[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 78 (Friday, April 21, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21361-21363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-10033]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[Docket No. OR-03-0001; FRL-6580-9]
Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated
Facilities and Pollutants: Oregon; 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 (CAA) requiring states to submit plans to EPA. These
plans show how states intend to control the emissions of the designated
pollutants from designated facilities. Federal regulations provide 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 October 20, 1998, the State of Oregon
submitted a negative declaration adequately certifying that there are
no hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators (HMIWI) located
within its boundaries. On November 6, 1998, Oregon submitted a
clarification to their negative declaration, indicating one of their
sources to be a co-combustor, and the rest to be crematories, both
categories which are considered exempt from this emission guideline
(EG.) EPA is approving Oregon's negative declaration.
DATES: This action will be effective on June 20, 2000 without further
notice, unless EPA receives relevant adverse comments by May 22, 2000.
If EPA receives such comments, then it will publish a timely withdrawal
of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Catherine Woo, US
EPA, Region X, Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, Washington 98101.
Copies of materials submitted to EPA may be examined during normal
business hours at the following location: US EPA, Region X, Office of
Air Quality, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Woo, US EPA, Region X,
Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington
98101, (206) 553-1814.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever we, us or
our is used, this refers to EPA. Information regarding this action is
presented in the following order:
I. What Action is EPA Taking Today?
II. Why is Oregon Required to Submit a Negative Declaration?
III. When Did the Requirements for Existing HMIWIs First Become
Known?
IV. When Did Oregon Submit Its Negative Declaration?
V. How Does This Approval Affect Sources Located in Indian Country?
VI. Administrative Requirements
I. What Action is EPA Taking Today?
We are approving the State of Oregon's negative declaration of air
emissions from HMIWIs. This negative declaration fulfills the
requirements of Sections 111(d) and 129 of the CAA for existing HMIWIs.
EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial action 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 Oregon negative
declaration should relevant adverse comments be filed. This action will
be effective on June 20, 2000 without further notice, unless EPA
receives relevant adverse comments by May 22, 2000.
If EPA receives such comments, then it will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this
direct final rule will not take effect. All public comments received
will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Parties
interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments
are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on
June 20, 2000 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.
II. Why is Oregon Required to Submit a Negative Declaration?
Section 111 of the CAA, ``Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources,'' authorizes us to set air emissions standards for
certain categories of sources. These standards are called New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS). When a NSPS is promulgated for new
sources, Section 111(d) also requires that we publish an EG applicable
to the control of the same pollutant from existing (designated)
facilities. States with designated facilities must then develop a State
Plan to adopt the EG into the State's body of regulations. If 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 State Plan for that designated facility (see 40 CFR 62.06).
Oregon does not have any designated facilities within its boundaries,
so it is required to submit a negative declaration.
III. When Did the Requirements for Existing HMIWIs First Become
Known?
On June 26, 1996 (see 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 (EG) for existing HMIWIs.
These guidelines were published in final form as 40 CFR Part 60,
Subpart Ce, on September 15, 1997 (see 62 FR 48348).
IV. When Did Oregon Submit Its Negative Declaration?
On October 20, 1998, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
submitted a letter to us certifying that there are no existing HMIWIs
subject to 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart Ce. On November 8, 1998, Oregon sent
a clarifying letter to indicate exempt
[[Page 21362]]
sources within its jurisdiction. EPA is publishing this negative
declaration today, as public notification of Oregon's exemption from
submitting a State Plan, as required under 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart B.
However, in the unlikely event that a designated source is discovered
within the State of Oregon, this source will be subject to the
requirements of a Federal Plan (to be promulgated.) If the State
chooses to do so, it can submit a State Plan for any newly discovered
designated sources as well. At the time of submittal, the State Plan
will need to be at least as protective as those requirements
promulgated by the EPA.
V. How Does This Approval Affect Sources Located in Indian Country?
Oregon's jurisdiction does not cover facilities located in Indian
Country. Since this action is approving Oregon's declaration that there
are no HMIWI facilities within its jurisdiction, this action does not
affect Indian Country. However, if there are any sources located in
Indian Country, they will be subject to the Federal plan, once
promulgated. The EPA plans to promulgate a Federal Plan which will
cover sources located in Indian Country and sources for which there is
no approved State Plan (or no approved negative declaration). Because
there is no Federal Plan yet, existing HMIWI sources in Indian Country
are not currently subject to any federal requirements.
VI. 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 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 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 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 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 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 June 20, 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).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Methane, Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills, Non-methane organic compounds, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: April 4, 2000.
Chuck Clarke,
Regional Administrator, Region X.
40 CFR is amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7642.
Subpart MM--Oregon
2. Section 62.9350 is amended by adding paragraphs (b)(6) and
(c)(6) to read as follows:
Sec. 62.9350 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) Control of metals, acid gases, organic compounds, particulates
and nitrogen oxide emissions from existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious
Waste Incinerators was submitted by the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality on October 20, 1998, and November 6, 1998.
(c) * * *
(6) Existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators.
* * * * *
3. Section 62.9515 and an undesignated center heading are added to
Subpart MM to read as follows:
[[Page 21363]]
Metals, Acid Gases, Organic Compounds, Particulates and Nitrogen
Oxide Emissions From Existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste
Incinerators
Sec. 62.9515 Identification of Sources--Negative Declaration.
On October 20, 1998, and November 6, 1998, the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality 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. 00-10033 Filed 4-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P