations at 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart B which require states to submit
plans to control emissions of designated pollutants from designated
facilities. In the event that a state does not have a particular
designated facility located within its boundaries, EPA requires that a
negative declaration be submitted in lieu of a control plan.
III. When Did the Requirements First Become Known?
On June 26, 1996 (61 FR 31736), EPA proposed HMIWIs as designated
facilities. EPA specified particulate matter, opacity, sulfur dioxide,
hydrogen chloride, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, lead, cadmium,
mercury, and dioxins and dibenzofurans as designated pollutants by
proposing emission guidelines for existing HMIWIs. These guidelines
were published in final form on September 15, 1997 (62 FR 48348).
IV. When Did Vermont Submit Its Negative Declaration?
On April 16, 1999, the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources (ANR)
submitted a letter certifying that there are no existing HMIWIs subject
to 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart B. EPA is publishing this negative
declaration at 40 CFR 62.11475.
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled
``Regulatory Planning and Review.''
B. Executive Orders on Federalism
Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or
tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office
of
[[Page 62118]]
Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to
develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of state, local, and tribal governments ``to provide
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals
containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875
do not apply to this rule.
On August 4, 1999, President Clinton issued a new executive order
on federalism, Executive Order 13132, (64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999)),
which will take effect on November 2, 1999. In the interim, the current
Executive Order 12612, (52 FR 41685 (October 30, 1987)) on federalism
still applies. This rule will not have a substantial direct effect on
Vermont, 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 12612.
The rule affects only a few States, and does not alter the relationship
or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act.
C. Executive Order 13045
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O.
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children.
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered
by the Agency.
This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve
decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks
that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on
children.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded,
EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, E.O. 13084 requires EPA to develop an
effective process permitting elected and other representatives of
Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in
the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or
uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's action does not create any new requirements on any entity
affected by this State Plan. Thus, the action will not significantly or
uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal governments.
Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not
apply to this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
Negative declaration approvals under section 111(d) of the Clean
Air Act do not create any new requirements on any entity affected by
this rule, including small entities. Furthermore, in developing the
HMIWI emission guidelines and standards, EPA prepared a written
statement pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act which it published
in the 1997 promulgation notice (see 62 FR 48348). In accordance with
EPA's determination in issuing the 1997 HMIWI emission guidelines, this
negative declaration approval does not include any new requirements
that will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
Therefore, because this approval does not impose any new
requirements and pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, the Regional Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
F. Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany 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. Under Section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted on by the rule.
EPA has determined that this approval action does not include a
Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or
more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or
to the private sector. This Federal action imposes no new requirements.
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, result from this action. Thus,
this action is not subject to the requirements of sections 202, 203,
204, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act.
G. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), as amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted 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
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Pub L. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
[[Page 62119]]
standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus bodies.
The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
In approving or disapproving negative declarations under section
129 of the Clean Air Act, EPA does not have the authority to revise or
rewrite the State's rule, so the Agency does not have authority to
require the use of particular voluntary consensus standards.
Accordingly, EPA has not sought to identify or require the State to use
voluntary consensus standards. Therefore, the requirements of the NTTAA
are not applicable to this final rule.
I. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 18, 2000. 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), 42
U.S.C. 7607(b)(2)). EPA encourages interested parties to comment in
response to the proposed rule rather than petition for judicial review,
unless the objection arises after the comment period allowed for in the
proposal.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62
Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,
Environmental protection, Intergovernmental relations, Hospital/
Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: November 1, 1999.
John P. DeVillars,
Regional Administrator, Region 1.
40 CFR Part 62 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
Subpart UU--Vermont
2. Subpart UU is amended by adding a new Sec. 62.11475 and a new
undesignated center heading to read as follows:
* * * * *
Air Emissions From Existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste
Incinerators
Sec. 62.11475 Identification of Plan--negative declaration.
On April 16, 1999, the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources
submitted a letter certifying that there are no existing hospital/
medical/infectious waste incinerators in the state subject to the
emission guidelines under Part 60, Subpart B of this chapter.
[FR Doc. 99-29759 Filed 11-15-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
