[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