FR 2021-02544

The document under consideration is a proposed rule from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as published in the Federal Register. It involves "negative declarations" from the states of Maine and Rhode Island regarding emission guidelines for municipal solid waste landfills. These negative declarations indicate that neither state has landfill facilities currently needing to comply with specific emission guidelines established by federal law. The agency considers this proposal noncontroversial and plans to finalize it without further ado unless adverse feedback is received by March 15, 2021.

General Summary

The EPA's proposed rule essentially serves to confirm that neither Maine nor Rhode Island have existing municipal solid waste landfills subject to recent federal emission guidelines. This outcome arises from both states' certifications provided to the EPA. The rule-making process appears straightforward, with the EPA indicating they expect no significant opposition due to the noncontroversial nature of the declaration. The rule's approval would conclude administrative actions around compliance for these guidelines for the specified states.

Issues and Concerns

Several issues arise from the document:

• Complexity and Accessibility: The document contains legal references and jargon, such as "40 CFR 60.23a(b)" and "negative declarations," which can be confusing for laypersons. Simplification or explanatory notes could assist general readers in understanding what is being proposed.

• Submission Process: The detailed process for submitting comments, including technical nuances about multimedia submissions accompanied by written comments, may pose a barrier to public participation. It suggests a level of complexity that not all stakeholders might readily navigate.

• Lack of Data Transparency: The document does not present or reference specific data to back up the claim that there are no applicable facilities in Maine and Rhode Island. This absence might raise transparency concerns among those who seek a data-driven justification for the negative declarations.

• Redundancy in Content: The metadata abstract and summary sections contain similar information, potentially making content appear repetitive without adding new insights.

Impact on the Public

Broadly, the impact of the EPA's proposed rule on the general public may be minimal, given the nature of the negative declarations. Since the declarations indicate no existing facilities are affected, citizens in Maine and Rhode Island might not experience immediate changes in air quality management or related public health outcomes contingent upon these guidelines.

For the broader public interested in regulatory processes or environmental governance, this proposal is an opportunity to observe how states certify compliance or non-necessity vis-a-vis federal standards—a critical aspect of how cooperative federalism functions in the environmental regulatory landscape.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For stakeholders directly involved in environmental regulation or municipal waste management, this proposed rule signals an administrative conclusion as it pertains to the specific emission guidelines.

• Environmental Advocates might view this as a point of analysis, scrutinizing whether such declarations sufficiently protect air quality without further checks.

• State Regulatory Bodies in Maine and Rhode Island might benefit positively by a reduction in regulatory oversight for non-existent facilities and can redirect focus towards areas with greater environmental impact.

• Business Stakeholders in waste management sectors would see minimal direct influence unless new facilities are proposed in the future, at which point compliance guidelines would need addressing.

Overall, while seemingly procedural, the proposed rule encapsulates core themes in environmental policy—including compliance certification, intergovernmental collaboration, and stakeholder engagement—which hold interest beyond mere regulatory enactment.