81 FR 28720 - Revision to the Research, Development and Demonstration Permits Rule for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 90 (May 10, 2016)

Page Range		28720-28724
FR Document		2016-10993
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is publishing a final rule to revise the maximum permit term for Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (MSWLF) units operating under Research, Development and Demonstration (RD&D) permits. The RD&D permit program, which began in 2004, allows landfill facilities to utilize innovative methods that vary from the run-on control systems, liquids restrictions, and final cover criteria prescribed in 40 CFR part 258 if these systems are determined by the Director of an approved State to be at least as protective as those criteria. The current rule limits permits for these units to three years, and they are renewable three times for a total permit term of 12 years. This revision allows the Director of an approved State to increase the number of permit renewals to six, for a total permit term of up to 21 years.
Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 90 (Tuesday, May 10, 2016)
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 10, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28720-28724]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10993]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 258

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2015-0126; FRL-9943-87-OLEM]
RIN 2050-AG75


Revision to the Research, Development and Demonstration Permits 
Rule for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is publishing a 
final rule to revise the maximum permit term for Municipal Solid Waste 
Landfill (MSWLF) units operating under Research, Development and 
Demonstration (RD&D) permits. The RD&D permit program, which began in 
2004, allows landfill facilities to utilize innovative methods that 
vary from the run-on control systems, liquids restrictions, and final 
cover criteria prescribed in 40 CFR part 258 if these systems are 
determined by the Director of an approved State to be at least as 
protective as those criteria. The current rule limits permits for these 
units to three years, and they are renewable three times for a total 
permit term of 12 years. This revision allows the Director of an 
approved State to increase the

[[Page 28721]]

number of permit renewals to six, for a total permit term of up to 21 
years.

DATES: This final rule is effective on November 10, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2015-0126. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in 
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain 
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the 
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. 
Publicly available docket materials are available electronically 
through http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Dufficy, Materials Recovery and 
Waste Management Division of the Office of Land and Emergency 
Management (mail code 5304P), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone: 703-308-
9037; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Entities potentially affected by this rule are public or private 
owners or operators of MSWLFs. These entities include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Category                   Example of affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Governments......................  Regulatory agencies and
                                          agencies operating landfills.
Industry...............................  Owners or operators of
                                          municipal solid waste
                                          landfills.
Municipalities, including Tribal         Owners or operators of
 Governments.                             municipal solid waste
                                          landfills.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The affected entities may also fall under the North American 
Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 924110, Sanitation 
engineering agencies, government; or 562212, Solid Waste Landfill. This 
list of sectors is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. This table lists the types of entities that the EPA believes 
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities 
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether 
your entity is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine 
the applicability criteria found in 40 CFR part 258 and the Research, 
Development and Demonstration Permits for Municipal Solid Waste 
Landfills final rule, referred to as the ``2004 RD&D rule'' (69 FR 
13242, March 22, 2004). If you have questions regarding the 
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. What action is the agency taking?

    The EPA is revising the maximum permit term for MSWLF units 
operating under RD&D permits. The rule allows the Director of an 
approved State to issue up to six, 3-year permit renewals, for a total 
permit term of 21 years. The RD&D rule previously limited the total 
permit term to 12 years.
    The primary basis for this extension of the permit period to up to 
21 years is to provide the EPA more time to characterize the 
performance of RD&D projects without making the permit period so long 
as to be open-ended. The EPA believes that the period of 21 years 
strikes an appropriate balance between providing more time for projects 
to continue operations as research facilities, while providing enough 
time for the EPA to consider making additional changes to the part 258 
MSWLF regulations.

C. What is the agency's authority for taking this action?

    The authority for this rulemaking is sections 1008, 2002(a), 4004, 
4005(c), 4010 and 8001(a) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
of 1976 (RCRA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6907, 6912(a), 6944, 6945(c), 
6949a, 6981(a).

D. What are the anticipated effects and benefits of this action?

    The anticipated effect of this action is to provide the Director of 
an approved State the ability to issue renewals to existing RD&D 
permits, as well as new RD&D permits, for up to 21 years instead of 12 
years. During this time, the EPA will continue to evaluate data from 
these facilities. There are approximately 30 facilities currently 
operating with RD&D permits. It is also relevant to one facility 
operating on tribal lands under a site-specific action. Additional 
facilities may also seek an RD&D permit in the future. The EPA has no 
information with which to estimate whether any new facilities will seek 
RD&D permits. Owners/operators operating under existing RD&D permits 
are not expected to incur any new costs as a result of this final rule. 
The annual costs for ongoing recordkeeping and annual reporting 
requirements are estimated at $2,410 per facility.
    It is important to note that applying for a RD&D permit remains 
voluntary. This action does not impose any new regulatory burden. This 
action allows the Director of an approved State to increase the number 
of extensions of the permit period for existing facilities, or offer 
more extensions of the permit term for new facilities, for those owners 
and operators who choose to participate in this research program. 
Increasing the possible number of extensions of the RD&D permit term 
may benefit current owners and operators of RD&D units by providing 
additional time to recover their costs, if the Director of an approved 
State chooses to extend existing permits. For example, data from one 
RD&D permitted facility show a projected increase of 3% in the rate of 
return for 20 years compared to 12 years.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See docket item EPA-HQ-RCRA-2015-0126-0012, Smiths Creek 
Bioreactor Report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Increasing the possible number of extensions of RD&D permit terms 
is also expected to provide more time for the EPA to collect additional 
data on the potential benefits of the approaches being taken under 
these RD&D permits. These potential benefits include: Decreased costs 
for leachate treatment due to leachate recirculation in bioreactors; 
increased revenue from the sale of landfill gas for use as a renewable 
source of fuel; decreased risk due to a reduction in the transportation 
of leachate for treatment; accelerated production and capture of 
landfill gas for use as a renewable fuel; and accelerated stabilization 
and corresponding decreased post-closure care activities, for 
facilities as a result of the accelerated decomposition of waste.

II. Background

    Under Subchapter IV of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6941-6949a, the EPA has 
promulgated minimum national standards for MSWLFs at 40 CFR part 258 
(56 FR 50978, October 9, 1991). As specified in 42 U.S.C. 6981(a), RCRA 
also directs EPA to encourage research and development for, among other 
things, the development and application of new and improved methods of 
collecting and disposing of solid waste.

[[Page 28722]]

    The initial 1991 MSWLF regulations addressed seven basic areas: 
Location restrictions; operation; design; groundwater monitoring; 
corrective action; closure and post-closure care; and financial 
assurance. These MSWLF landfill regulations focused on dry-tomb 
landfills to minimize the possibility of groundwater contamination from 
the production and subsequent leakage of leachate. After the 
promulgation of those standards, the EPA became aware that landfill 
technology had advanced sufficiently that some alternative designs and 
operations could benefit from further study through research and 
demonstration projects. For example, some of these methods, 
particularly the addition of liquids and leachate recirculation, could 
accelerate biodegradation and provide additional potential benefits. 
These include:

--Acceleration of landfill gas generation which can be collected as a 
source of renewable fuel;
--minimization of leachate treatment requirements during the 
operational life of the landfill;
--more rapid reduction in concentration of leachate constituents of 
concern, thereby limiting the corresponding post-closure activities for 
leachate control; and
--an increase in the rate of landfill settlement resulting in the more 
efficient use of permitted landfill capacity.

    As a means to advance innovation in landfill design, in 2000 the 
EPA selected four landfills to participate in its Project XL 
program,\2\ all of which involved some use of bioreactor technology or 
leachate recirculation. The landfills are located in Buncombe County, 
North Carolina; Yolo County, California; King George County, Virginia; 
and the Maplewood facility in Amelia Country, Virginia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA began Project XL in 1995, and accepted projects until 
2002, as a national pilot program to help business, state and local 
governments, and federal facilities work with EPA to develop and 
test innovative approaches to achieve better and more cost-effective 
environmental and public health protection. The provisions for the 
four Project XL landfills discussed here are codified in Sec.  
258.41.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to Project XL, in 2001 the EPA began using Cooperative 
Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs) to promote collaborative 
research between federal and non-federal scientists as an additional 
means to explore the addition of liquids to landfills to promote faster 
biodegradation and stabilization. Bioreactor landfill sites operating 
with CRADAs include the Outer Loop landfill in Louisville, Kentucky; 
and the Polk County landfill in Florida.
    Subsequently, in 2004, the EPA amended the part 258 MSWLF 
regulations to create a broader RD&D research program. The 2004 RD&D 
action (69 FR 13242, March 22, 2004), which added Sec.  258.4, enabled 
the Director of an approved State to allow RD&D projects with variances 
to specific provisions of the MSWLF criteria, including variances from 
operating criteria in part 258 with respect to run-on controls (Sec.  
258.26(a)(1)) and the liquids restrictions in Sec.  258.28(a). In 
addition, the 2004 RD&D rule allows an additional variance for the 
final cover requirements set forth in the closure criteria in Sec.  
258.60(a)(1), (a)(2) and (b)(1). The 2004 RD&D rule limits the duration 
of the initial permit to three years, and the permit can be renewed for 
up to three additional 3-year terms, for a total of 12 years.
    As of March 2014, in the most recent compilation of data available 
to the EPA, there were 30 active RD&D projects in 11 approved states 
and one project on tribal lands.\3\ The maximum permit period for the 
first of these projects is coming to an end. This final rule allows the 
Director of an approved State to continue to extend the permit period 
for up to a total of 21 years to allow for continued research.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Permitting of Landfill Bioreactor Operations: Ten years 
After the RD&D Rule, EPA document number EPA/600/R-14/335.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. What did EPA propose?

    EPA proposed this rulemaking through an action in the Federal 
Register published at 80 FR 70180, November 13, 2015. EPA proposed to 
allow the Director of an approved State to increase the maximum term 
for RD&D permits from 12 to 21 years at Sec.  258.4(e)(1), in order to 
provide the EPA more time to continue to support research into the 
performance of bioreactors, alternative covers and run-on systems. In 
effect, the proposal would allow the Director of an approved State to 
increase the number of permit renewals from three to six. The EPA did 
not propose any other changes to the RD&D permit program and made it 
clear that EPA was not reopening at this time any other provision of 
the existing RD&D rule or MSWLF criteria in 40 CFR part 258.
    Separately from this final rule, the EPA plans to publish an 
Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) seeking comment on the 
possibility of revising other sections of the MSWLF criteria (40 CFR 
part 258) to authorize the operation of wet landfills and bioreactors 
and other possible changes to the national criteria on a permanent 
basis. Interested parties will have an opportunity to comment on 
broader issues relating to bioreactor operation during the public 
comment period on that ANPRM.
    In response to the 80 FR 70180, November 13, 2015 proposed rule, 
the Agency received six sets of comments during the comment period that 
closed on December 14, 2015. The six sets of comments were from: The 
States of Iowa, Kansas, Michigan and Nebraska; the Southeast Michigan 
Council of Governments, and the Solid Waste Disposal and Conversion 
Task Force of the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste 
Management Officials. All comments can be reviewed on-line at http://www.regulations.gov/, using ``EPA-HQ-RCRA-2015-0126'' in the search 
box, and then by opening the docket folder and select `view comments' 
to review any or all of the comments.
    Five of the six commenters expressed support for extending maximum 
permit term for RD&D permits to EPA's proposed term of 21 years. 
Several commenters (including the one commenter that did not support an 
extension to 21 years) indicated support for eliminating the overall 
permit term entirely, arguing that any time limit may discourage 
entities from making investments. Several commenters also encouraged 
the EPA to establish a mechanism to convert RD&D permits into permanent 
designs and operational practices subject to appropriate monitoring and 
performance standards as administered by an approved state. Commenters 
indicated support for making permanent changes to the regulations at 40 
CFR part 258 to authorize bioreactor operations.
    After consideration of these comments, and in light of other 
information in the record, the EPA has decided to issue the final rule 
as proposed. The EPA disagrees with the comments that the RD&D permit 
program should not be time-limited, which is consistent with the EPA 
position since the original RD&D rule was promulgated in 2004. The RD&D 
permits have always been intended to be used for innovation and 
experimentation for a limited period of time. As such, the RD&D rule is 
not intended to authorize activities on a permanent basis, as unlimited 
renewals could effectively allow. In addition, EPA notes that the 
commenters did not suggest an alternative, discrete, maximum time frame 
other than EPA's proposal for a maximum permit term of 21 years.
    The issue of making changes to the part 258 regulations to 
authorize

[[Page 28723]]

bioreactor operations on a permanent basis is outside the scope of this 
rule, as EPA stated in the proposed rule (80 FR 70180, November 13, 
2015). As discussed previously, EPA plans to publish an ANPRM 
requesting data relating to wet landfills and bioreactors. EPA intends 
this ANPRM to begin the process of considering additional changes to 
the part 258 regulations. In that proceeding, the commenters are free 
to raise concerns about how existing RD&D projects can be appropriately 
addressed under any potential future amendments to the existing MSWLF 
regulations. Thus, the comments did not change EPA's view that a 
maximum term of 21 years is an appropriate balance between allowing 
more time for continued research by EPA and allowing the facilities to 
continue operating for a significant but not open-ended period of time.

B. Basis for This Final Rule

    In the 2004 RD&D final rule, the EPA made clear its intention that 
MSWLF RD&D permits be of limited duration while also providing data to 
support future rulemaking. This final rule is intended to further these 
dual goals. Although the EPA does not expect that all RD&D permits will 
necessarily extend to the full permit term, the EPA believes that the 
current 12-year time limit may not be sufficient to realize potential 
benefits in all cases. Thus, extending the permit period for up to 21 
years will provide more time to collect data on potential benefits and 
any problems without making the permit period so long as to be open-
ended.
    Extending the maximum permit term will help continuing efforts to 
collect data at existing RD&D units. If the EPA did not take this 
action, owners and operators using existing RD&D permits would need to 
make significant modifications to their disposal units or cease 
operation altogether, before reaching the end of their normal 
operations or closure. Because of the potential environmental benefits 
that may be derived from bioreactors, alternative cover designs, and 
run-on systems, the EPA believes that it is important to extend the 
maximum permit period to 21 years to provide more time to characterize 
the performance of RD&D projects without making the permit period so 
long as to be open-ended.
    The EPA also wishes to enhance the economic feasibility to build 
and operate bioreactors or employ alternative approaches for final 
covers, which would provide additional sources of data in the future. 
The EPA has heard from stakeholders that limiting the permit period to 
12 years has the unintended consequence of discouraging the development 
of bioreactors.

C. Implementation of This Final Rule

    This rule does not require states with EPA-approved RD&D programs 
to modify their solid waste permit programs. Since this change to the 
2004 RD&D rule provides more flexibility than existing federal 
criteria, states are not required to amend existing solid waste permit 
programs that have been determined by EPA to be adequate under 40 CFR 
part 239. At the same time, the RD&D rule (including the revised 
maximum permit term) is not self-implementing, and states are required 
to adopt the RD&D rule and obtain EPA approval for their RD&D program 
in order to issue a RD&D permit. States previously approved to issue 
RD&D permits that wish to increase the total length of time for which 
RD&D permits can be issued will need to notify the EPA in accordance 
with 40 CFR part 239. States with EPA-approved solid waste permit 
programs that have not previously sought approval for an RD&D program 
and now wish to do so will need to apply to EPA for approval of an RD&D 
program, including approval of the longer time period allowed by this 
rulemaking. Any state without an EPA-approved solid waste permit 
program may submit an application to EPA for a determination of 
adequacy under 40 CFR part 239 and may include a request for approval 
of the RD&D permit provisions reflecting the longer time period allowed 
by this rule. For MSWLF units located in Indian Country, EPA intends to 
consider the longer maximum permit term when issuing or modifying any 
site-specific RD&D rule. EPA has previously issued draft guidance on 
the site-specific flexibility request process in Indian Country. See 
``Site-Specific Flexibility Requests for Municipal Solid Waste 
Landfills in Indian Country,'' EPA 530-R-97-016, August 1997.

III. Statutory and Executive Orders Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at http://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was 
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose any new Information Collection Request 
(ICR) burden under the PRA. The purpose of this action is to extend the 
maximum allowable permit period for this program, and this change to 
the RD&D program itself does not impose any additional reporting 
requirements. The OMB has previously approved the information 
collection activities contained in the existing regulations in two 
different, applicable ICRs. The ICRs affected by this proposal are for 
40 CFR part 239, Requirements for State Permit Program Determination of 
Adequacy and part 258, MSWLF Criteria. The OMB has reviewed the ICR for 
part 239 (ICR# 1608.07, OMB# 2050-0152). The EPA will request comments 
under the ICR review process from states that plan to make these 
revisions so that the EPA can better understand the expected burden 
that would be incurred by states who wish to make these changes. In 
addition, the EPA will also be requesting information from MSWLF 
owners/operators on the reporting burden that they would incur under an 
extended permit term provided in accordance with this rule under the 
part 258, MSWLF criteria ICR (ICR# 1381.09, OMB# 2050-0122) when that 
review process begins. This process is scheduled to be completed in 
June 2016.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In 
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant 
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no 
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small 
entities subject to the rule. This rule will not create any additional 
burden for small entities. Small entities are not required to take any 
action as a consequence of this rule, and this action will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. We have 
therefore concluded that this action will have no net regulatory burden 
for all directly regulated small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small

[[Page 28724]]

governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local 
or tribal governments or the private sector. The costs involved in this 
action are imposed only by voluntary participation in a federal 
program.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It 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.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. The EPA has concluded that this action will have 
no new tribal implications, nor would it present any additional burden 
on the tribes. It will neither impose substantial direct compliance 
costs on tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive 
Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, because it is 
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and 
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety 
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to 
children. The underlying RD&D rule requires all RD&D permits to include 
terms and conditions that are at least as protective as the criteria 
for municipal solid waste landfills to assure protection of human 
health and the environment, and this rule does not reopen or otherwise 
change that requirement.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes the human health and environmental risk addressed 
by this action will not have a new disproportionately high and adverse 
human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or 
indigenous populations. The underlying RD&D regulations require all 
RD&D permits to include terms and conditions that are at least as 
protective as the criteria for municipal solid waste landfills to 
assure protection of human health and the environment. This final rule 
is an administrative action to extend the maximum permit period, and it 
does not reopen or otherwise change the requirement for protectiveness. 
Therefore, the EPA finds that the human health and environmental risks 
addressed by this action will not have disproportionately high and 
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income 
or indigenous populations, because this action does not affect the 
level of protection provided to human health or the environment.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule 
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of 
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 258

    Environmental protection, Municipal landfills, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment and disposal.

    Dated: April 29, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 
258 as follows:

PART 258--CRITERIA FOR MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS

0
1. The authority citation for part 258 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1345(d) and (e); 42 U.S.C. 6902(a), 6907, 
6912(a), 6944, 6945(c) and 6949a(c), 6981(a).

Subpart A--General

0
2. Revise Sec.  258.4(e)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  258.4  Research, development, and demonstration permits.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) The total term for a permit for a project including renewals 
may not exceed twenty-one (21) years; and
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-10993 Filed 5-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
28720 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

State effective Notice of final rule
Title/subject NFR citation
date date

* * * * * * *

(9) Yellowstone County

* * * * * * *
Billings 2010 SO2 Maintenance Plan ......................................................................... 12/14/2015 5/10/2016 ............... [Insert Federal
Register citation].

■ 3. Section 52.1398 is added to read as redesignating the Billings 2010 SO2 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
follows: nonattainment area to attainment.
(b) The EPA is approving the Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment
§ 52.1398 Control strategy: Sulfur dioxide. maintenance plan for the Billings Status Designations
(a) Redesignation to attainment. The nonattainment area for the 2010 SO2
EPA has determined that the Billings NAAQS submitted by the State of ■ 5. Section 81.327, table ‘‘Montana—
Montana on December 14, 2015. 2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS (Primary)’’
2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2)
nonattainment area has met the criteria is amended by revising the entry for
PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS ‘‘Yellowstone County (part)’’ to read as
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING
redesignation from nonattainment to follows:
PURPOSES
attainment for the 2010 1-hour SO2 § 81.327 Montana.
NAAQS. The EPA is therefore ■ 4. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows: * * * * *

Designation
Designated area
Date Type

* * * * * * *
Yellowstone County (part) .................................................................................................................... 5/10/2016 Attainment.
The area originates at the point defined as the southwest corner of Section 11, Township 1S,
Range 26E. From that point the boundary proceeds north along the western section line of Sec-
tion 11 to the point of intersection with the midline of Interstate Highway 90. From that point the
boundary follows the midline of Interstate Highway 90, across the Yellowstone River, to the point
where the highway midline intersects the northern boundary of Section 35, Township 1N, Range
26E. From that point the boundary proceeds east along the northern section line of Sections 35
and 36 to the point where Old US 87/Hardin Road leaves the section line and turns southeast.
The boundary follows the midline of Old US 87/Hardin Road southeast to the point where the
road intersects the western boundary of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 31, Township 1N,
Range 27E. From that point the boundary proceeds south along the 1/4 section line to the
southern boundary of Township 1N, then east to the northeast corner of Section 5, Township
1S, Range 27E. The boundary then proceeds south along the eastern section line of sections 5
and 8 to the southeast corner of Section 8, Township 1S, Range 27E, where it turns west and
follows the south section line of Sections 8 and 7, Township 1S, Range 27E; and Sections 12
and 11, Township 1S, Range 26E, back to the point of origin.

* * * * * ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION to revise the maximum permit term for
[FR Doc. 2016–10451 Filed 5–9–16; 8:45 am] AGENCY Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P (MSWLF) units operating under
40 CFR Part 258 Research, Development and
[EPA–HQ–RCRA–2015–0126; FRL–9943–87– Demonstration (RD&D) permits. The
OLEM] RD&D permit program, which began in
2004, allows landfill facilities to utilize
RIN 2050–AG75 innovative methods that vary from the
run-on control systems, liquids
Revision to the Research, restrictions, and final cover criteria
Development and Demonstration prescribed in 40 CFR part 258 if these
Permits Rule for Municipal Solid Waste systems are determined by the Director
Landfills of an approved State to be at least as
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES

AGENCY: Environmental Protection protective as those criteria. The current
Agency (EPA). rule limits permits for these units to
ACTION: Final rule. three years, and they are renewable
three times for a total permit term of 12
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection years. This revision allows the Director
Agency (EPA) is publishing a final rule of an approved State to increase the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:17 May 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM 10MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 28721

number of permit renewals to six, for a Certain other material, such as Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
total permit term of up to 21 years. copyrighted material, is not placed on Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington,
DATES: This final rule is effective on the Internet and will be publicly DC 20460; telephone: 703–308–9037;
November 10, 2016. available only in hard copy form. email: Dufficy.craig@epa.gov.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a Publicly available docket materials are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
docket for this action under Docket ID available electronically through http://
No. EPA–HQ–RCRA–2015–0126. All www.regulations.gov. I. General Information
documents in the docket are listed on A. Does this action apply to me?
the http://www.regulations.gov Web FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
site. Although listed in the index, some Craig Dufficy, Materials Recovery and Entities potentially affected by this
information is not publicly available, Waste Management Division of the rule are public or private owners or
e.g., CBI or other information whose Office of Land and Emergency operators of MSWLFs. These entities
disclosure is restricted by statute. Management (mail code 5304P), U.S. include:

Category Example of affected entities

State Governments ................................................................................... Regulatory agencies and agencies operating landfills.
Industry ..................................................................................................... Owners or operators of municipal solid waste landfills.
Municipalities, including Tribal Governments ........................................... Owners or operators of municipal solid waste landfills.

The affected entities may also fall for the EPA to consider making this research program. Increasing the
under the North American Industry additional changes to the part 258 possible number of extensions of the
Classification System (NAICS) code MSWLF regulations. RD&D permit term may benefit current
924110, Sanitation engineering owners and operators of RD&D units by
C. What is the agency’s authority for
agencies, government; or 562212, Solid providing additional time to recover
taking this action?
Waste Landfill. This list of sectors is not their costs, if the Director of an
intended to be exhaustive, but rather The authority for this rulemaking is approved State chooses to extend
provides a guide for readers regarding sections 1008, 2002(a), 4004, 4005(c), existing permits. For example, data from
entities likely to be regulated by this 4010 and 8001(a) of the Resource one RD&D permitted facility show a
action. This table lists the types of Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 projected increase of 3% in the rate of
entities that the EPA believes could (RCRA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6907, return for 20 years compared to 12
potentially be regulated by this action. 6912(a), 6944, 6945(c), 6949a, 6981(a). years.1
Other types of entities not listed in the D. What are the anticipated effects and Increasing the possible number of
table could also be regulated. To benefits of this action? extensions of RD&D permit terms is also
determine whether your entity is expected to provide more time for the
regulated by this action, you should The anticipated effect of this action is EPA to collect additional data on the
carefully examine the applicability to provide the Director of an approved potential benefits of the approaches
criteria found in 40 CFR part 258 and State the ability to issue renewals to being taken under these RD&D permits.
the Research, Development and existing RD&D permits, as well as new These potential benefits include:
Demonstration Permits for Municipal RD&D permits, for up to 21 years Decreased costs for leachate treatment
Solid Waste Landfills final rule, referred instead of 12 years. During this time, the due to leachate recirculation in
to as the ‘‘2004 RD&D rule’’ (69 FR EPA will continue to evaluate data from bioreactors; increased revenue from the
13242, March 22, 2004). If you have these facilities. There are approximately sale of landfill gas for use as a
questions regarding the applicability of 30 facilities currently operating with renewable source of fuel; decreased risk
this action to a particular entity, consult RD&D permits. It is also relevant to one due to a reduction in the transportation
the person listed in the FOR FURTHER facility operating on tribal lands under of leachate for treatment; accelerated
INFORMATION CONTACT section. a site-specific action. Additional production and capture of landfill gas
facilities may also seek an RD&D permit for use as a renewable fuel; and
B. What action is the agency taking? in the future. The EPA has no accelerated stabilization and
The EPA is revising the maximum information with which to estimate corresponding decreased post-closure
permit term for MSWLF units operating whether any new facilities will seek care activities, for facilities as a result of
under RD&D permits. The rule allows RD&D permits. Owners/operators the accelerated decomposition of waste.
the Director of an approved State to operating under existing RD&D permits
issue up to six, 3-year permit renewals, are not expected to incur any new costs II. Background
for a total permit term of 21 years. The as a result of this final rule. The annual Under Subchapter IV of RCRA, 42
RD&D rule previously limited the total costs for ongoing recordkeeping and U.S.C. 6941–6949a, the EPA has
permit term to 12 years. annual reporting requirements are promulgated minimum national
The primary basis for this extension estimated at $2,410 per facility. standards for MSWLFs at 40 CFR part
of the permit period to up to 21 years It is important to note that applying 258 (56 FR 50978, October 9, 1991). As
is to provide the EPA more time to for a RD&D permit remains voluntary. specified in 42 U.S.C. 6981(a), RCRA
characterize the performance of RD&D This action does not impose any new also directs EPA to encourage research
projects without making the permit regulatory burden. This action allows and development for, among other
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES

period so long as to be open-ended. The the Director of an approved State to things, the development and application
EPA believes that the period of 21 years increase the number of extensions of the of new and improved methods of
strikes an appropriate balance between permit period for existing facilities, or collecting and disposing of solid waste.
providing more time for projects to offer more extensions of the permit term
continue operations as research for new facilities, for those owners and 1 See docket item EPA–HQ–RCRA–2015–0126–

facilities, while providing enough time operators who choose to participate in 0012, Smiths Creek Bioreactor Report.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:17 May 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM 10MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 28723

bioreactor operations on a permanent permit period to 12 years has the B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
basis is outside the scope of this rule, as unintended consequence of This action does not impose any new
EPA stated in the proposed rule (80 FR discouraging the development of Information Collection Request (ICR)
70180, November 13, 2015). As bioreactors. burden under the PRA. The purpose of
discussed previously, EPA plans to this action is to extend the maximum
C. Implementation of This Final Rule
publish an ANPRM requesting data allowable permit period for this
relating to wet landfills and bioreactors. This rule does not require states with
EPA-approved RD&D programs to program, and this change to the RD&D
EPA intends this ANPRM to begin the
modify their solid waste permit program itself does not impose any
process of considering additional
programs. Since this change to the 2004 additional reporting requirements. The
changes to the part 258 regulations. In
RD&D rule provides more flexibility OMB has previously approved the
that proceeding, the commenters are
than existing federal criteria, states are information collection activities
free to raise concerns about how
not required to amend existing solid contained in the existing regulations in
existing RD&D projects can be
waste permit programs that have been two different, applicable ICRs. The ICRs
appropriately addressed under any
determined by EPA to be adequate affected by this proposal are for 40 CFR
potential future amendments to the
under 40 CFR part 239. At the same part 239, Requirements for State Permit
existing MSWLF regulations. Thus, the
comments did not change EPA’s view time, the RD&D rule (including the Program Determination of Adequacy
that a maximum term of 21 years is an revised maximum permit term) is not and part 258, MSWLF Criteria. The
appropriate balance between allowing self-implementing, and states are OMB has reviewed the ICR for part 239
more time for continued research by required to adopt the RD&D rule and (ICR# 1608.07, OMB# 2050–0152). The
EPA and allowing the facilities to obtain EPA approval for their RD&D EPA will request comments under the
continue operating for a significant but program in order to issue a RD&D ICR review process from states that plan
not open-ended period of time. permit. States previously approved to to make these revisions so that the EPA
issue RD&D permits that wish to can better understand the expected
B. Basis for This Final Rule increase the total length of time for burden that would be incurred by states
In the 2004 RD&D final rule, the EPA which RD&D permits can be issued will who wish to make these changes. In
made clear its intention that MSWLF need to notify the EPA in accordance addition, the EPA will also be
RD&D permits be of limited duration with 40 CFR part 239. States with EPA- requesting information from MSWLF
while also providing data to support approved solid waste permit programs owners/operators on the reporting
future rulemaking. This final rule is that have not previously sought burden that they would incur under an
intended to further these dual goals. approval for an RD&D program and now extended permit term provided in
Although the EPA does not expect that wish to do so will need to apply to EPA accordance with this rule under the part
all RD&D permits will necessarily for approval of an RD&D program, 258, MSWLF criteria ICR (ICR# 1381.09,
extend to the full permit term, the EPA including approval of the longer time OMB# 2050–0122) when that review
believes that the current 12-year time period allowed by this rulemaking. Any process begins. This process is
limit may not be sufficient to realize state without an EPA-approved solid scheduled to be completed in June 2016.
potential benefits in all cases. Thus, waste permit program may submit an C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
extending the permit period for up to 21 application to EPA for a determination
years will provide more time to collect of adequacy under 40 CFR part 239 and I certify that this action will not have
data on potential benefits and any may include a request for approval of a significant economic impact on a
problems without making the permit the RD&D permit provisions reflecting substantial number of small entities
period so long as to be open-ended. the longer time period allowed by this under the RFA. In making this
Extending the maximum permit term rule. For MSWLF units located in determination, the impact of concern is
will help continuing efforts to collect Indian Country, EPA intends to consider any significant adverse economic
data at existing RD&D units. If the EPA the longer maximum permit term when impact on small entities. An agency may
did not take this action, owners and issuing or modifying any site-specific certify that a rule will not have a
operators using existing RD&D permits RD&D rule. EPA has previously issued significant economic impact on a
would need to make significant draft guidance on the site-specific substantial number of small entities if
modifications to their disposal units or flexibility request process in Indian the rule relieves regulatory burden, has
cease operation altogether, before Country. See ‘‘Site-Specific Flexibility no net burden or otherwise has a
reaching the end of their normal Requests for Municipal Solid Waste positive economic effect on the small
operations or closure. Because of the Landfills in Indian Country,’’ EPA 530– entities subject to the rule. This rule
potential environmental benefits that R–97–016, August 1997. will not create any additional burden for
may be derived from bioreactors, small entities. Small entities are not
alternative cover designs, and run-on III. Statutory and Executive Orders required to take any action as a
systems, the EPA believes that it is Reviews consequence of this rule, and this action
important to extend the maximum Additional information about these will not have a significant impact on a
permit period to 21 years to provide statutes and Executive Orders can be substantial number of small entities. We
more time to characterize the found at http://www.epa.gov/laws- have therefore concluded that this
performance of RD&D projects without regulations/laws-and-executive-orders. action will have no net regulatory
making the permit period so long as to burden for all directly regulated small
be open-ended. A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory entities.
The EPA also wishes to enhance the Planning and Review and Executive
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES

economic feasibility to build and Order 13563: Improving Regulation and D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
operate bioreactors or employ Regulatory Review (UMRA)
alternative approaches for final covers, This action is not a significant This action does not contain any
which would provide additional sources regulatory action and was therefore not unfunded mandate as described in
of data in the future. The EPA has heard submitted to the Office of Management UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
from stakeholders that limiting the and Budget (OMB) for review. not significantly or uniquely affect small

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:17 May 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM 10MYR1
28724 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations

governments. The action imposes no J. Executive Order 12898: Federal (e) * * *
enforceable duty on any state, local or Actions To Address Environmental (1) The total term for a permit for a
tribal governments or the private sector. Justice in Minority Populations and project including renewals may not
The costs involved in this action are Low-Income Populations exceed twenty-one (21) years; and
imposed only by voluntary participation The EPA believes the human health * * * * *
in a federal program. and environmental risk addressed by [FR Doc. 2016–10993 Filed 5–9–16; 8:45 am]
this action will not have a new BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
disproportionately high and adverse
This action does not have federalism human health or environmental effects
implications. It will not have substantial on minority, low-income or indigenous DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
direct effects on the states, on the populations. The underlying RD&D
regulations require all RD&D permits to Defense Acquisition Regulations
relationship between the national System
government and the states, or on the include terms and conditions that are at
least as protective as the criteria for
distribution of power and 48 CFR Parts 204, 209, 212, 227, 237,
municipal solid waste landfills to assure
responsibilities among the various protection of human health and the and 252
levels of government. environment. This final rule is an [Docket DARS–2014–0017]
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation administrative action to extend the
maximum permit period, and it does not RIN 0750–AH54
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments reopen or otherwise change the
Defense Federal Acquisition
requirement for protectiveness.
Regulation Supplement: Disclosure to
This action does not have tribal Therefore, the EPA finds that the human
Litigation Support Contractors (DFARS
implications as specified in Executive health and environmental risks
Case 2012–D029)
Order 13175. The EPA has concluded addressed by this action will not have
that this action will have no new tribal disproportionately high and adverse AGENCY: Defense Acquisition
implications, nor would it present any human health or environmental effects Regulations System, Department of
additional burden on the tribes. It will on minority, low-income or indigenous Defense (DoD).
neither impose substantial direct populations, because this action does ACTION: Final rule.
compliance costs on tribal governments, not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the SUMMARY: DoD is adopting as final, with
nor preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive
environment. changes, an interim rule amending the
Order 13175 does not apply to this
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation
action. K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) Supplement (DFARS) to implement a
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of This action is subject to the CRA, and section of the National Defense
Children From Environmental Health the EPA will submit a rule report to Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
Risks and Safety Risks each House of the Congress and to the that provides DoD the authority to allow
Comptroller General of the United its litigation support contractors access
This action is not subject to Executive States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ to ‘‘sensitive information’’ subject to
Order 13045, because it is not as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). certain restrictions.
economically significant as defined in List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 258 DATES: Effective May 10, 2016.
Executive Order 12866, and because the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
EPA does not believe the environmental Environmental protection, Municipal
Amy G. Williams, telephone 571–372–
health or safety risks addressed by this landfills, Reporting and recordkeeping
6106.
action present a disproportionate risk to requirements, Waste treatment and
disposal. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
children. The underlying RD&D rule
requires all RD&D permits to include Dated: April 29, 2016. I. Background
terms and conditions that are at least as Gina McCarthy, DoD published an interim rule in the
protective as the criteria for municipal Administrator. Federal Register at 79 FR 11337 on
solid waste landfills to assure protection For the reasons set forth in the February 28, 2014, to implement section
of human health and the environment, preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 258 802 of the National Defense
and this rule does not reopen or as follows: Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
otherwise change that requirement. (Pub. L. 112–81), which provides DoD
PART 258—CRITERIA FOR MUNICIPAL the express authority to allow its
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS litigation support contractors access to
Concerning Regulations That ‘‘sensitive information,’’ provided that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, ■ 1. The authority citation for part 258 the litigation support contractor is
Distribution or Use continues to read as follows: subject to certain restrictions on using
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1345(d) and (e); 42 and disclosing such information. Two
This action is not subject to Executive U.S.C. 6902(a), 6907, 6912(a), 6944, 6945(c) respondents submitted public
Order 13211, because it is not a and 6949a(c), 6981(a). comments in response to the interim
significant regulatory action under rule.
Executive Order 12866. Subpart A—General
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES

II. Discussion and Analysis
I. National Technology Transfer and ■ 2. Revise § 258.4(e)(1) to read as
follows: DoD reviewed the public comments in
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
the development of the final rule. A
This rulemaking does not involve § 258.4 Research, development, and discussion of the comments received
demonstration permits. and the changes made to the rule as a
technical standards.
* * * * * result of those comments follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:17 May 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM 10MYR1
Document Created: 2016-05-10 05:19:38
Document Modified: 2016-05-10 05:19:38
Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Rules and Regulations
Action		Final rule.
Dates		This final rule is effective on November 10, 2016.
Contact		Craig Dufficy, Materials Recovery and Waste Management Division of the Office of Land and Emergency Management (mail code 5304P), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone: 703-308- 9037; email: [email protected]
FR Citation		81 FR 28720
RIN Number		2050-AG75
CFR Associated		Environmental Protection; Municipal Landfills; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Waste Treatment and Disposal