[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 137 (Monday, July 19, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38582-38586]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-18041]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[Region 2 Docket No. NY31-192a, FRL-6379-2]


Approval and Promulgation of State Plans For Designated 
Facilities; New York

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is conditionally 
approving the State Plan submitted by New York implementing the 
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfill Emission Guidelines. The State 
Plan establishes performance standards for existing MSW 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 September 17, 1999 
without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by August 
18, 1999. 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: All comments should be addressed to: Raymond Werner, Acting 
Chief, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 
Office, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
    Copies of the state submittal 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 or Kirk Wieber, Air 
Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 
Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4249.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. State Submittal
III. Review of State Submittal
    A. Identification of Enforceable State Mechanism for 
Implementing the EG
    B. Demonstration of the State's Legal Authority to Carry Out the 
Section 111(d) State Plan as Submitted
    C. Inventory of Existing MSW Landfills in the State Affected by 
the State Plan
    D. Emission Limitations for MSW Landfills
    E. A Process for State Review and Approval of Site-Specific Gas 
Collection and Control System Design Plans
    F. Compliance Schedules
    G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
    H. Submittal of Annual State Progress Reports to EPA
IV. Conclusion
V. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866
    B. Executive Order 12875
    C. Executive Order 13045
    D. Executive Order 13084

[[Page 38583]]

    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    F. Unfunded Mandates
    G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
    H. Petitions for Judicial Review

I. Background

    Under section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (Act), EPA established 
procedures for states to submit plans to control certain existing 
sources of ``designated pollutants.'' Designated pollutants are defined 
as pollutants for which a standard of performance for new sources 
applies under section 111, but which are not ``criteria pollutants'' 
(i.e., pollutants for which National Ambient Air Quality Standards are 
set under sections 108 and 109 of the Act) or hazardous air pollutants 
(HAPs) regulated under section 112 of the Act.
    As required by section 111(d) of the Act, EPA established a 
process, at title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 60, 
subpart B which states must follow in adopting and submitting a section 
111(d) plan. Whenever EPA promulgates a new source performance standard 
(NSPS) that controls a designated pollutant, EPA establishes emission 
guidelines in accordance with 40 CFR section 60.22 which contain 
information pertinent to the control of the designated pollutant from 
existing sources for that NSPS source category (i.e., the ``designated 
facility'' as defined at 40 CFR 60.21(b)). Thus, a state's section 
111(d) plan for a designated facility must comply with the emission 
guidelines for that source category as well as 40 CFR part 60, subpart 
B.
    On March 12, 1996, EPA published emission guidelines (EG) for 
existing Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) landfills at 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart Cc (40 CFR 60.30c through 60.36c) and the NSPS for new MSW 
landfills at 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW (40 CFR 60.750 through 
60.759). See, 61 FR 9905 (March 12, 1996). The NSPS and EG regulate MSW 
landfill emissions, which contain a mixture of volatile organic 
compounds (VOCs), other organic compounds, methane, and HAPs. To 
determine if emissions control is required, nonmethane organic 
compounds (NMOCs) are measured as a surrogate for MSW landfill 
emissions. Thus, NMOC is considered the designated pollutant. The 
designated facility which is subject to the EG is each existing MSW 
landfill (as defined in 40 CFR 60.31c) for which construction, 
reconstruction or modification was commenced before May 30, 1991. Under 
40 CFR 60.23(a), states were required to submit a plan for the control 
of the designated pollutant to which the EG applies within nine months 
after publication of the EG (by December 12, 1996).
    On June 16, 1998, EPA published in the Federal Register (63 FR 
32743) a direct final action which amended, corrected errors in, and 
clarified the regulatory text of the ``Standards of Performance for New 
Stationary Sources and Guidelines for Control of Existing Sources: 
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills,'' which was promulgated on March 12, 
1996. The Background section of the amended rule (63 FR 32744) states, 
``These changes do not significantly modify the requirements of the 
regulation.'' No adverse comments were received on the amended landfill 
rule, and as a result, it became effective on August 17, 1998.

II. State Submittal

    On October 8, 1998, the New York State Department of Environmental 
Conservation (NYSDEC) submitted its ``Section 111(d) State Plan for MSW 
Landfills'' for implementing EPA's MSW landfill EG. New York's 
submittal included: the necessary legal authority; an enforceable 
mechanism; some of the increments of progress of an enforceable 
compliance schedule; an emissions inventory; emission standards; 
testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements; a 
process to review design plans; a provision for annual state progress 
reports; and the record of public hearing. New York held a public 
hearing on January 15, 1998 for all of the required elements of the MSW 
landfill State Plan.

III. Review of State Submittal

    EPA has reviewed New York's section 111(d) plan for existing MSW 
landfills against the requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subpart B and 
subpart Cc, as follows:

A. Identification of Enforceable State Mechanism for Implementing the 
EG

    40 CFR 60.24(a) requires that a section 111(d) plan include 
emissions standards, defined in 40 CFR 60.21(f) as ``a legally 
enforceable regulation setting forth an allowable rate of emissions 
into the atmosphere, or prescribing equipment specifications for 
control of air pollution emissions.'' New York has adopted revisions to 
State rules to control air emissions from existing landfills in the 
State. The New York State rules for MSW Landfills are primarily found 
in part 360-2 of title 6 of the New York Code of Rules and Regulations 
of the State of New York, entitled, ``Landfills''. Part 360-2 became 
effective on November 21, 1998.

B. Demonstration of the State's Legal Authority To Carry out the 
Section 111(d) State Plan as Submitted

    40 CFR 60.26 requires that a section 111(d) plan demonstrate that 
the state has the necessary legal authority to adopt and implement the 
plan. In order to make this demonstration, the plan must show that the 
state has the legal authority to adopt emission standards and 
compliance schedules for the designated facilities; enforce the 
applicable laws, regulations, emission standards and compliance 
schedules, including the ability to obtain injunctive relief; the 
authority to obtain information from the designated facilities in order 
to determine compliance, including the authority to require 
recordkeeping from the facilities, to make inspections and to conduct 
tests at the facilities; the authority to require designated facilities 
to install, maintain and use emission monitoring devices; the authority 
to require periodic reporting to the state on the nature and amounts of 
emissions from the facility; and the authority for the state to make 
such emissions data available to the public. New York has demonstrated 
all these elements. As a result, New York has demonstrated that it has 
sufficient authority to adopt rules governing MSW landfills and that 
the NYSDEC has sufficient legal authority to enforce these rules and to 
develop and administer this MSW landfill plan.

C. Inventory of Existing MSW Landfills in the State Affected by the 
State Plan

    The regulation at 40 CFR 60.25(a) requires that the section 111(d) 
plan include a complete source inventory of all existing MSW landfills 
(i.e., those MSW landfills that were constructed, reconstructed, or 
modified prior to May 30, 1991) in the state that are subject to the 
plan. This includes all existing landfills that have accepted waste 
since November 8, 1987, or that have additional capacity for future 
waste deposition. 40 CFR 60.25(a) also requires an estimate of the 
regulated pollutant, which is NMOC for landfills. A list of the 
existing MSW landfills in New York and an estimate of NMOC emissions 
from each landfill has been submitted as part of the State's landfill 
111(d) plan (see Table 1 below).

[[Page 38584]]



                           Table 1.--New York State MSW Landfills Emissions Inventory
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Mass  (1,000      Status--year  opened/      NMOC emission
          Landfill name                  tons)                  closed           rate  (tons/year)   NSPS or EG
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brookhaven.......................             17,200  opened in 1974...........              1,395  EG
Babylon LF.......................              6,000  closed in 1990...........                356  EG
Islip............................              6,200  closed in 1990...........                262  EG
E. Northport SLF.................              3,800  closed in 1991...........                 40  EG
Oceanside SLF....................              2,750  closed in 1989...........                 88  EG
Freshkills.......................            126,000  opened in 1948...........              2,273  EG
Orange County....................              3,800  opened in 1974...........                512  EG
Al Turi LF.......................              4,800  opened in 1968...........                772  EG
Sullivan Co. LF..................              2,800  opened in 1962...........                300  EG
Albany LF........................              2,750  opened in 1969...........                335  NSPS
Colonie LF.......................              3,000  opened in 1972...........                320  NSPS
Fulton Co. LF....................              5,000  opened in 1989...........                136  EG
DANC.............................              5,500  opened in 1992...........                  3  NSPS
Nanticoke........................              3,200  opened in 1969...........                390  EG
Chemung Co. LF...................              2,750  opened in 1973...........                210  EG
High Acres (WMI).................              5,630  opened in 1972...........              1,942  NSPS
Mill Seat........................              6,930  opened in 1993...........                 88  NSPS
Ontario Co. LF...................              3,600  opened in 1975...........                 27  EG
Seneca Meadows...................              5,300  opened in 1981...........              1,104  NSPS
Monroe Livingston................              5,210  closed in 1989...........                129  EG
Niagara Recycling................              3,700  opened in 1970...........                226  EG
Modern LF........................              6,300  opened in 1983...........                865  EG
Niagara LF (BFI).................              8,000  closed in 1993...........                334  EG
CID SLF..........................              5,600  opened in 1957...........                792  EG
Chautauqua Co. LF................              6,500  opened in 1981...........                228  EG
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Emission Limitations for MSW Landfills

    The regulation at 40 CFR 60.24(c) specifies that the state plan 
must include emission standards that are no less stringent than the EG 
(except as specified in 40 CFR 60.24(f) which allows for less stringent 
emission limitations on a case-by-case basis if certain conditions are 
met). 40 CFR 60.33c contains the emissions standards applicable to 
existing MSW landfills. Part 360-2.21(c) requires existing MSW 
landfills to comply with the same equipment design criteria and level 
of control as prescribed in the NSPS. The controls required by the NSPS 
are the same as those required by the EG. Thus, the emission 
limitations/standards are ``no less stringent than'' subpart Cc, which 
meets the requirements of 40 CFR 60.24(c).

E. A Process for State Review and Approval of Site-Specific Gas 
Collection and Control System Design Plans

    The provision of the EG at 40 CFR 60.33c(b) requires state plans to 
include a process for state review and approval of site-specific design 
plans for required gas collection and control systems. New York's 
regulation, part 360-2.21(c), requires the submission of design plans 
from all applicable MSW Landfills. The process for state review and 
approval of site specific gas collection and control systems is 
specified in the State's Title V operating permit review process, to 
which these landfills are subject. Thus, New York's section 111(d) plan 
adequately addresses this requirement.

F. Compliance Schedules

    A state's section 111(d) plan must include a compliance schedule 
that owners and operators of affected MSW landfills must meet in 
complying with the requirements of the plan. Under 40 CFR 60.24(e)(1) 
any compliance schedule extending more than 12 months from the date 
required for plan submittal shall include legally enforceable 
increments of progress as specified in 40 CFR 60.21(h), including: (1) 
deadlines for the submittal of a final control plan, (2) awarding of 
contracts for emission control systems, (3) initiation of on-site 
construction or installation of emission control equipment, (4) 
completion of on-site construction/installation of emission control 
equipment, and (5) final compliance. 40 CFR 60.36c of the EG gives the 
general deadline that the planning, the awarding of contracts, and the 
installation of air emission collection and control equipment capable 
of meeting the EG must be accomplished within 30 months of the 
effective date of a state emission standard for MSW landfills. Meant to 
be a guideline for a state developing a plan rather than a plan itself, 
the EG does not give specific deadlines for each increment of progress 
required in a compliance schedule under 40 CFR 60.21(h).
    Part 360-2 of New York's regulation addresses the above increments 
of progress, including final compliance, except for increments 2 and 3; 
awarding of contracts for emission control systems and initiation of 
on-site construction or installation of emission control equipment. 
Thus, all the required increments of progress are not included in New 
York's regulation.
    However, 40 CFR 60.24(e)(2) provides that the compliance schedules 
for individual sources may be submitted after the submittal of the 
state plan, as long as the compliance schedules are submitted no later 
than the deadline for the first annual report required under 40 CFR 
60.25(e). After the approval of its landfill plan, it is New York's 
intention to incorporate the two missing increments of progress (the 
awarding of contracts and the initiation of on-site construction), as 
well as the other three increments of progress into compliance 
schedules in existing state permits for each facility or in each 
facility's Title V operating permit when issued. The incorporation of 
the compliance schedule into each facility's permit will include a 
public hearing for each affected facility, therefore, making the 
compliance schedules, including all increments of progress, legally 
enforceable. In a letter dated May 4, 1999 from NYSDEC to EPA, New York 
committed to submit the applicable

[[Page 38585]]

Title V operating permits or state permits within one year of EPA 
approval of New York's plan in accordance with 40 CFR 60.24(e)(2). 
Thus, EPA is conditionally approving New York's State Plan based on the 
condition that New York will submit the state permits or Title V 
permits for each facility, which will include compliance schedules with 
all five increments of progress specified in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B, 
section 60.21(h), and within one year of the effective date of this 
approval.
    If New York does not make the required submittal to EPA within one 
year of the effective date of this action, EPA's conditional approval 
will convert to a disapproval. In that event, EPA would issue a letter 
to notify the State that the condition has not been met, and the 
approval has converted to a disapproval.

G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

    The regulation at 40 CFR 60.34c specifies the testing and 
monitoring provisions that state plans must include (section 60.34c 
specifically refers to the requirements found in 40 CFR 60.754 to 
60.756), and 40 CFR 60.35c specifies the reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements (section 60.35c refers to the requirements found in 40 CFR 
60.757 and 60.758). Part 360-2.21(l) requires that all landfills 
subject to this rule keep appropriate records of the operation and 
maintenance of the collection and control systems. Part 360-2.21(f)(3) 
requires monitoring of surface methane concentrations every three 
months. If the concentration of methane exceeds 500 parts per million, 
the landfill owner must take corrective action. Part 360-2.21(h) 
requires annual reporting of operation of the collection and control 
systems. Thus, the State's rule satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 
60.34c.

H. Submittal of Annual State Progress Reports to EPA

    The regulation at 40 CFR 60.25(e) and (f) requires states to submit 
to EPA annual reports on the progress of plan enforcement. New York 
will submit to EPA annual reports on the progress in the implementation 
of the State Plan. These will be incorporated into the reports required 
by 40 CFR part 51, section 51.321, ``Annual source emissions and state 
action report''. These reports will include compliance status, 
enforcement actions, increments of progress, identification of 
landfills that have closed and ceased to operate a collection and 
control system, emissions inventory for MSW landfills that were not in 
operation or were not identified at the time of plan development, 
updated emission data and compliance information, and copies of initial 
performance test reports, including control device operating 
conditions.

IV. 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, in addition New York 
has committed to submit the remaining increments of progress for 
compliance. Therefore, EPA is conditionally approving New York's Plan 
to implement and enforce subpart Cc, as it applies to existing MSW 
Landfills. If New York does not make the required submittal to EPA 
within one year of the effective date of this action, EPA's conditional 
approval will convert to a disapproval.
    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 September 
17, 1999 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse 
comments by August 18, 1999.
    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.

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 Order 12875

    Under Executive Order 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. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office 
of 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 any written 
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 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 Executive 
Order 12875 do not apply to this rule.

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.
    EPA interprets E.O. 13045 as applying only to those regulatory 
actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the 
analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the potential to 
influence the regulation. This State Plan approval is not subject to 
E.O. 13045 because it proposes approval of a state program implementing 
a Federal standard, and it is not economically significant under E.O. 
12866.

D. Executive Order 13084

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly 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

[[Page 38586]]

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, Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected 
officials 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 rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements 
of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because Conditional approvals of 
State Plan submittals under section 111 of the Act does not create any 
new requirements but simply approve requirements that the state is 
already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal State Plan approval 
does not impose any new requirements, I certify that this action will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship 
under the Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. 
Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 
7410(a)(2).
    If the conditional approval is converted to a disapproval under 
section 111(d), based on the state's failure to meet the commitment, it 
will not affect any existing state requirements applicable to small 
entities. Federal disapproval of the state submittal does not affect 
its state-enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal 
does not impose a new Federal requirement. Therefore, I certify that 
this disapproval action will not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities because it does not remove 
existing requirements nor does it substitute a new federal requirement.

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 
annual costs to state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; 
or to 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 by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the final approval action does not include 
a federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of $100 
million or more to either state, local, or tribal governments in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. This federal action approves pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

G. 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).

H. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by September 17, 1999. 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: July 6, 1999.
William J. Muszynski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2.

    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. 7401-7642.

Subpart HH--New York

    2. Part 62 is amended by adding Sec. 62.8104 and an undesignated 
heading to subpart HH to read as follows:

Landfill Gas Emissions From Existing Municipal Solid Waste 
Landfills


Sec. 62.8104  Identification of plan

    (a) The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 
submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency a ``State Plan for 
implementation and enforcement of 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cc, Emissions 
Guidelines for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills' on October 8, 1998.
    (b) Identification of sources: The plan applies to all existing 
municipal solid waste landfills for which construction, reconstruction 
or modification was commenced before May 30, 1991 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.

[FR Doc. 99-18041 Filed 7-16-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P