Proposed Rule2024-29454
Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Oklahoma; Control of Emissions From Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
December 18, 2024
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the CAA section 111(d)State plan submitted by the State of Oklahoma for sources subject to the Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfills Emission Guidelines (EG). The Oklahoma MSW landfills plan was submitted to fulfill the State's obligations under CAA section 111(d) to implement and enforce the requirements under the MSW Landfills EG. The EPA is proposing to approve the State plan and amend the agency regulations in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 243 (Wednesday, December 18, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 18, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 102847-102851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29454]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[EPA-R06-OAR-2024-0232; FRL-12425-01-R6]
Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Oklahoma; Control of Emissions
From Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the CAA
section 111(d)State plan submitted by the State of Oklahoma for sources
subject to the Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Landfills Emission
Guidelines (EG). The Oklahoma MSW landfills plan was submitted to
fulfill the State's obligations under CAA section 111(d) to implement
and enforce the requirements under the MSW Landfills EG. The EPA is
proposing to approve the State plan and amend the agency regulations in
accordance with the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before February 18,
2025.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2024-0232, at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> or via email to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1a7d7f696f7b767e7534777b6e6e727f6d5a7f6a7b347d75"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="34535147415558505b1a595540405c5143745144551a535b">[email protected]</span></a>v. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
<a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact Matthew Gesualdo, (214)
665-6530, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2d4a485e584c41494203404c595945485a6d485d4c034a42"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5730322422363b3338793a3623233f322017322736793038">[email protected]</span></a>v. For the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit
[[Page 102848]]
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets</a>.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. While all documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may not be publicly
available due to docket file size restrictions or content (e.g., CBI).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Gesualdo, EPA Region 6 Office,
Air and Radiation Division--State Planning and Implementation Branch,
(214) 665-6530, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#96f1f3e5e3f7faf2f9b8fbf7e2e2fef3e1d6f3e6f7b8f1f9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ea8d8f999f8b868e85c4878b9e9e828f9daa8f9a8bc48d85">[email protected]</span></a>v. We encourage the public to
submit comments via <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Please call or email
the contact listed above if you need alternative access to material
indexed but not provided in the docket.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.
I. Background
Section 111 of the CAA, ``Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources,'' directs the EPA to establish emission standards
for stationary sources of air pollution that could potentially endanger
public health or welfare. These standards are referred to as New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS). Section 111(d) addresses the process by
which the EPA and States regulate standards of performance for existing
sources. When NSPS are promulgated for new sources, section 111(d) and
EPA regulations require that the EPA publish an Emission Guideline (EG)
to regulate the same pollutants from existing facilities. While NSPS
are directly applicable to new sources, EG for existing sources
(designated facilities) are intended for States to use to develop a
State plan to submit to the EPA.
State plan submittal and revisions under CAA section 111(d) must be
consistent with the applicable EG and the requirements of 40 CFR part
60, subpart B, and part 62, subpart A. The regulations at 40 CFR part
60, subpart B, contain general provisions applicable to the adoption
and submittal of State plans under CAA section 111(d). Additionally, 40
CFR part 62, subpart A, provides the procedural framework by which the
EPA will approve or disapprove such plans submitted by a state. Once
approved by the EPA, the State plan becomes federally enforceable. If a
State does not submit an approvable State plan to the EPA, the EPA is
responsible for developing, implementing, and enforcing a federal plan.
The MSW landfills NSPS for new landfills and EG for existing
landfills were first promulgated by EPA on March 12, 1996, in 40 CFR
part 60, subparts WWW and Cc, respectively (61 FR 9905). On August 29,
2016, the EPA finalized revisions to the MSW landfills NSPS and EG in
40 CFR part 60, subparts XXX and Cf, respectively (81 FR 59332; 81 FR
59313). The 2016 EG revision updates the control requirements and
monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping provisions for existing MSW
landfill sources.
The current MSW landfills EG, found at 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf,
concerns the regulation of landfill gas and its components, including
methane, from MSW landfills for which construction, reconstruction, or
modification was commenced on or before July 17, 2014. The deadline to
submit a State plan to the EPA was May 30, 2017. On May 21, 2021, EPA
finalized the MSW landfills Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62, subpart OOO
(86 FR 27756). The MSW landfills Federal plan at 40 CFR part 62,
subpart OOO, applies to States that do not have an EPA-approved State
plan. The MSW landfills Federal plan is currently in effect in
Oklahoma.
In order to fulfill obligations under CAA section 111(d), the
Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) submitted a revised
State plan for the control of emissions from existing MSW landfills for
the State of Oklahoma on April 30, 2024.\1\ The Oklahoma MSW landfills
plan implements and enforces the applicable provisions under the MSW
landfills EG at 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf, and additionally meets the
relevant requirements of the CAA section 111(d) implementing
regulations at 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. The Oklahoma submittal and
the supplements are included in the public docket for this rulemaking
(Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-2024-0232).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Oklahoma plan submitted by ODEQ does cover sources
located in Indian country with some exclusions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Evaluation
The EPA has evaluated the Oklahoma MSW landfills plan to determine
whether the plan meets applicable requirements from the MSW landfills
EG at 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf, and the CAA section 111(d)
implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. The EPA's
detailed rationale and discussion on the Oklahoma MSW landfills plan
can be found in the EPA Technical Support Document (TSD), located in
the docket for this rulemaking.
The State plan submittal package includes all materials necessary
to be deemed administratively and technically complete according to the
criteria of 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. The State plan document (the
``Oklahoma MSW Landfill State Plan'') includes all the necessary
authority for the implementation and enforcement of the MSW landfill
Emission Guidelines in the State. Specifically, the State appropriately
incorporated all applicable EG requirements from 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Cf, into the Oklahoma Administrative Code (OAC) 252:100-47,
Control of Emissions from Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.
Both the adopted State plan document and the relevant OAC regulations,
as well as all other relevant plan submittal materials may be found in
the docket for this action. Necessary State legal and enforcement
authorities required for plan approval are located elsewhere in
Oklahoma's statute, rules and regulations and have been reviewed and
approved of by the EPA in the course of prior State implementation plan
as well as section 111(d) and/or 129 State plan approvals. See 40 CFR
part 52, subpart E, and 40 CFR part 62, subpart E.
The Oklahoma MSW landfills plan has been evaluated in detail in the
TSD. Our evaluation demonstrates that the Oklahoma MSW landfills plan
meets the requirements in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf and subpart B, and
is consistent with the requirements for an approvable section 111(d)
State plans for MSW landfills.
III. Impact on Areas of Indian Country
Following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma,
140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020), the Governor of the State of Oklahoma requested
approval under Section 10211(a) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005: A Legacy for Users, Public
Law 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1937 (August 10, 2005) (``SAFETEA''), to
administer in certain areas of Indian country (as defined at 18 U.S.C.
1151) the State's environmental regulatory programs that were
previously approved by the EPA for areas outside of Indian country. The
State's request excluded certain areas of Indian country further
described below. In addition, the State only sought approval to the
extent that such approval is necessary for the State to administer a
program in light of Oklahoma Dept. of Environmental
[[Page 102849]]
Quality v. EPA, 740 F.3d 185 (D.C. Cir. 2014).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In ODEQ v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit held that under the CAA, a
state has the authority to implement a SIP in non-reservation areas
of Indian country in the state, where there has been no
demonstration of Tribal jurisdiction. Under the D.C. Circuit's
decision, the CAA does not provide authority to states to implement
SIPs in Indian reservations. ODEQ did not, however, substantively
address the separate authority in Indian country provided
specifically to Oklahoma under SAFETEA. That separate authority was
not invoked until the State submitted its request under SAFETEA, and
was not approved until EPA's decision, described in this section, on
October 1, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 1, 2020, the EPA approved Oklahoma's SAFETEA request to
administer all the State's EPA-approved environmental regulatory
programs, including the Oklahoma SIP, in the requested areas of Indian
country. As requested by Oklahoma, the EPA's approval under SAFETEA
does not include Indian country lands, including rights-of-way running
through the same, that: (1) qualify as Indian allotments, the Indian
titles to which have not been extinguished, under 18 U.S.C. 1151(c);
(2) are held in trust by the United States on behalf of an individual
Indian or Tribe; or (3) are owned in fee by a Tribe, if the Tribe (a)
acquired that fee title to such land, or an area that included such
land, in accordance with a treaty with the United States to which such
Tribe was a party, and (b) never allotted the land to a member or
citizen of the Tribe (collectively ``excluded Indian country
lands'').\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In accordance with Executive Order 13990, EPA is currently
reviewing our October 1, 2020, SAFETEA approval. On December 22,
2021, EPA proposed to withdraw and reconsider the October 1, 2020,
SAFETEA approval. See <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ok/proposed-withdrawal-and-reconsideration-and-supporting-information">https://www.epa.gov/ok/proposed-withdrawal-and-reconsideration-and-supporting-information</a>. EPA expects to have
further discussions with Tribal governments and State of Oklahoma as
part of this reconsideration. EPA also notes that the October 1,
2020, approval is the subject of a pending challenge in Federal
court. Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma v. Regan, No. 20-9635 (10th Cir.).
Pending completion of EPA's review, EPA is proceeding with this
proposed action in accordance with the October 1, 2020, approval.
EPA may make further changes to the approval of Oklahoma's plan to
reflect the outcome of the proposed withdrawal and reconsideration
of the October 1, 2020 SAFETEA approval. To the extent any change
occurs in the scope of Oklahoma's CAA 111(d)/129 authority in Indian
country before the finalization of this proposed rule, such a change
may affect the scope of the EPA's final action on the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's approval under SAFETEA expressly provided that to the
extent EPA's prior approvals of Oklahoma's environmental programs
excluded Indian country, any such exclusions are superseded for the
geographic areas of Indian country covered by the EPA's approval of
Oklahoma's SAFETEA request.\4\ The approval also provided that future
revisions or amendments to Oklahoma's approved environmental regulatory
programs would extend to the covered areas of Indian country (without
any further need for additional requests under SAFETEA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ EPA's prior approvals relating to Oklahoma's CAA section
111(d)/129 plans did not apply in areas of Indian country located in
the state. See, e.g., 70 FR 57764 (October 4, 2005). Such prior
expressed limitations are superseded by the EPA's approval of
Oklahoma's SAFETEA request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained earlier in this action, the EPA is proposing to
approve the Oklahoma CAA section 111(d) MSW landfill State plan that
was submitted by the State of Oklahoma on April 30, 2024. More
specifically, we are proposing to approve Oklahoma's MSW landfill plan
addressing CAA section 111(d) requirements for MSW under the MSW
landfill EG codified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf. The Oklahoma MSW
landfill plan applies statewide, but only affects specific types of
facilities, as discussed earlier in this document. Consistent with the
EPA's October 1, 2020, SAFETEA approval, if this approval is finalized
as proposed, this Oklahoma MSW landfill plan will apply to all Indian
country within Oklahoma, other than the excluded Indian country lands,
as described earlier. EPA has identified multiple existing facilities
located within currently recognized reservation areas and not on
excluded Indian country lands. These facilities will be subject to the
Oklahoma MSW landfill plan we are proposing to approve. Any newly
constructed municipal solid waste landfill in these same areas would be
subject to the MSW landfill NSPS, not the MSW landfill plan
implementing the MSW landfill EG requirements.
IV. Proposed Action
The EPA is proposing to approve the Oklahoma MSW landfill plan
submitted by ODEQ in accordance with the requirements of section 111(d)
of the CAA and to amend 40 CFR part 62, subpart E, to codify EPA's
approval. The EPA is proposing to find that the Oklahoma MSW landfill
plan is at least as protective as the Federal requirements provided
under the MSW landfills EG, codified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cf.
Once approved by the EPA, the Oklahoma MSW landfills plan will become
federally enforceable.
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
Information on Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994), Executive Order 14094
(Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to Environmental Justice for All,
88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023), and how EPA defines environmental justice
can be found in the section titled ``Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews'' in this proposed rule.\5\ EPA is providing additional
analysis of environmental justice associated with this action. The
results of this analysis are being provided for informational and
transparency purposes, not as a basis of our proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See <a href="https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice">https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA conducted screening analyses using EJSCREEN, an environmental
justice mapping and screening tool that provides EPA with a nationally
consistent dataset and approach for combining various environmental and
demographic indicators.\6\ The EJSCREEN tool presents these indicators
at a Census block group (CBG) level or a larger user-specified
``buffer'' area that covers multiple CBGs.\7\ An individual CBG is a
cluster of contiguous blocks within the same census tract and generally
contains between 600 and 3,000 people. EJSCREEN is not a tool for
performing in-depth risk analysis, but is instead a screening tool that
provides an initial representation of indicators related to
environmental justice and is subject to uncertainty in some underlying
data (e.g., some environmental indicators are based on monitoring data
which are not uniformly available; others are based on self-reported
data).\8\ To help mitigate this uncertainty, we have summarized
EJSCREEN data within larger ``buffer'' areas covering multiple block
groups and representing the average resident within the buffer areas
surrounding the MSW landfills. We present EJSCREEN environmental
indicators to help screen for locations where residents may experience
a higher overall pollution burden than would be expected for a block
group with the same total population. These indicators of overall
pollution burden include estimates of ambient particulate matter
(PM<INF>2.5</INF>) and ozone concentration, a score for traffic
proximity and volume, percentage of pre-1960 housing units (lead paint
[[Page 102850]]
indicator), and scores for proximity to Superfund sites, risk
management plan (RMP) sites, and hazardous waste facilities.\9\
EJSCREEN also provides information on demographic indicators, including
percent low-income, communities of color, linguistic isolation, and
less than high school education. The EPA prepared EJSCREEN reports
covering buffer areas of approximately 3-mile radii around the existing
MSW landfills in Oklahoma. Table 1 presents a summary of results from
the EPA's screening-level analysis for the areas surrounding each MSW
landfill compared to the U.S. as a whole, where the landfill was
located in an area where one or more of the EJ indices were greater
than the 80th percentiles (the full, detailed EJSCREEN reports are
provided in the docket for this rulemaking).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The EJSCREEN tool is available at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ejscreen">https://www.epa.gov/ejscreen</a>.
\7\ See <a href="https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/about/glossary.html">https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/about/glossary.html</a>.
\8\ In addition, EJSCREEN relies on the five-year block group
estimates from the U.S. Census American Community Survey. The
advantage of using five-year over single-year estimates is increased
statistical reliability of the data (i.e., lower sampling error),
particularly for small geographic areas and population groups. For
more information, see <a href="https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/acs/acs_general_handbook_2020.pdf">https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/acs/acs_general_handbook_2020.pdf</a>.
\9\ For additional information on environmental indicators and
proximity scores in EJSCREEN, see ``EJSCREEN Environmental Justice
Mapping and Screening Tool: EJSCREEN Technical Documentation,''
Chapter 3 and Appendix C (September 2019) at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-04/documents/ejscreen_technical_document.pdf">https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-04/documents/ejscreen_technical_document.pdf</a>.
Table 1--EJSCREEN Analysis Summary for Existing Oklahoma MSW Landfills With EJ Indices Above 80%tile
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Values for buffer areas (radius) for each MSW landfill and the U.S. (percentile within U.S. where indicated)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quarry
Enid City Great Plains Newcastle Muskogee Landfill
Variables Landfill (Pocasset) Ponca City Landfill Community Osage Landfill (Waste
(Garfield, 3 Landfill Landfill (Kay, (McClain, 3 Landfill (Osage, 3 Management of U.S.
miles) (Grady, 3 3 miles) miles) (Muskogee, 3 miles) OK) (Tulsa, 3
miles) miles) miles)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollution Burden Indicators
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter (PM2.5), annual average...................... 8.97 [micro]g/ 9.01 [micro]g/ 9.19 [micro]g/ 9.81 [micro]g/ 8.88 [micro]g/ 8.69 [micro]g/ 9.38 [micro]g/ 8.45 [micro]g/
m\3\ m\3\ (75th m\3\ (78th m\3\ (86th m\3\ (71st m\3\ (66th m\3\ (81st m\3\
(74th %ile) %ile) %ile) %ile) %ile) %ile) %ile) (--)
Ozone, summer seasonal average of daily 8-hour max.............. 58.9 ppb 59.2 ppb 57.2 ppb 60.8 ppb 53.7 ppb 59.1 ppb 59.4 ppb 61.8 ppb
(42nd %ile) (46th %ile) (33rd %ile) (52nd %ile) (15th %ile) (43rd %ile) (44th %ile) (--)
Traffic proximity (daily traffic count/distance to road)........ 180,000 57,000 45,000 250,000 200,000 180,000 680,000 1,700,000
(23rd %ile) (13th %ile) (11th %ile) (28th %ile) (24th %ile) (24th %ile) (46th %ile) (--)
Lead paint (percentage pre-1960 housing)........................ 0.52% 0.14% 0.43% 0.045% 0.30% 0.66% 0.074% 0.30%
(75th %ile) (41st %ile) (69th %ile) (25th %ile) (58th %ile) (84th %ile) (31st %ile) (--)
Superfund proximity score*...................................... 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.099 0.99 0.00 0.39
(0%ile) (0%ile) (0%ile) (0%ile) (59th %ile) (91st %ile) (0%ile) (--)
RMP proximity score *........................................... 1.20 0.22 1.30 0.28 0.16 0.95 1.60 0.57
(85th %ile) (46th %ile) (86th %ile) (50th %ile) (40th %ile) (79th %ile) (90th %ile) (--)
Hazardous waste proximity score *............................... 0.00 0.13 0.36 0.27 0.15 1.00 4.60 3.5
(0%ile) (20th %ile) (29th %ile) (26th %ile) (21st %ile) (45th %ile) (77th %ile) (--)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Demographic Indicators
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People of color population...................................... 39% 15% 35% 23% 53% 30% 24% 40%
(57th %ile) (29th %ile) (53rd %ile) (40th %ile) (68th %ile) (48th %ile) (42nd %ile) (--)
Low-income population........................................... 49% 23% 47% 20% 55% 46% 32% 30%
(80th %ile) (43rd %ile) (78th %ile) (37th %ile) (85th %ile) (77th %ile) (58th %ile) (--)
Linguistically isolated population.............................. 2% 1% 1% 0% 2% 1% 2% 5%
(65th %ile) (57th %ile) (58th %ile) (0%ile) (64th %ile) (58th %ile) (62nd %ile) (--)
Population with less than high school education................. 18% 7% 13% 9% 15% 11% 9% 11%
(79th %ile) (48th %ile) (69th %ile) (55th %ile) (72nd %ile) (63rd %ile) (53rd %ile) (--)
Population under 5 years of age................................. 7% 4% 4% 7% 8% 8% 5% 5%
(73rd %ile) (38th %ile) (46th %ile) (69th %ile) (75th %ile) (78th %ile) (50th %ile) (--)
Population over 64 years of age................................. 10% 31% 15% 12% 17% 15% 29% 18%
(25th %ile) (89th %ile) (46th %ile) (32nd %ile) (53rd %ile) (45th %ile) (86th %ile) (--)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The traffic proximity and volume indicator is a score calculated by daily traffic count divided by distance in meters to the road. The Superfund proximity, RMP proximity, and hazardous waste
proximity indicators are all scores calculated by site or facility counts divided by distance in kilometers.
EPA proposes to approve Oklahoma's MSW Landfills Plan, received on
April 30, 2024, in accordance with section 111(d) of the CAA. The
Oklahoma MSW Landfills Plan incorporates Federal requirements for MSW
landfills, as specified in the MSW landfills EG at 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Cf, which are also implemented under the MSW Landfills Federal
Plan at 40 CFR part 62, subpart OOO. The MSW Landfills Federal Plan was
implemented by EPA in Oklahoma as Oklahoma did not have an approved MSW
landfills plan addressing applicable EG requirements. These EG
requirements implemented under the MSW Landfills Federal Plan and now
incorporated by Oklahoma in its MSW landfills plan is designed to
result in significant emissions reductions for MSW landfills, as
described in the Federal Registers for the MSW landfill rules (80 FR
52100; 81 FR 59276). Landfill gas is a natural byproduct of the
decomposition of organic material in landfills and is composed of
roughly 50% methane, 50% carbon dioxide (CO<INF>2</INF>), and less than
1% non-methane organic compounds (NMOC) by volume, which include
volatile organic
[[Page 102851]]
compounds (VOC) and various organic hazardous air pollutants (HAP).\10\
VOC emissions are precursors to both fine particulate matter
(PM<INF>2.5</INF>) and ozone formation; exposure to PM<INF>2.5</INF>
and ozone is associated with significant public health effects,
including (1) cardiovascular morbidity such as heart attacks, (2)
respiratory morbidity such as asthma attacks, acute bronchitis, (3)
hospital admissions and emergency room visits, and (4) premature
mortality.\11\ Hazardous air pollutants may cause cancer or other
serious health effects, such as reproductive effects or birth
defects.\12\ In addition, methane is a potent greenhouse gas with a
global warming potential 28-36 times greater than CO<INF>2.</INF>
Therefore, we believe that these requirements for existing MSW
landfills and resulting emissions reductions have climate benefits and
have contributed to reduced environmental and health impacts on all
populations impacted by emissions from these sources in Oklahoma,
including communities with environmental justice concerns, and will
continue to do so under Federal oversight. This proposed rule is not
anticipated to have disproportionately high or adverse human health or
environmental effects on communities with environmental justice
concerns because it is not anticipated to result in or contribute to
emissions increases in Oklahoma. If finalized as proposed, EPA's
approval of the Oklahoma MSW Landfills Plan will make the Plan and the
corresponding MSW landfills EG requirements incorporated into the Plan
federally enforceable by EPA as of the effective date of the final
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See 80 FR 52099, August 27, 2015.
\11\ Id.
\12\ See <a href="https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-management-process/managing-air-quality-human-health-environmental-and-economic#what">https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-management-process/managing-air-quality-human-health-environmental-and-economic#what</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a CAA
section 111(d) submission that complies with the provisions of the Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7411(d); 42 U.S.C. 7429;
40 CFR part 60, subparts B and Cf; and 40 CFR part 62, subpart A. Thus,
in reviewing CAA section 111(d) State plan submissions, the EPA's role
is to approve State plans that meet the criteria of the CAA and
implementing regulations. Accordingly, this action merely proposes to
approve State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that
reason, this action:
<bullet> Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
<bullet> Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
<bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
<bullet> Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
<bullet> Does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
This proposed approval of revisions to the Oklahoma 111(d) State
plan in accordance with section 111(d) of the CAA as discussed more
fully elsewhere in this document will apply, if finalized as proposed,
to certain areas of Indian country as discussed in the preamble, and
therefore has Tribal implications as specified in E.O. 13175 (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000). However, this action will neither impose
substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized Tribal
governments, nor preempt Tribal law. This action will not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized Tribal
governments because no actions will be required of Tribal governments.
This action will also not preempt Tribal law as no Oklahoma tribe
implements a regulatory program under the CAA, and thus does not have
applicable or related Tribal laws. Consistent with the EPA Policy on
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes (May 4, 2011), the EPA
has engaged with Tribal governments that may be affected by this action
and provided information about this action.
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on communities with environmental justice
(EJ) concerns to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 2023) builds on
and supplements E.O. 12898 and defines EJ as, among other things, ``the
just treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of
income, race, color, national origin, or Tribal affiliation, or
disability in agency decision-making and other Federal activities that
affect human health and the environment.''
The air agency did not evaluate EJ considerations as part of its
submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation. EPA performed an EJ analysis,
as is described in the section titled, ``Environmental Justice
Considerations.'' The analysis was done for the purpose of providing
additional context and information about this rulemaking to the public,
not as a basis of the action. Due to the nature of the action being
taken here, this action is expected to have a neutral to positive
impact on the air quality of the affected area. In addition, there is
no information in the record upon which this decision is based
inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898/14096 of achieving EJ
for communities with EJ concerns.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment and disposal.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 9, 2024.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2024-29454 Filed 12-17-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on December 18, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.