03-21054. Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Control of Emissions From Existing Commercial/Industrial Solid Waste Incinerator Units; Arizona; Nevada

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Direct final rule.

SUMMARY:

EPA is taking direct final action to approve negative declarations submitted by various local air pollution control agencies in Arizona and Nevada. Each negative declaration certifies that commercial/industrial solid waste incinerator units, subject to the requirements of sections 111(d) and 129 of the Clean Air Act, do not exist within the relevant agency's air pollution control jurisdiction.

DATES:

This rule is effective on October 17, 2003 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 17, 2003. If we receive such comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that this rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES:

Mail comments to Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office Chief (AIR-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mae Wang, EPA Region IX, [phone].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Sections 111(d) and 129 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) require States to submit plans to control certain pollutants (designated pollutants) at existing solid waste combustor facilities (designated facilities) whenever standards of performance have been established under section 111(b) for new sources of the same type, and EPA has established emission guidelines (EG) for such existing sources. A designated pollutant is any pollutant for which no air quality criteria have been issued, and which is not included on a list published under section 108(a) or section 112(b)(1)(A) of the CAA, but emissions of which are subject to a standard of performance for new stationary sources. However, section 129 of the CAA also requires EPA to promulgate EG for commercial/industrial solid waste incinerator (CISWI) units that emit a mixture of air pollutants. These pollutants include organics (dioxins/furans), carbon monoxide, metals (cadmium, lead, mercury), acid gases (hydrogen chloride, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides) and particulate matter (including opacity).

On December 1, 2000 (65 FR 75338), EPA promulgated CISWI unit new source performance standards and EG, located at 40 CFR part 60, subparts CCCC and DDDD, respectively. The designated facility to which the EG apply is each existing CISWI unit, as defined in subpart DDDD, that commenced construction on or before November 30, 1999.

Subpart B of 40 CFR part 60 establishes procedures to be followed and requirements to be met in the development and submission of State plans for controlling designated pollutants. Also, 40 CFR part 62 provides the procedural framework for the submission of these plans. When designated facilities are located in a State, the State must then develop and submit a plan for the control of the designated pollutant. However, 40 CFR 60.23(b) and 62.06 provide that if there are no existing sources of the designated pollutant in the State, the State may submit a letter of certification to that effect (i.e., negative declaration) in lieu of a plan. The negative declaration exempts the State from the requirements of subpart B for the submittal of a 111(d)/129 plan.

II. Final EPA Action

The following air pollution control agencies have determined that there are no designated facilities subject to the CISWI unit EG requirements in their respective air pollution control jurisdictions: Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (Arizona DEQ), Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (Maricopa County ESD), Pima County Air Quality District (Pima County AQD), Pinal County Air Quality Control District (Pinal County AQCD), Clark County Department of Air Quality Management (Clark County DAQM), Washoe County District Health Department Air Quality Management Division (Washoe County DHD AQMD). Accordingly, each air pollution control agency has submitted to EPA a negative declaration letter certifying this fact. The submittal dates of these letters are listed in the following table:

Air pollution control agency	Date of negative declaration
Arizona DEQ	April 25, 2003
Maricopa County ESD	February 4, 2003
Pima County AQD	February 5, 2003
Pinal County AQCD	January 24, 2003
Clark County DAQM	February 27, 2003
Washoe County DHD AQMD	January 28, 2003

EPA is amending part 62 to reflect the receipt of these negative declaration letters from the noted air pollution control agencies. Amendments are being made to 40 CFR part 62, subpart D (Arizona), and subpart DD (Nevada).

After publication of this Federal Register notice, if a CISWI facility is later found within any of these noted jurisdictions, then the overlooked facility will become subject to the requirements of the Federal CISWI 111(d)/129 plan, including the compliance schedule, when promulgated. The Federal plan would no longer apply if EPA subsequently were to receive and approve a 111(d)/129 plan from the jurisdiction with the overlooked CISWI facility.

EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comments. This action simply reflects already existing Federal requirements for State air pollution control agencies under 40 CFR parts 60 and 62. In the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve each negative declaration should relevant adverse or critical comments be filed.

This rule will be effective October 17, 2003 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant adverse comments by September 17, 2003. If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, then EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). 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 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).

This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 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). This action also does not have federalism implications because it does 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). This action 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 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

In reviewing 111(d)/129 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)/129 plan submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a 111(d)/129 plan submission, to use VCS in place of a 111(d)/129 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. 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 October 17, 2003. 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 approving the section 111(d)/129 negative declarations submitted by the air pollution control agencies in Arizona and Nevada 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
• Aluminum
• Fertilizers
• Fluoride
• Intergovernmental relations
• Paper and paper products industry
• Phosphate
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
• Sulfur oxides
• Sulfuric acid plants
• Waste treatment and disposal

Dated: July 8, 2003.

Wayne Nastri,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.

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. 7401-7671q.

Subpart D—Arizona

2. Subpart D is amended by adding an undesignated center heading and § 62.650 to read as follows:

Emissions From Existing Commercial/Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units

§ 62.650

Identification of plan.

(a) The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality submitted on April 25, 2003, a letter certifying that there are no existing commercial/industrial solid waste incineration units within the Department's jurisdiction that are subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD.

(b) The Maricopa County Environmental Services Department submitted on February 4, 2003, a letter certifying that there are no existing commercial/industrial solid waste incineration units within the Department's jurisdiction that are subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD.

(c) The Pima County Air Quality District submitted on February 5, 2003, a letter certifying that there are no existing commercial/industrial solid waste incineration units within the District's jurisdiction that are subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD.

(d) The Pinal County Air Quality Control District submitted on January 24, 2003, a letter certifying that there are no existing commercial/industrial solid waste incineration units within the District's jurisdiction that are subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD.

Subpart DD—Nevada

3. Subpart DD is amended by adding an undesignated center heading and § 62.7130 to read as follows:

Emissions From Existing Commercial/Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units

§ 62.7130

Identification of plan.

(a) The Clark County Department of Air Quality Management submitted on February 27, 2003, a letter certifying that there are no existing commercial/industrial solid waste incineration units in Clark County that are subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD.

(b) The Washoe County District Health Department Air Quality Management Division submitted on January 28, 2003, a letter certifying that there are no existing commercial/industrial solid waste incineration units in Washoe County that are subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD.