[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 71 (Friday, April 12, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17944-17946]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-8825]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[RI 044-6991a; FRL-7170-1]


Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated 
Facilities and Pollutants: Rhode Island; Negative Declarations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the sections 111(d)/129 negative declarations 
submitted by the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management 
(DEM) on January 8, 2002. These negative declarations adequately 
certify that there are no existing commercial and industrial solid 
waste incineration units (CISWIs) or small municipal waste combustors 
(MWCs) located within the boundaries of the state of Rhode Island. EPA 
publishes regulations under sections 111(d) and 129 of the Clean Air 
Act requiring states to submit control plans to EPA. These state 
control plans show how states intend to control the emissions of 
designated pollutants from designated facilities (e.g., CISWIs). The 
state of Rhode Island submitted these negative declarations in lieu of 
a state control plan.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on June 11, 2002 without 
further notice unless EPA receives significant adverse comment by May 
13, 2002. 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. Steven 
Rapp, Chief, Air Permit Programs 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 requirements first become known?
IV. When did Rhode Island submit its negative declarations?
V. Administrative Requirements

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    EPA is approving the negative declarations of air emissions from 
CISWI and small MWC units submitted by the state of Rhode Island.
    EPA is publishing these negative declarations 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 these negative declarations 
should relevant adverse comments be filed. If EPA receives no 
significant adverse comment by May 13, 2002 this action will be 
effective June 11, 2002.
    If EPA receives significant 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 June 11, 2002.

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 November 30, 1999 (64 FR 67092) and August 30, 1999 (64 FR 
47276), EPA proposed emission guidelines for CISWI units and small 
MWCs, respectively. These separate actions enabled EPA to list CISWI 
units and small MWCs as designated facilities. EPA specified 
particulate matter, opacity, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, oxides 
of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, lead, cadmium, mercury, and dioxins/
furans as designated pollutants for each category by proposing emission 
guidelines for existing CISWI units and small MWCs. These guidelines 
were published in final form on December 1, 2000 (65 FR 75362) and 
December 6, 2000, respectively.

IV. When Did Rhode Island Submit Its Negative Declarations?

    On January 8, 2002, the Rhode Island Department of Environmental 
Management (DEM) submitted a letter certifying that there are no 
existing CISWI units and no small MWCs subject to 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart B. Section 111(d) and 40 CFR 62.06 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. EPA is publishing these negative declarations at 40 CFR 
62.9970 and 62.9980, respectively.

[[Page 17945]]

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory 
Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 13132

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces 
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the 
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to 
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input 
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the 
Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    This final 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. 
Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order 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 
Executive Order 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 Executive Order 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 13175

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    This final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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 in Executive Order 13175. 
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. Thus, 
Executive Order 13175 does 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 
CISWI and small MWC emission guidelines and standards, EPA prepared a 
written statements pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act which it 
published in the respective 1999 proposal notices (see 64 FR 67100 and 
64 FR 47243). In accordance with EPA's determination in issuing the 
2000 CISWI and small MWC emission guidelines, these negative 
declaration approvals do no 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

    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

[[Page 17946]]

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. 
Section 804, however, exempts from section 801 the following types of 
rules: rules of particular applicability; rules relating to agency 
management or personnel; and rules of agency organization, procedure, 
or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or obligations 
of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not required to submit a 
rule report regarding today's action under section 801 because this 
negative declaration does not substantially affect the rights or 
obligations of non-agency parties.

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing 
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with 
NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards'' 
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies 
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical.
    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. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. 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 May 13, 2002. 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

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Waste treatment and 
disposal.

    Dated: April 3, 2002.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

    40 CFR Part 62 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 OO--Rhode Island

    2. Subpart OO is amended by adding a new Sec. 62.9970 and a new 
undesignated center heading to read as follows:
Air Emissions From Existing Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste 
Incineration Units


Sec. 62.9970  Identification of plan--negative declaration.

    On January 8, 2002, the Rhode Island Department of Environmental 
Management submitted a letter certifying that there are no existing 
commercial and industrial solid waste incineration units in the state 
subject to the emission guidelines under part 60, subpart DDDD of this 
chapter.

    3. Subpart OO is also amended by adding a new Sec. 62.9980 and a 
new undesignated center heading to read as follows:
Air Emissions From Existing Municipal Waste Combustors With the 
Capacity To Combust at Least 35 Tons Per Day But No More Than 250 Tons 
Per Day of Municipal Solid Waste


Sec. 62.9980  Identification of plan--negative declaration.

    On January 8, 2002, the Rhode Island Department of Environmental 
Management submitted a letter certifying that there are no existing 
small municipal waste combustors in the state subject to the emission 
guidelines under part 60, subpart BBBB of this chapter.

[FR Doc. 02-8825 Filed 4-11-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P