[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 15 (Friday, January 23, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3509-3530]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1521]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[AD-FRL-5951-5]
Federal Plan Requirements for Large Municipal Waste Combustors
Constructed on or Before September 20, 1994
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On December 19, 1995, EPA adopted emission guidelines for
existing municipal waste combustor (MWC) units. Section 129 of the Act
requires States with existing MWC units subject to the guidelines to
submit plans to EPA that implement and enforce the emission guidelines.
The State plans were due on December 19, 1996. States without MWC units
subject to the emission guidelines must submit a negative declaration
letter. Following receipt of a State plan, EPA has up to 6 months to
approve or disapprove the plan. If a State with existing MWC units does
not submit an approvable plan within 2 years after promulgation of the
guidelines (i.e., December 19, 1997), the Clean Air Act (ACT) requires
EPA to develop, implement, and enforce a Federal plan for MWC units in
that State. In this action EPA proposes a Federal plan to implement
emission guidelines for MWC units located in States where State plans
have not been approved. For most of these States, the Federal plan
would be an interim action because when a State plan is approved, the
Federal plan will no longer apply to MWC units covered by the State
plan. This proposed MWC Federal plan includes the same required
elements as a State plan as specified in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B.
These elements are: identification of legal authority; identification
of mechanisms for implementation; inventory of affected facilities;
emission inventory; emission limits; compliance schedules; public
hearing requirements; reporting and recordkeeping requirements; and
public progress reports. Also discussed in this preamble is Federal
plan implementation and delegation of authority.
DATES: Comments. Comments on this proposal must be received on or
before March 24, 1998.
Public Hearing. A public hearing will be held in Washington, DC if
individuals request to speak. In addition, a public hearing will be
held in any State with an MWC unit that would be covered by the
proposed MWC Federal plan, if individuals request to speak. Requests to
speak must be received by February 23, 1998. If requests to speak are
received, one or more public hearings will be held. A message regarding
the date and location of the public hearing(s) may be accessed by
calling (919) 541-5339 after February 23, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments on this proposal should be submitted (in
duplicate, if possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center (MC-6102), Attention Docket No. A-97-45, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. Comments and
data may be filed electronically by following the instructions in
section I of Supplementary Information of this preamble.
Public Hearing. If timely requests to speak at a public hearing are
received, a public hearing will be held in Washington, DC or in any
State with an MWC unit that would be covered by the proposed MWC
Federal plan. Persons wishing to present oral testimony should notify
Ms. Julie Andresen, Program Review Group, Information Transfer and
Program Integration Division (MD-12), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone (919)
541-5339 at EPA. A message regarding the date and location of the
public hearing(s) may be accessed by calling (919) 541-5339.
Docket. Docket numbers A-89-08, A-90-45, and A-97-45 contain the
supporting information for this proposed rule and the supporting
information for EPA's promulgation of emission guidelines for existing
MWC units. These dockets are available for public inspection and
copying between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at
EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Mail Code 6102),
401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, or by calling (202) 260-7548.
The docket is located at the above address in Room M-1500, Waterside
Mall (ground floor, central mall). A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding this
proposal, contact Ms. Julie Andresen at (919) 541-5339, Program Review
Group, Information Transfer and Program Integration Division (MD-12),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711. For technical information, contact Mr. Walt Stevenson
at (919) 541-5264, Combustion Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-
13), U.S.
[[Page 3510]]
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711. For information regarding the implementation of this Federal
plan, contact the appropriate Regional Office (table 2) as shown in
section I of Supplementary Information.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background of MWC Regulations and Affected Facilities
A. Background of MWC Regulations
On February 11, 1991 (56 FR 5488), EPA promulgated in the Federal
Register emission guidelines for existing MWC units (40 CFR part 60,
subpart Ca) under authority of section 111 of the Act as amended in
1977. On September 20, 1994, EPA proposed revised emission guidelines
for MWC units (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cb) under sections 111 and 129
of the Act as amended in 1990. On December 19, 1995, EPA issued final
emission guidelines applicable to small and large categories of MWC
units.1 See 60 FR 65387. On April 8, 1997, the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated subpart
Cb as it applies to MWC units with an individual capacity to combust
less than or equal to 250 tons per day of municipal solid waste (MSW)
(small MWC units), and all cement kilns combusting MSW, consistent with
their opinion in Davis County Solid Waste Management and Recovery
District v. EPA, 101 F.3d 1395 (D.C. Cir. 1996), amended, 108 F.3d 1454
(D.C. Cir. 1997). As a result, subpart Cb applies only to MWC units
with an individual capacity to combust more than 250 tons per day of
MSW per unit (large MWC units). On August 25, 1997 EPA published
changes to the emission guidelines to address the court decision (62 FR
45116). Those changes went into effect on October 24, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The small category comprised all MWC units located at
facilities with total capacity to combust between 35 mg/day (40 tons
per day), and 225 mg/day (250 tons per day) of MSW. The large
category comprised all MWC units located at facilities with total
capacity to combust greater than 250 tons per day of MSW.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
States with existing large MWC units subject to the emission
guidelines were required to submit to EPA a plan that implements and
enforces the guidelines within 1 year after promulgation of the
guidelines, or by December 19, 1996. The court's order that vacated the
applicability of the guidelines to small MWC units and cement kilns did
not affect the due date or the required content of State plans for
large MWC units. The State plans due date remained December 19, 1996.
Section 129(b)(3) of the Act requires EPA to develop, implement, and
enforce a Federal plan for large units located in States that have not
submitted an approvable plan within 2 years after promulgation of the
guidelines, or by December 19, 1997. This action proposes a Federal
plan for MWC units that are not covered by a State plan. The elements
of the Federal plan are summarized in section II of this preamble.
B. MWC Federal Plan and Affected Facilities
This proposed MWC Federal plan would affect all MWC units with a
combustion capacity greater than 250 tons per day of municipal solid
waste (large MWC units) that commenced construction on or before
September 20, 1994 that are located in: (1) Any State for which a State
plan has not been approved; (2) any State whose State plan has been
approved and subsequently vacated in whole or in part; or (3) any State
with an approved State plan that subsequently revises any component of
the plan (e.g., the underlying legal authority or enforceable
mechanism) such that the State plan is no longer as protective as the
emission guidelines. The specific applicability of this plan is
described in Secs. 62.14100 and 62.14102 of subpart FFF.
This proposed MWC Federal plan would not affect an MWC unit covered
by an EPA approved State plan. If a State submits a State plan and that
State plan is approved before promulgation of the Federal plan, the
promulgated MWC Federal plan would not apply to MWC units covered by
that State plan. Furthermore, promulgation of this MWC Federal plan
does not preclude a State from submitting a State plan later. If a
State submits a State plan after promulgation of the MWC Federal plan,
EPA will review and approve or disapprove the plan. Upon approval of
the State plan, the Federal plan would no longer apply. The EPA will
periodically amend the exclusion table in Sec. 62.14102 of subpart FFF
to identify MWC units covered in the approved State plan that are
excluded from Federal plan applicability. (See the discussion in State
Submits a State Plan After Large MWC Units Located in the State Are
Subject to the Federal Plan--Full Transfer of Authority Through State
Plan Approval in section VI of this preamble.) States are, therefore,
encouraged to continue their efforts to develop and submit State plans
to EPA for approval.
To clarify which MWC units would and would not be covered, this
proposed Federal plan lists in the exclusion table in Sec. 62.14102 of
subpart FFF those units, by State, to which the MWC Federal plan would
not apply. Only the MWC units listed in that table are excluded from
the proposed Federal plan. Large MWC units not listed in the exclusion
table would be covered by the Federal plan. For example, if a large MWC
is located in a State and the large unit is not either specifically
listed in the applicability section of the State plan or covered by a
general applicability clause in the State plan, the large MWC unit
would be subject to the Federal plan. Also, large MWC units overlooked
by a State that submitted a negative declaration letter would be
subject to the Federal plan. As stated above, EPA expects additional
State plans to be approved prior to promulgation of this rule. The
promulgated Federal plan would list in the exclusion table, those
additional units in States in which an approved State plan applies.
C. Status of State Plan Submittals
Many States are making significant progress on their State plans
and EPA expects many State plans to be submitted in the next few
months. Table 1 summarizes the status of State plans and negative
declarations. The table is based on information from Regional Offices
(A-97-45, II-I-5). The status of State plan submittals as of December
19, 1997 is as follows:
The EPA has approved the State plans for Oregon and
Florida and the MWC units covered in those State plans would not be
covered by the proposed MWC Federal plan (The EPA has reviewed and
approved the State plan for Illinois. However, the Federal Register
notice approving the plan has not been published. Therefore, the
approval of the Illinois State plan is not reflected elsewhere in
this proposal.);
The EPA has received a negative declaration letter from
States listed in section I of table 1 stating that there are no
large MWC units in these States; thus EPA is not expecting a State
plan to be submitted from these States. However, in the unlikely
event that large MWC units are subsequently identified in any of
these States, this Federal plan would automatically apply to them;
The EPA has received a State plan from States listed in
section II of table 1 and the State plans currently are being
reviewed by EPA. The proposed Federal plan would cover large MWC
units in these States, but if these State plans are approved, the
promulgated Federal plan would not cover units addressed in the
approved State plans.
The EPA has not received a State plan or a negative
declaration letter from the States listed in section III of table 1.
The large MWC units in these States would be subject to the proposed
MWC Federal plan until a State plan applicable to large MWC units is
approved by EPA.
[[Page 3511]]
Table 1.--Status of States Without an Approved State Plan a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Status b
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Negative declaration submitted to EPA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region I:
Rhode Island............................. A
Vermont.................................. A
Region II:
Puerto Rico.............................. A
Virgin Islands........................... A
Region III:
Delaware................................. A
District of Columbia..................... A
West Virginia............................ A
Region IV:
Kentucky................................. A
Mississippi.............................. A
North Carolina........................... A
Region V:
Wisconsin................................ A
Region VI:
Arkansas................................. A
Louisiana................................ A
New Mexico............................... A
Texas.................................... A
Region VII:
Iowa..................................... A
Kansas................................... A
Missouri................................. A
Nebraska................................. A
Region VIII:
Colorado................................. A
Montana.................................. A
North Dakota............................. A
South Dakota............................. A
Utah..................................... A
Wyoming.................................. A
Region IX:
Arizona.................................. A
Nevada................................... A
Region X:
Alaska................................... A
Idaho.................................... A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. State plan submitted to EPA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region II:
New York................................. B
Region III:
Maryland................................. B
Region IV:
Georgia.................................. B
Tennessee................................ B
Region V:
Illinois................................. B
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. State plan or negative declaration not submitted to EPA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region I:
Connecticut.............................. C
New Hampshire............................ C
Maine.................................... C
Massachusetts............................ C
Region II:
New Jersey............................... C
Region III:
Pennsylvania............................. C
Virginia................................. C
Region IV:
Alabama.................................. C
South Carolina........................... C
Region V:
Indiana.................................. C
Michigan................................. C
Minnesota................................ C
Ohio..................................... C
Region VI:
Oklahoma................................. C
Region VII:
None.....................................
Region VIII:
None.....................................
Region IX:
American Samoa........................... C
California............................... C
Guam..................................... C
Hawaii................................... C
Northern Mariana Islands................. C
Region X:
Washington............................... C
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Any large MWC units in these States are covered by the proposed
Federal plan.
b Status codes.
A=Negative declaration submitted. No State plan is expected. However, in
the unlikely event that large MWC units are subsequently identified in
any of these States, this Federal plan would automatically apply to
them.
B=State plan has been submitted and is being reviewed by EPA. If the
plan is approved, MWC units in these States would not be subject to
the promulgated Federal plan.
C=State plan or negative declaration submittal has not been received.
While section 129 of the Act specifies that the Federal plan would
apply to units in any State that has not submitted an ``approvable''
plan by December 19, 1997, the proposed language in Sec. 62.14100
refers to units in States for which a State plan has not been
``approved.'' Because this Federal plan will be promulgated in 1998,
EPA expects to have approved or disapproved State plans that are
submitted by December 19, 1997. Thus, when this Federal plan is
promulgated, any ``approvable'' State plans that were submitted by
December 19, 1997, will likely have been ``approved.''
Regulated Entities. Entities regulated by this action are existing
MWC units with capacities to combust greater than 250 tons per day of
MSW unless the unit is subject to a section 111(d)/129 State plan that
has been approved by EPA. The EPA projects that this proposed MWC
Federal plan could initially affect up to 143 MWC units at 59 plants in
23 States. However, many State plans are expected to be approved by the
time the Federal plan is promulgated. Based on current expectations,
this Federal plan may affect 53 MWC units at 21 plants by June 1998 and
13 MWC units at 4 plants by June 1999. Regulated categories and
entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Examples of regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry and Local Government Waste-to-energy plants that generate
Agencies. electricity or steam from the combustion
of garbage by feeding municipal waste
into large furnaces.
Incinerators that combust trash but do
not recover energy from the waste.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The foregoing table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated
by this MWC Federal plan. For specific applicability criteria, see
Secs. 62.14100 and 62.14102 of subpart FFF.
Electronic Submittal of Comments. Comments and data may be
submitted electronically via electronic mail (E-mail) or on disk.
Electronic comments on this proposed rule may be filed via E-mail at
most Federal Depository Libraries. E-mail submittals should be sent to
A-and-R-Docket@epamail.epa.gov. No confidential business information
should be submitted through E-mail. Comments and data also will be
accepted on disks in WordPerfect 5.1 or 6.1 file format or ASCII file
format. Electronic comments must avoid the use of special characters
and any form of encryption. All comments and data for this proposal,
whether in paper form or electronic forms, must be identified by docket
number A-97-45.
Regional Office Contacts. For information regarding the
implementation of the MWC Federal plan, contact the appropriate EPA
Regional Office as shown in table 2.
[[Page 3512]]
Table 2.--EPA Regional Contacts for Municipal Waste Combustors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regional contact Phone No. Fax No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Courcier, U.S. EPA, Region I (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont), John F. Kennedy Federal Bldg., Boston,
MA 02203-0001............................................................ (617) 565-9462 (617) 565-4940
Christine DeRosa, U.S. EPA, Region II (New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico,
Virgin Islands), 290 Broadway, New York, NY 10007-1866................... (212) 637-4022 (212) 637-3901
James B. Topsale, U.S. EPA/3AP22, Region III (Delaware, District of
Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia), 841 Chestnut
Bldg., Philadelphia, PA 19107............................................ (215) 556-2190 (215) 566-2134
Brian Beals, Scott Davis, U.S. EPA/APTMD, Region IV (Alabama, Florida,
Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Tennessee), 345 Courtland St., N.E., Atlanta, GA 30365................... (404) 562-9098
(404) 562-9127 (404) 562-9095
Douglas Aburano (MN), Mark Palermo (IL, IN, OH), Rick Tonielli (MI),
Charles Hatten (WI), U.S. EPA/AT18J, Region V (Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin), 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL
60604.................................................................... (312) 353-6960
(312) 886-6082
(312) 886-6068
(312) 886-6031 (312) 886-5824
Mick Cote, U.S. EPA, Region VI (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma,
Texas), 1445 Ross Ave., Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202-2733................ (214) 665-7219 (214) 665-7263
Wayne Kaiser, U.S. EPA, Region VII (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska), 726
Minnesota Ave., Kansas City, KS 66101.................................... (913) 551-7603 (913) 551-7065
Mike Owens, U.S. EPA, Region VIII (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Utah, Wyoming), 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202-2466 (303) 312-6440 (303) 312-6064
Patricia Bowlin, U.S. EPA/Air 4, Region IX (American Somoa, Arizona,
California, Guam, Hawaii, Northern Mariana Islands, Nevada), 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.......................................... (415) 744-1188 (415) 744-1076
Catherine Woo, U.S. EPA, Region X (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington),
1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, WA 98101....................................... (206) 553-1814 (206) 553-0404
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Required Elements of the Proposed MWC Federal Plan
Sections 111(d) and 129 of the Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7411(d)
and 7429(b)(2), require States to develop and implement State plans for
MWC units to implement and enforce the promulgated emission guidelines.
Subparts B and Cb of 40 CFR part 60 require States to submit State
plans that include specified elements. Because this Federal plan is
being proposed in lieu of State plans, it includes the same essential
elements: (1) identification of legal authority, (2) identification of
mechanisms for implementation, (3) inventory of affected facilities,
(4) emission inventory, (5) emission limits, (6) compliance schedules,
(7) public hearing requirements, (8) reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, and (9) public progress reports. Each State plan element
is summarized below as it relates to this proposed MWC Federal plan.
A. Legal Authority and Mechanisms for Implementation
As a required element of a State plan, a State must demonstrate
that it has the legal authority to adopt and implement the emission
requirements and compliance schedules in the State plan. The State also
must identify the enforceable State mechanism for implementing the
emission guidelines (e.g., a State rule or other State enforcement
mechanism). Section 129(b)(3) of the Act requires EPA to develop a
Federal plan for States that do not submit an approvable State plan
within 2 years after promulgation of the emission guidelines. By
proposing this MWC Federal plan, EPA is fulfilling its obligation under
the Act to establish emission limits and other requirements for MWC
units in States that have not yet submitted approvable plans. The EPA
is proposing a Federal regulation under the legal authority of the Act
as the mechanism to implement the emission guidelines. However, as
discussed in section VI of this preamble, implementation and
enforcement of the Federal plan can be delegated to State and local
agencies. Furthermore, when a State plan is approved, the Federal plan
will no longer apply to MWC units covered by a State plan.
B. Inventory of Affected MWC Units
As a required element, a State plan must include a complete source
inventory of MWC units affected by the emission guidelines. Consistent
with the requirement for State plans to include an inventory of MWC
units, docket A-97-45 contains an inventory of large MWC units covered
by this proposed MWC Federal plan. The inventory is contained in a
memorandum entitled ``Inventory and Emission Estimates for Large
Municipal Waste Combustor Units Covered by the Proposed Federal Section
111(d)/129 Plan'' (A-97-45, II-B-1). Item II-B-1 serves both the MWC
inventory requirement and the MWC emission inventory requirement, which
will be discussed in the following section. The inventory is based on
information available to EPA during development of the 1995 emission
guidelines and recent information from EPA Regional Offices.
C. Inventory of Emissions
As a required element, a State plan must include an emission
inventory for MWC units subject to the emission guidelines. The
pollutants to be inventoried include dioxins/furans, cadmium (Cd), lead
(Pb), mercury (Hg), particulate matter (PM), hydrogen chloride (HCl),
nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur
dioxide (SO2). For this proposal, EPA has estimated the
emissions from each MWC unit that would be covered by the Federal plan
for all pollutants regulated by the Federal plan. This emission
inventory is item II-B-1 in docket A-97-45. Table 3 of this preamble
summarizes the results of the inventory for those States that do not
have an approved State plan. Pollutant emissions are expressed in
megagrams per year (Mg/yr) for most pollutants and grams per year (g/
yr) for dioxins. The emission inventory is based on information known
about the combustor and uses emission factors contained in
``Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors'' (AP-42). Refer to the
emission estimates memorandum in docket A-97-45 for the complete
emissions inventory and details on the calculations.
[[Page 3513]]
Table 3.--Summary of Current Emissions From Large MWC Units by State
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dioxins/
Region/state furans (g/ Cd (Mg/yr) Pb (Mg/yr) Hg (Mg/yr) PM (Mg/ HCl (Mg/ SO2 (Mg/ NOX (Mg/
yr) yr) yr) yr) yr)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region I:
Connecticut........................................... 53 0.027 0.477 1.74 78 144 476 3684
Maine................................................. 56 0.006 0.296 0.06 32 24 145 1334
Massachusetts......................................... 673 0.103 1.86 4.13 126 543 1466 5866
New Hampshire......................................... 15 0.002 0.024 0.2 13 48 109 277
Rhode Island.......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vermont............................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Region II:
New Jersey............................................ 394 0.014 0.521 2.35 56 145 499 2737
New York.............................................. 619 0.304 1.33 4.61 156 2492 1911 5293
Puerto Rico........................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Region III:
Delaware.............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
District of Columbia.................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maryland.............................................. 493 0.277 1.084 2.47 89 2241 1332 1964
Pennsylvania.......................................... 178 0.092 0.506 3.23 93 714 918 3571
Virginia.............................................. 46 0.034 0.712 1.34 58 144 464 3007
Virgin Islands........................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
West Virginia......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Region IV:
Alabama............................................... 2 0.003 0.025 0.05 7 22 58 383
Georgia............................................... 108 0.06 0.226 0.52 16 485 263 277
Kentucky.............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Mississippi........................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
South Carolina........................................ 69 0.001 0.81 0.36 7 15 59 333
Tennessee............................................. 227 0.125 0.475 1.09 33 1019 551 583
Region V:
Illinois.............................................. 4 0.001 0.3 0.02 14 9 4 283
Indiana............................................... 28 0.011 0.087 0.96 23 75 199 1311
Michigan.............................................. 465 0.084 0.837 1.03 89 627 589 3085
Minnesota............................................. 268 0.039 0.807 0.8 168 983 676 2717
Ohio.................................................. 18 0.01 0.264 0.44 5 25 87 206
Wisconsin............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Region VI:
Arkansas.............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Louisiana............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
New Mexico............................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oklahoma.............................................. 244 0.134 0.509 1.17 36 1092 590 624
Texas................................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Region VII:
Kansas................................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Iowa.................................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Missouri.............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nebraska.............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Region VIII:
Colorado.............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Montana............................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
North Dakota.......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
South Dakota.......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Utah.................................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Wyoming............................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Region IX:
American Samoa........................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Arizona............................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
California............................................ 31 0.011 0.094 1.04 25 81 216 1017
Guam.................................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hawaii................................................ 35 0.026 0.387 0.14 32 58 523 1646
Nevada................................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Northern Mariana Islands.............................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Region X:
Alaska................................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Idaho................................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Washington............................................ 10 0.004 0.029 1.19 8 25 67 318
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Emission Limits
Emission Limits. As a required element, a State plan must include
emission limits. Section 129(b)(2) requires these emission limits to be
``at least as protective as'' those in the emission guidelines. The
emission limits in this proposed MWC Federal plan are the same as those
contained in
[[Page 3514]]
the emission guidelines (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cb) as amended on
August 25, 1997 (62 FR 45116). The emission limits and additional
requirements are summarized in section V of this preamble. (See the
discussion in An Approved State Plan Is No Longer As Protective As The
Emission Guidelines--Partial Transfer of Authority Through Delegation
in section VI of this preamble for a discussion of State plans that do
not include the amended emission limits.)
The emission limits for all pollutants except NOX can be
achieved by the combination of good combustion practices (GCP), post-
combustion control by a spray dryer with either an electrostatic
precipitator (ESP) or a fabric filter, and supplemented with activated
carbon injection. For MWC units requiring NOX control, the
limits can be achieved using selective noncatalytic reduction (SNCR).
This combination of controls was determined to represent the Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT) under the section 129 guidelines.
An MWC owner or operator is free to employ any techniques to comply
with the proposed MWC Federal plan, as long as the numerical emission
limits for all pollutants are met.
The emission guidelines, as amended on August 25, 1997, apply the
emission limits for SO2, HCl, Pb, and NOX in two
stages. The final guidelines require compliance with the emission
limits in the 1995 guidelines by December 19, 2000 and compliance with
the four amended emission limits by August 25, 2002. Specifically, the
final emission guidelines require compliance with SO2 and
HCl limits of 31 parts per million by volume (ppmv) by December 19,
2000 and 29 ppmv by August 25, 2002. The lead limit is 0.49 milligrams
per dry standard cubic meter (mg/dscm) by December 19, 2000, and 0.44
mg/dscm by August 25, 2002. The NOX limit for one type of
MWC, fluidized bed combustors, decreases. The four amended limits were
added as a result of a court decision, as described in 62 FR 45116
(August 25, 1997).
This proposed Federal plan addresses the emission limits in 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Cb, including the final amended limits for the four
pollutants, and would require compliance with all limits by December
19, 2000. The same types of air pollution control technology served as
the basis for both the 1995 and the amended limits: spray dryer/fabric
filter or ESP, carbon injection, and SNCR for non-refractory combustor
types. Large MWC units would need to install these controls by December
19, 2000 to meet the original limits, and as soon as the controls are
installed, they will also meet the final, amended limits. Thus, for
simplicity, this proposed Federal plan includes only the final, amended
emission limits for these four pollutants.
Operator Training and Certification. The emission guidelines
require American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) or a comparable
State program for operator certification for chief facility operators
and shift supervisors, and an EPA or State MWC operator training course
for chief facility operators. In States that have not yet submitted
State plans or that do not have State operator training and
certification programs, ASME certification and the EPA operator
training course would be required. However, some States already have
submitted to EPA either a partial or a complete State plan allowing
State training courses and/or State certification programs. The EPA is
reviewing these plans, but has not approved them yet, so the facilities
in these States would be covered by this proposed MWC Federal plan
until EPA approves the State plan. Because this Federal plan is an
interim action until State plans are approved, the Federal plan
includes State certification and State training courses if submitted in
a State plan. Therefore, this proposed Federal plan would allow ASME or
State certification in Connecticut and Maryland. This proposed Federal
plan also would allow EPA or State operator training courses in
Connecticut. The EPA requests information on whether other States that
will be submitting plans in the near future have State certification
programs and/or State operator training courses. If States submit this
information to EPA before the end of the comment period for this
proposal (March 24, 1998), EPA intends to allow State certification and
State operator training courses in the promulgated Federal plan for
those States.
NOX Trading. The emission guidelines [Sec. 60.33b(d)]
allow States to establish programs to allow owners or operators of
existing MWC units to trade nitrogen oxide emission credits. At this
time, no State has submitted such a program for approval as part of
their State plan. However, a State could include such a program in a
future State plan submittal for approval by the Administrator on a
case-by-case basis prior to implementation. Trading programs are not
included in the proposed MWC Federal plan for the following reasons:
(1) No State has requested such a trading program; (2) these trading
programs, if approved by the State, are to be proposed by the State for
potential approval by EPA; and (3) at least one State has specifically
excluded MWC units from their State trading program. States may still
allow an owner or operator to use that State's NOX trading
program to meet the Federal plan emission limits. For example, if a
State allows an owner or operator to use that State's NOX
trading program to meet the emission limits rather than retrofit
control equipment, then the owner or operator would submit its trading
approach to the State for case-by-case approval. Then, the State would
follow that State's approved procedures for approving the owner or
operator's approach and then the owner or operator would submit the
State-approved, source-specific trading approach to EPA for case-by-
case approval in time to commence the trading program by the date the
final control plan is due for the specific MWC units. (See section II.E
for additional discussion on determining the dates for achieving the
increments of progress.) Please note that both the owner or operator
and the State must act expeditiously in order to ensure that the public
and EPA have sufficient time to review the specifics of the proposed
trade. In general, EPA supports open market concepts, including
trading, especially when they can be harnessed to achieve environmental
limits, minimize costs, and EPA can ensure the technical validity and
appropriate tracking of the parameters of the trade.
NOX Emission Averaging. The emission guidelines allow
States to allow the owner or operator of an affected facility to
implement a NOX emission averaging plan within an MWC plant
with multiple MWC units. (See 40 CFR 60.33b(d), subpart Cb.) At this
time, no State has submitted such plant-wide emission averaging for
approval as part of their State plan, nor have any States approved such
averaging as part of the initial compliance report as specified in 40
CFR 60.59b(f) or the annual compliance report specified in 40 CFR
60.59b(g), as applicable. Therefore, no source-specific averaging plans
are included in this Federal plan. However, a State could propose a
NOX emission averaging plan in a future State plan submittal
for potential approval by EPA prior to implementation. Furthermore, an
owner or operator may propose to use plant-wide NOX emission
averaging to meet the Federal plan NOX emission limits. The
proposed NOX emission averaging plan must be submitted in
the initial compliance report specified in 40 CFR 60.59b(f) or annual
compliance report
[[Page 3515]]
specified in 40 CFR 60.39b(g), as applicable, prior to implementation.
E. Compliance Schedules and Increments of Progress
As a required element, a State plan must include compliance
schedules for retrofitting controls to comply with the emission
guidelines. Because this proposed MWC Federal plan is being implemented
in lieu of State plans, its compliance schedule includes the same five
increments of progress as required in a State plan. The Federal plan
increments of progress are consistent with the State plan requirements
in 40 CFR 60.24 of subpart B. These increments of progress are required
for compliance schedules that are longer than 12 months. The increments
of progress in the Federal plan (and any approved State plan) are the
primary mechanism for ensuring progress toward final compliance. Each
increment of progress has a specified date for achievement.
This proposed Federal plan includes the five increments of progress
and provides three options to establish the increment dates. Under all
three options the five increment dates are defined and are enforceable.
The Federal plan could function with only one option, but in order to
provide maximum flexibility, this proposal includes three options. The
EPA requests comments on each of the options and on the desirability of
including these multiple options in the final Federal plan. Based on
comments received, the final Federal plan will include one, two, or
three options. All three options are discussed in more detail following
the definitions for the increments of progress as listed below.
1. Increments of Progress
The increments of progress to be measured are: (1) Submitting a
final control plan, (2) awarding contracts for control systems or
process modifications or orders for purchase of components, (3)
beginning on-site construction or installation of the air pollution
control device(s) or process changes, (4) completing on-site
construction or installation of the air pollution control device(s) or
process changes, and (5) final compliance.
The MWC owner or operator is responsible for meeting each of these
five increments of progress for each MWC unit no later than the
applicable compliance date. The owner or operator must notify EPA as
each increment of progress is achieved (or missed). The notification
must identify the increment and the date the achieved increment was met
(or missed). For an increment achieved late, the notification must
identify the increment and the date the increment was ultimately
achieved.
The owner or operator must mail the (post-marked) notification to
the applicable EPA Regional Office within 10 business days of the
increment date defined in the Federal plan. (See table 2 under the
``Supplementary Information'' section of this document for a list of
Regional Offices.) The definition of each increment of progress
follows:
Submit a Final Control Plan. To meet this increment, the owner or
operator of each MWC unit must submit a plan that describes the air
pollution control devices or process changes that will be employed so
that each MWC unit complies with the emission limits and other
requirements. The plan must include a complete analysis of the
applicable regulatory requirements and methods of compliance and
selected control technology options available to meet these
requirements. (The EPA intends to provide compliance assistance
information to MWC owners and operators upon request.) The final
control plan also must contain engineering specifications and drawings
of all air pollution control equipment planned to be installed and/or
descriptions of planned process changes. The owner or operator of an
MWC unit will typically use the services of architectural and
engineering (A/E) firms to obtain the design drawings and other
operational characteristics of air pollution control devices to include
in the final control plan. The final control plan must include
information of sufficient detail to be used to solicit bids to install
the air pollution control devices or initiate the process changes. If
an MWC owner or operator plans to close a unit rather than retrofit
controls to comply with the Federal plan by the applicable compliance
date, a final control plan for that unit is not required. The owner or
operator, however, must notify EPA of such a cease operation decision
by the date the final control plan is due. The owner or operator must
also submit a legally enforceable cease operation agreement documenting
the date by which the unit will cease operation if operations cease
later than 1 year after promulgation of the Federal plan. (See section
IV of this preamble for additional discussion of closed and closing
units.)
Award Contract. To award contract means the MWC owner or operator
enters into legally binding agreements or contractual obligations that
cannot be canceled or modified without substantial financial loss to
the owner or operator. The EPA anticipates that the owner or operator
may award a number of contracts to complete the retrofit. To meet this
increment of progress, the MWC owner or operator must award a contract
or contracts to initiate on-site construction, initiate on-site
installation of air pollution control devices, and/or incorporate
process changes. The owner or operator must mail a copy of the signed
contract(s) to EPA within 10 business days of entering the contract(s).
Initiate On-site Construction. To initiate on-site construction,
installation of air pollution control devices, or process change means
to begin any of the following:
Installation of an air pollution control device to be
used to comply with the final emission limits as outlined in the
final control plan;
Physical preparation necessary for the installation of
an air pollution control device to be used to comply with the final
emission limits as outlined in the final control plan;
Alteration of an existing air pollution control device
to be used to comply with the final emission limits as outlined in
the final control plan;
Alteration of the municipal waste combustion process to
accommodate installation of an air pollution control device to be
used to comply with the final emission limits as outlined in the
final control plan; or
Process changes identified in the final control plan
being made to meet the emission standards.
Complete On-site Construction. To complete on-site construction
means that all necessary air pollution control devices or process
changes identified in the final control plan are in place, on site, and
ready for operation on the MWC unit. If the owner or operator of an MWC
unit is unable to complete on-site construction prior to December 19,
2000 and, therefore ceases an MWC unit's operation and plans to restart
it, the owner or operator must notify EPA and enter into a legally
enforceable cease operation agreement by the date the final control
plan is due. (See section IV of this preamble for additional discussion
of closed and closing units.)
Final Compliance. To be in final compliance means to incorporate
all process changes or complete retrofit construction as designed in
the final control plan and to connect the air pollution control
equipment or process changes with the affected facility identified in
the final control plan such that if the affected facility is brought on
line all necessary process changes or air pollution control equipment
are operating as designed. Within 180 days after the date the facility
is required to achieve final compliance, the initial performance test
must be conducted. On
[[Page 3516]]
or after the date the initial performance test is completed or is
required to be completed, whichever is earlier, no pollutant may be
discharged into the atmosphere from an affected facility in excess of
the applicable emission limits.
2. Summary of Three Options for Determining Schedule Increment Dates
The proposed Federal plan includes three options for establishing
the increment dates. The compliance schedule for facilities affected by
this MWC Federal plan could be established by option 1 (generic
compliance schedule proposed by EPA), option 2 (facility-specific
schedule consistent with the State plan submitted to EPA by the State),
or option 3 (facility-specific schedule submitted to EPA by the owner
or operator of the MWC unit or the State). Under all three options the
five increment dates would be defined and are enforceable.
In cases where option 2 or 3 has not been exercised, the owner or
operator of an affected facility would be subject to option 1 (generic
schedule). However, if the State or the MWC owner or operator submits a
schedule that EPA approves (option 2 or 3), the owner or operator would
be subject to that alternative schedule. Under option 2, States may
submit increment schedules to EPA prior to the end of the comment
period for this proposal March 24, 1998. Under option 3, an MWC owner
or operator or the State may submit a schedule to EPA at the time the
final control plan is due under the option 1 generic compliance
schedule September 21, 1998. In options 2 and 3, EPA would review the
schedules and incorporate them into the Federal plan. Each of the
options is discussed in detail below.
Option 1. Generic Compliance Schedule. Option 1 is the generic
default alternative. For MWC units covered by the Federal plan where
State plans or compliance schedules have not been submitted, EPA is
proposing generic compliance schedules and increments of progress.
Alone, option 1 could be unnecessarily inflexible and reflects past
approaches to regulatory compliance. However, option 1 is necessary to
establish a baseline where neither option 2 nor 3 is exercised. Within
option 1, the same generic schedule would apply to each MWC unit for
all pollutants except dioxin and mercury. The compliance schedule for
dioxin and mercury depends on the date of the MWC unit's construction,
as described below.
The emission guidelines and section 129(b)(2) allow MWC units to
complete retrofits or close no later than December 19, 2000. To be
consistent with the emission guidelines, the final compliance date (for
all pollutants except mercury and dioxin) in the proposed Federal plan
is December 19, 2000. Because many MWC units are expected to retrofit
combustion controls, as well as acid gas, PM, mercury, and/or
NOX controls to meet the emission limits (e.g., spray dryer/
fabric filter or ESP, carbon injection, and/or SNCR), under this
proposal they are given the maximum time (until December 19, 2000) to
complete retrofits.
The emission guidelines require MWC units that commenced
construction, reconstruction, or modification after June 26, 1987 to
achieve compliance with the mercury and dioxin limits within 1 year
after State plan approval (or 1 year after a revised construction
permit or a revised operating permit is issued, if a permit
modification is required, whichever is later). The EPA is, therefore,
proposing to require compliance with the mercury and dioxin limits
within 1 year after promulgation of the MWC Federal plan (or 1 year
after a revised construction permit or a revised operating permit is
issued, if a permit modification is required, whichever is later).
The EPA is proposing increments of progress as part of the generic
compliance schedule. Tables in subpart FFF show the proposed increments
of progress for pre-1987 units (December 19, 2000 schedule for all
pollutants) and post-1987 units (1 year schedule for dioxin and
mercury, December 19, 2000 schedule for all other pollutants).
While the generic compliance schedule is ambitious, EPA believes it
is achievable because MWC owners and operators and States have known
that they would need to install controls by December 19, 2000 as a
result of the promulgation of the emission guidelines on December 19,
1995. Thus, MWC units already should have been developing their final
control plans and should be ready to begin retrofits quickly.
Furthermore, EPA believe that the generic compliance schedules are
necessary to ensure final compliance by December 19, 2000.
The generic compliance schedule and increments of progress are
based on case studies of four MWC plants that either completed or are
in the process of completing retrofits of the controls needed to meet
the subpart Cb emission limits. The EPA reviewed the retrofit schedules
for MWC units at four MWC plants containing 12 MWC units. The retrofit
case studies are documented in docket A-97-45 (II-A-1 through II-A-5).
The EPA compared the four retrofits to the increments of progress
required by subpart B and determined appropriate time intervals for
each increment. To provide maximum flexibility, the first three Federal
plan increments are based on the maximum time required by any of the
retrofits studied. The fourth increment was established to provide the
maximum time to complete retrofits and still meet the final compliance
date. The final increment (final compliance by December 19, 2000) is
dictated by the Act.
The generic compliance schedule would apply to all MWC units
subject to this MWC Federal plan, except those units that are subject
to site-specific compliance schedules as submitted under option 2 or 3.
If a large MWC unit will not complete construction and achieve final
compliance by December 19, 2000, the guidelines allow and this proposed
Federal plan would allow the unit to cease operation by December 19,
2000, complete the retrofit while not operating, and comply upon
restarting. (See section IV of this preamble for a discussion of closed
and closing units.)
Option 2. Site-specific Compliance Schedules Submitted by States.
Under option 2, States would submit increment dates as negotiated with
MWC owners or operators to EPA before the end of the comment period of
this proposal. Following review and approval of these schedules, EPA
would add them to the Federal plan. This assures the Federal plan is
fully consistent with State plans that are approved after the Federal
plan is promulgated. In some cases the State already has negotiated a
retrofit schedule with the MWC owner or operator, determined what
retrofit schedule is feasible, held public hearings, and considered
public comments.
Several States have already submitted compliance schedules to EPA
and these site-specific compliance schedules are included in this
proposed Federal plan. The following States have submitted compliance
schedules as of December 19, 1997: Georgia, New York, New Jersey,
Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and
Virginia. Some schedules have already been reviewed by EPA. Other
schedules have not yet been reviewed because of their late arrival. The
EPA will review these schedules concurrently with other compliance
schedules submitted under this option. The site-specific compliance
schedule table in subpart FFF contains the site-specific compliance
schedules submitted to EPA. Some MWC units have already met some of
their increments of progress.
[[Page 3517]]
Option 3. Site-specific Compliance Schedules Submitted by MWC
Owners or Operators or the State. The third option for determining the
compliance dates is for the MWC owner or operator or the State to
submit a site-specific date for achieving increments 2, 3, and 4 to EPA
for approval. The dates for increment 1 (submitting a final control
plan) and increment 5 (achieving final compliance) would be the same as
option 1. As documented in the retrofit studies (docket A-97-45), the
date for achieving the first increment (September 21, 1998) reflects
the maximum time required by any of the retrofits studied. The final
increment compliance date (December 19, 2000) is dictated by the Act.
The EPA recognizes that flexibility may be needed for the award
contract date, the start construction date, and the finish construction
date given facility-specific retrofit considerations and constraints.
Therefore, under option 3, EPA is requesting facility-specific
compliance schedules from MWC owners or operators or the State.
The State or the MWC owner or operator (preferably after consulting
with the State) would submit alternative dates for increments 2, 3, and
4 to EPA on September 21, 1998, at the time the final control plan is
due. The MWC owner or operator would submit a copy of the compliance
schedule to both EPA and the State. The EPA would review the schedule
and coordinate with the owner or operator and the State. Following EPA
approval, EPA would add the schedule to the site-specific compliance
schedule table in subpart FFF as a technical amendment.
In summary, the proposed MWC Federal plan includes three options
for defining the five increment dates. The EPA believes including all
three options in the Federal plan maximizes flexibility and increases
regulatory efficiency. The EPA specifically requests comments on each
of the options provided in this proposal, as well as comments on the
desirability of including only a subset of the options in the final
Federal plan.
F. Record of Public Hearings
As a required element of a State plan, a State must include
opportunity for public participation in developing, adopting, and
implementing the State plan. For this MWC Federal plan, a public
hearing will be held in Washington, DC, if individuals request to
speak. In addition, a public hearing will be held in any State with an
MWC unit covered by the proposed MWC Federal plan, if individuals
request to speak. (See the Dates section of this preamble.) The hearing
record will appear in docket A-97-45. A hearing would be held in
Washington, DC because most of the MWC units affected by the Federal
plan are located in the eastern United States and Washington, DC is
easily accessible. Written public comments also are solicited. (See the
Addresses section of this document.) The EPA will review and consider
the oral and written comments in developing the final Federal plan.
G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and Reporting
As a required element, a State plan must include the test methods
listed in 40 CFR 60.58b of subpart Eb and the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements listed in 40 CFR 60.59b of subpart Eb. The
proposed MWC Federal plan includes the same provisions.
H. Progress Reports
As a required element of a State plan, a State must submit to EPA
annual reports on progress in the implementation of the emission
guidelines. Emissions data would be reported to the Aerometric
Emissions Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem as specified
in 40 CFR part 60, appendix D. If a State has been delegated authority
to implement and enforce the proposed Federal plan, the State would
submit annual progress reports to EPA, as required by 40 CFR 60.25(e)
of subpart B. These reports can be combined with the State
Implementation Plan report required by 40 CFR 51.32 of subpart Q, in
order to avoid duplicative reporting. Each progress report should
include compliance status, enforcement actions, increments of progress,
identification of sources that have ceased operation or started
operation, updated emission inventory and compliance information, and
copies of technical reports on any performance testing and monitoring.
For MWC units in States where authority has not been delegated, EPA
intends to prepare annual progress reports.
III. Proposed Amendments to General Provisions of 40 CFR Part 62
The proposed Federal plan would be added as a new subpart to 40 CFR
part 62. Part 62 currently contains approvals and promulgations of
State plans developed under section 111(d) of the Act. The MWC Federal
plan is developed under both sections 111(d) and 129 of the Act. This
proposal would amend the general provisions (subpart A) of part 62 to
specify that Federal plans are contained in part 62. It would also
amend the introductory text in Sec. 62.02 to refer to section 129, as
applicable, in addition to section 111(d). This is necessary because
MWC State plans that are approved and published in part 62, as well as
the proposed Federal plan, are developed to meet the requirements of
both sections 111(d) and 129 of the Act.
IV. Implications for Closed Units, Units That Plan To Close, and
Units That Plan To De-Rate
The emission guidelines (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cb) require MWC
units to comply with the emission limits or close within 3 years
following approval of a State plan, but no later than December 19,
2000. Units subject to the Federal plan would also be required to
comply or close by December 19, 2000. The Federal plan, consistent with
the emission guidelines, would further require that if the owner or
operator of a large MWC unit is planning to cease operation of the
unit, the owner or operator must either cease operation of the unit
within 1 year of promulgation of this Federal plan or submit a
``closure agreement'' (i.e., a cease operation agreement) that defines
the date operation will cease. Cease operation agreements must be
legally enforceable.
This section describes how this Federal plan addresses various
categories of closed MWC units and de-rated MWC units, including:
Dismantled MWC units;
MWC units that have ceased operation;
MWC units that will cease operation within 1 year of
Federal plan promulgation;
MWC units that will cease operation later than 1 year
after Federal plan promulgation;
MWC units that will cease operation and plan to restart
after December 19, 2000; and
MWC units that will de-rate (reduce capacity).
A. Dismantled Units
Units that are partially or fully dismantled are not required to be
included in the MWC unit inventory that is an element of a State plan
or this Federal plan. MWC units are partially or fully dismantled if
they have been physically altered so they cannot operate. Dismantled
units cannot be restarted without extensive work; and if they were
restarted, they would be considered a new unit and would be subject to
the subpart Eb new source performance standard (NSPS) rather than to
the State or Federal plan for existing units.
B. Units That Have Ceased Operation
MWC units that are known to have ceased operation already (but are
not known to be dismantled) are included in the inventory element of
this proposed Federal plan. Such units must
[[Page 3518]]
also be identified in any State plans submitted to EPA. If the owner or
operator of these inactive MWC units plans to restart these units
before December 19, 2000, the units would be required to achieve the
same compliance schedule required for other MWC units and final
compliance would be achieved for all pollutants no later than December
19, 2000. In order to assure compliance by the required date, the owner
or operator of units that have ceased operation, but who plans to
restart the units before December 19, 2000, must submit a final control
plan and the units must comply with the five increments of progress on
the same generic schedule as other MWC units subject to this Federal
plan. (See section II.E for a discussion of compliance schedules and
increments of progress.)
If inactive MWC units will not be restarted until after December
19, 2000, a control plan would not be needed. However, the proposed
Federal plan specifies that any units that have ceased operation and
are planned to be restarted after December 19, 2000, must complete
retrofit and comply with the emission limits and operational
requirements immediately upon restarting. Performance testing to
demonstrate compliance would be required within 180 days after
restarting. The dates for increments of progress that lead to final
compliance (e.g., awarding contracts, initiating on-site construction,
completing on-site construction) would not need to be specified for
units that have ceased operation and plan to restart after December 19,
2000, because these activities would occur before restart while the
units are closed and have no emissions. If a unit was operated after
December 19, 2000 without complying, it would be a violation of the
Federal plan.
C. Units That Will Cease Operation Within 1 Year of Federal Plan
Promulgation
The owner or operator of currently operating MWC units subject to
this Federal plan who will cease operation of the units rather than
comply with the emission limits would be required to notify EPA at the
time that final control plans are due. The owner operator would specify
whether the MWC units will cease operation within 1 year or at a later
date. If the owner or operator notifies EPA that the MWC units will
cease operation within 1 year of promulgation of this Federal plan, the
owner or operator would not be required to enter into a cease operation
agreement. However, if the owner or operator does not cease operation
of the units by the date 1 year after promulgation, it would be a
violation of the Federal plan.
D. Units That Will Cease Operation Later Than 1 Year After Federal Plan
Promulgation
The owner or operator of an MWC unit that will cease operations
more than 1 year after promulgation of the Federal plan would be
required to notify EPA at the time the final control plan is due that
the owner or operator will cease operation of the unit. The owner or
operator of such an MWC unit also would need to enter into a legally
enforceable cease operation agreement with EPA by the date the final
control plan is due. The cease operation agreement would include the
date that operation will cease. The owner or operator of an affected
MWC unit that is ceasing operation more than 1 year after promulgation
of this Federal plan would also submit data for dioxin/furan emission
tests by the date 1 year after promulgation of this Federal plan per
Sec. 62.14109 of the proposed Federal plan rule. This requirement is
consistent with subpart Cb. The cease operation agreement ensures that
the MWC unit will cease operation by an agreed-upon enforceable date.
In all cases, this date would be no later than December 19, 2000.
E. Units That Will Cease Operation and Plan to Restart After December
19, 2000
MWC units covered by this Federal plan that will cease operation
can be restarted after December 19, 2000 if the units achieve
compliance upon restarting. The proposed Federal plan allows for MWC
units that cease operation by December 19, 2000 and then restart as
part of their retrofit schedule, because it may not be feasible for the
owner or operator of every MWC unit at every MWC plant to complete
every unit's retrofit by December 19, 2000. Some owners or operators
will wish to stagger retrofit of their units to maintain service. For
example, an MWC plant owner or operator may complete retrofits on two
of three MWC units before December 19, 2000 and those two units could
remain in operation. The owner or operator could cease operation of the
third unit on December 19, 2000 and complete the unit's retrofit prior
to restarting. (Performance testing on the third unit would be
conducted within 180 days of restarting the retrofitted MWC unit.)
If the owner or operator of MWC units covered by this Federal plan
wishes to include ceasing operations as part of the retrofit schedule,
the owner or operator would be required to notify EPA at the time the
final control plan is due. The owner or operator would also enter into
a cease operation agreement if the unit ceases operation later than 1
year after Federal plan promulgation as described in section IV.D. The
proposed Federal plan specifies that when an MWC unit restarts after
December 19, 2000, it must comply with the Federal plan emission limits
and operational requirements upon restarting. There would be no need to
establish and meet specific dates for the remaining increments of
progress (i.e., awarding contracts, initiating on-site construction,
completing on-site construction, and final compliance) because these
increments would be completed while the unit is closed and there are no
emissions. The proposed Federal plan specifies that the unit must
achieve final compliance with the Federal plan emission limits and
operating requirements as soon as it is restarted. The performance test
to demonstrate compliance would be required within 180 days after
restarting.
F. Units That Plan To De-rate
The proposed Federal plan would allow the owner or operator of an
MWC unit to de-rate the capacity of an MWC unit to below 250 tons per
day. Therefore, the MWC unit would be no longer be subject to the MWC
Federal plan. De-rating means a permanent change that physically
reduces the capacity of the MWC unit to less than 250 tons per day of
MSW. (De-rating cannot be a permit provision, but must be a permanent
physical restriction). The owner or operator that plans to de-rate an
MWC unit would de-rate the unit on the same schedule and increments
that the MWC unit would have had to follow if it were to be retrofit to
meet the emission limits. For example, the owner or operator of an MWC
unit that commenced construction before June 1987 that is subject to
the proposed generic compliance schedule would need to submit a plan
describing the specific physical changes and schedule for accomplishing
the de-rating on the date the final control plan is due. The owner or
operator would need to award a contract for the physical changes to the
units to accomplish the de-rating by the date MWC units are required to
award contracts for retrofit of air pollution control equipment. The
owner or operator would need to initiate on-site construction and
complete on-site construction to accomplish the de-rating by the dates
for these increments specified in the proposed generic compliance
schedule. Once the MWC unit physically is unable to combust
[[Page 3519]]
more than 250 tons per day, it would no longer subject to the MWC
Federal plan.
V. Summary of Federal Plan Emission Limits and Requirements
The proposed MWC Federal plan (40 CFR part 62, subpart FFF), which
will implement the emission guidelines, includes emission limits,
operating practice requirements, operator training and certification
requirements, and compliance and performance testing requirements.
These emission limits and requirements are the same as those in the
emission guidelines (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cb), as amended. Table 4
summarizes the requirements of the Federal plan rule (40 CFR part 62,
subpart FFF).
Table 4.--Summary of Federal Plan Requirements for Existing MWCsa
Applicability:
The Federal
plan would
apply to
existing MWC
units with
capacities to
combust
greater than
250 tons per
day of
municipal
solid waste
unless the
unit is
subject to a
section 111(d)/
129 State plan
that has been
approved by
EPA.
Unit size (MSW combustion capacity) Requirement
> 250 tons per day (referred to as a large Subject to provisions listed below.
MWC unit).
Good Combustion Practices:
A site-specific operator training manual would be required
to be developed and made available for MWC personnel.
The EPA or a State MWC operator training course would be
required to be completed by the MWC chief facility operator, shift
supervisors, and control room operators.
The ASME (or State-equivalent) provisional and full
operator certification would be required to be obtained by the MWC
chief facility operator (mandatory), shift supervisors (mandatory),
and control room operators (optional).
The MWC load level would be required to be measured and not
to exceed 110 percent of the maximum load level measured during the
most recent dioxin/furan performance test.
The maximum PM control device inlet flue gas temperature
would be required to be measured and not to exceed the temperature
17 deg.C above the maximum temperature measured during the most
recent dioxin/furan performance test.
The CO level would be required to be measured using a CEMS,
and the concentration in the flue gas would be required not to
exceed the following:
Averaging
MWC type CO level time
Modular starved-air and 50 ppmv................... 4-hour.
excess-air.
Mass burn waterwall and 100 ppmv.................. 4-hour.
refractory.
Mass burn rotary refractory.. 100 ppmv.................. 24-hour.
Fluidized-bed combustion..... 100 ppmv.................. 4-hour.
Pulverized coal/RDF mixed 150 ppmv.................. 4-hour.
fuel-fired.
Spreader stoker coal/RDF 200 ppmv.................. 24-hour.
mixed fuel-fired.
RDF stoker................... 200 ppmv.................. 24-hour.
Mass burn rotary waterwall... 250 ppmv.................. 24-hour.
MWC Organic Emissions
(measured as total mass
dioxins/furans):
Dioxins/furans (performance test by EPA Reference Method 23).
MWC units utilizing an ESP-based air 60 ng/dscm total mass
pollution control system. (mandatory) or 15 ng/dscm
total mass (optional to
qualify for less frequent
testing).b
MWC units utilizing a nonESP-based air 30 ng/dscm total mass
pollution control system. (mandatory) or 15 ng/dscm
total mass (optional to
qualify for less frequent
testing).b
Basis for dioxin/furan limits GCP and SD/ESP or GCP and SD/
FF, as specified above.
MWC Metal Emissions:
PM (performance test by EPA Reference Method 5)
27 mg/dscm (0.012 gr/dscf).
Opacity (performance test by EPA Reference Method 9).
10 percent (6-minute average).
Cd (performance test by EPA Reference Method 29).
0.040 mg/dscm (18 gr/million dscf).
Pb (performance test by EPA Reference Method 29).
0.44 mg/dscm (200 gr/million dscf).
Hg (performance test by EPA Reference Method 29).
0.080 mg/dscm (35 gr/million dscf) or 85-percent reduction in Hg
emissions.
Basis for PM, opacity, Cd, Pb, and Hg limits GCP and SD/ESP/
CI or GCP and SD/FF/CI.
MWC Acid Gas Emissions:
SO2 (performance test by CEMS).
29 ppmv or 80-percent reduction in SO2 emissions.
HCl (performance test by EPA Reference Method 26).
29 ppmv or 95-percent reduction in HCl emissions.
Basis for SO2 and HCl limits.
See basis for MWC metals.
Nitrogen Oxides Emissions:
NOX (performance
test by CEMS):
Mass burn waterwall.. 205 ppmv.
Mass burn rotary 250 ppmv.
waterwall.
Refuse-derived fuel 250 ppmv.
combustor.
Fluidized bed 180 ppmv.
combustor.
Mass burn refractory. No NOX control requirement.
[[Page 3520]]
Basis for NOX
limits:
MWC units except SNCR.
refractory.
Refractory MWC units. No NOX control requirement.
Fugitive Ash Emissions:
Fugitive Emissions (performance test by EPA Reference
Method 22).
Visible emissions 5 percent of the time from ash transfer
systems except for maintenance and repair activities.
Basis for fugitive Wet ash handling or enclosed
emission limit. ash handling.
Performance Testing and Monitoring
Requirements:
Reporting frequency....... Annual (semiannual if
violation).
Load, flue gas temperature Continuous monitoring, 4-hour
block arithmetic average.
CO........................ CEMS, 4-hour block or 24-hour
daily arithmetic average, as
applicable.
Dioxins/furans, PM, Cd, Annual stack test.
Pb, HCl, and Hg.
Opacity................... COMS (6-minute average) and
annual stack test.
SO2....................... CEMS, 24-hour daily geometric
mean.
Fugitive ash emissions Annual test
NOX....................... CEMS, 24-hour daily arithmetic
average.
Compliance Schedule:
See Section II.E of this preamble.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a All concentration levels in the table are converted to 7 percent O2,
dry basis.
b Although not part of the dioxin/furan limit, the dioxin/furan total
mass limits of 30 ng/dscm and 60 ng/dscm are equal to about 0.3 to 0.8
ng/dscm TEQ and 0.7 to 1.4 ng/dscm TEQ, respectively. The optional
reduced testing limit of 15 ng/dscm total mass is equal to about 0.1
to 0.3 ng/dscm TEQ.
VI. Implementation of Federal Plan and Delegation
The EPA is required to promulgate emission guidelines that are
applicable to existing solid waste incineration sources under sections
111(d) and 129 of the Act. However, the emission guidelines are not
enforceable until EPA approves a State plan or promulgates a Federal
Plan. In cases where a State has not submitted an approvable plan, the
EPA must promulgate a MWC Federal plan for sources in the State as a
``stop-gap'' measure to implement the emission guidelines.
Congress has determined that the primary responsibility for air
pollution control rests with State and local agencies. See the Act
101(a)(3). Sections 111 and 129 of the Act also intend for the States
to take the primary responsibility for ensuring that emission reduction
targets are met. The daily administration of a comprehensive air
pollution control initiative, such as this MWC Federal plan, cannot be
easily accomplished by EPA. Unnecessary Federal intrusion would
inevitably result if EPA were to assume the primary burden of enforcing
the MWC Federal plan. Accordingly, the EPA has designed the MWC Federal
plan to facilitate the transfer of authority from EPA to State and
local agencies. For example, the EPA has encouraged States to help
determine compliance schedules and to provide operator training and
certification requirements for this MWC Federal plan. The EPA has
encouraged States to participate in the development of the MWC Federal
plan to facilitate the transfer of implementation responsibility.
There are four mechanisms for transferring implementation
responsibility to State and local agencies: (1) If EPA approves a State
plan submitted to EPA after the Federal plan is promulgated, the State
would automatically have authority to enforce and implement the State
plan upon EPA approval; (2) if a State does not submit a State plan and
does not have a State rule, EPA can use general delegation authority to
delegate to State agencies authority to perform certain implementation
responsibilities for this Federal plan to the extent allowed by State
law; (3) if a State does not submit a State plan but adopts a State
rule that is identical to, or as protective as, this Federal plan, then
EPA can delegate implementation responsibilities to the State, and (4)
if a State plan is modified such that it is no longer as protective as
the emission guidelines, then EPA may delegate a portion of the Federal
plan. Each of these different options is described in more detail
below.
A. State Submits a State Plan After Large MWC Units Located in the
State Are Subject to the Federal Plan--Full Transfer of Authority
Through State Plan Approval
Even after an MWC unit in a particular State becomes subject to the
Federal plan, the State or a local agency may still adopt and submit to
EPA for approval a State plan (i.e., a State plan containing a State
rule or other enforceable mechanism, inventories, records of public
hearings, and all other required elements of a State plan). The EPA
will determine if the State plan is as protective as the emission
guidelines. If EPA determines that the State plan is as protective as
the emission guidelines, EPA will approve the State plan. Upon approval
of the State plan, the Federal plan will no longer apply to MWC units
covered by the State plan and the State will implement and enforce the
State plan in lieu of the Federal plan. (The EPA will periodically
amend the Federal plan to identify MWC units that are covered in the
approved State plan and, therefore, are not subject to the Federal
plan.) Making the State plan effective immediately upon approval
expedites a State's assumption of responsibility for implementing the
1995 emission guidelines through the State plan mechanism as intended
by Congress. However, if EPA determines that the State plan is not as
protective as the guidelines, EPA cannot approve the State plan.
B. State Takes Delegation of the Federal Plan (No State Plan or State
Rule)--Partial Transfer of Authority Through Delegation
The State may assume implementation responsibilities even if there
is no State plan or State rule in effect. To the extent authorized by
State law, the EPA believes it is advantageous for State agencies to
agree to undertake, on the EPA's behalf, administrative and substantive
roles in implementing the Federal plan. These roles could include:
procedural and engineering review of certain permit applications,
administration and oversight of compliance reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, conduct of source inspections, and preparation of draft
notices of violation. The EPA would
[[Page 3521]]
retain responsibility for bringing enforcement actions against sources
violating Federal plan provisions, as well as the authority to
terminate, modify, or revoke permits. A Memorandum of Agreement between
the appropriate EPA Regional Office and the air pollution control
officer or executive officer of the responsible State agency would be
used to transfer partial authority. The EPA would announce the terms of
the partial delegation in a Federal Register notice, and would inform
affected sources.
C. State Adopts a State Rule and Does Not Submit a State Plan--Full
Transfer of Authority Through Delegation
A State may adopt a State rule that is identical to, or as
protective as, the MWC Federal plan. The State can then be delegated
authority to enforce the State rule, which serves to implement the
Federal plan. Such a State can be delegated authority without
submitting a full State plan (i.e., without a plan containing an
inventory of emissions, public hearings, and all of the other State
plan elements) because these elements would be included in the Federal
plan that is being delegated to the State. The EPA would evaluate the
State rule and, if it is identical to or as protective as the Federal
plan, EPA will delegate authority to the State to implement the Federal
plan by implementing and enforcing the approved State rule.
To assure timely transfer of implementation authority to States, it
is desirable that each State (in which MWC units subject to the MWC
Federal plan are located) quickly adopt a State rule that is identical
to, or as protective as, the MWC Federal plan. If a State adopts an
essentially indistinguishable rule, the EPA intends to delegate full
implementation responsibilities to that State immediately following
State adoption. The EPA would publish a notice of this delegation of
the MWC Federal plan in the Federal Register and would, in conjunction
with the State, make efforts to ensure that affected sources are aware
that a State has assumed responsibility for implementing the MWC
Federal plan.
In the event that the State fails to implement its own State rule
or subsequently amends the State rule so that it is not as protective
as the MWC Federal plan, the EPA will resume direct enforcement of the
affected provisions of the MWC Federal plan and withdraw the delegation
in whole or in part, as appropriate.
D. An Approved State Plan Is No Longer as Protective as the Emission
Guidelines--Partial Transfer of Authority Through Delegation
The EPA could also delegate portions of the Federal Plan to a State
under certain circumstances. An example would be a State with an
approved State Plan that contains the 1995 emission limits. A State
plan must incorporate the revised emission limits by 1 year after
promulgation of the amendments. If a State plan does not incorporate
the amended emission limits by August 25, 1998 (1 year after the
promulgation of the amendments to the emission guidelines), then the
State plan would no longer be as protective as the emission guidelines.
Rather than withdrawing its approval of the entire State plan, the EPA
could (to the extent authorized by State law) delegate that portion of
the Federal Plan containing the revised emission limits (from the
August 25, 1997 amendments) to the State. The State would retain
responsibilities for all implementation and enforcement.
VII. Title V Operating Permits
All MWC sources subject to this MWC Federal plan must obtain a
title V permit. Title V permits issued to sources subject to this MWC
Federal plan must include all applicable requirements of this plan.
Permitting authorities will enforce these requirements.
VIII. Units Subject to This Federal Plan and New Source Performance
Standards
This section describes the relationship between the Federal plan
and the three NSPS in terms of applicability and emission limits. The
MWC emission guidelines apply and this proposed Federal plan would
apply to MWC units larger than 250 tons per day in combustion capacity
that commenced construction before September 20, 1994. There are also
three new source performance standards (NSPS) that apply to MWC units.
The first NSPS for MWC units, 40 CFR part 60 subpart E, was
promulgated in 1971. It applies to incinerators charging more than 45
Mg per day (50 tons per day) of MSW that were constructed or modified
after August 17, 1971. Subpart E units that combust greater than 225 mg
per day (250 tons per day) could also be subject to the Federal plan.
The only pollutant regulated by subpart E is PM, and the PM limit is
higher than the limit in the proposed Federal plan. Thus, MWC units
complying with the Federal plan PM limit would also comply with the
subpart E NSPS emission limit for PM.
The second NSPS, subpart Ea, was promulgated on February 11, 1991
and revised on December 19, 1995. This NSPS applies to MWC units with
capacities to combust greater than 250 tons per day, that:
Commenced construction after December 20, 1989 and on
or before September 20, 1994; or
Commenced modification or reconstruction after December
20, 1989 and on or before June 19, 1996. (``Modification'' and
``reconstruction'' are defined in 40 CFR part 60, subpart A.)
MWC units that started construction between December 20, 1989 and
September 20, 1994 could be subject to both this proposed Federal plan
(or an approved State plan) and the subpart Ea NSPS. MWC units must
comply with the more stringent emission limit. The emission limits in
the subpart Ea NSPS are as stringent or more stringent than the Federal
plan (limits for the same pollutants) except for the PM and
SO2 limits. The PM and SO2 limits in this Federal
plan are slightly more stringent, but could be met using the same
controls. Also this Federal plan has limits for three metals and
fugitive ash that are not regulated by subpart Ea. Units already
complying with subpart Ea also should be meeting the Federal plan
emission limits, but will need to verify that they are indeed in
compliance with the slightly more stringent PM, SO2, and
metals limits contained in the Federal plan.
The third NSPS, subpart Eb, applies to MWC units that:
(1) Commence construction after September 20, 1994, or
(2) Commence modification or reconstruction after June 19,1996.
There is no overlap between the proposed Federal plan and the subpart
Eb NSPS sources would not be subject to both rules. The emission limits
in subpart Eb are as stringent or more stringent than the proposed
Federal plan.
IX. Administrative Requirements
This section addresses the following administrative requirements:
Docket, Paperwork Reduction Act, Executive Order 12866, Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act, and Regulatory Flexibility Act. Many of these
administrative requirements were addressed in the preamble to the 1995
emission guidelines (60 FR 65404-65413). Since today's proposed rule
merely would implement the emission guidelines promulgated on December
19, 1995 (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cb) as they apply to large MWC units
and does not impose any new requirements, many of the
[[Page 3522]]
following administrative requirements refer to the administrative
requirements in the preamble to the 1995 rule.
A. Docket
As discussed above, a docket has been prepared for this action
pursuant to the procedural requirements of section 307(d) of the Act,
42 U.S.C. 7607(d). Docket numbers A-89-08 and A-90-45 contain the
supporting information for the December 19, 1995 promulgated emission
guidelines. Because this proposed rule implements the emission
guidelines, these same dockets also contain the supporting information
for this proposed rule. Additional supporting information for this
proposed rule is contained in docket number A-97-45.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in this proposed rule will
be submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An
Information Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA
(ICR No. 1847.01) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, OPPE
Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(2137), 401 M St., S.W., Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 260-
2740.
The information required by the Federal plan would be used by the
Agency to ensure that the MWC Federal plan requirements are implemented
and are complied with on a continuous basis. Required records and
reports are necessary for EPA to identify MWC units that may not be in
compliance with the MWC Federal plan requirements. Based on reported
information, EPA would decide which units should be inspected and what
records or processes should be inspected. The records that owners and
operators of units maintain would indicate to EPA whether MWC personnel
are operating and maintaining control equipment properly.
Because the MWC Federal plan is an interim action, EPA is
presenting a range of estimated burden. The maximum burden reflects a
worst-case scenario in which no additional State plans are approved
within 3 years of the Federal plan promulgation. The minimum estimate
reflects a more likely scenario in which all remaining State plans are
in place at some point within 3 years following promulgation of the MWC
Federal plan.
Based on a 1995 MWC inventory and recent information from EPA
Regional Offices, this Federal plan is projected to affect a maximum of
143 MWC units at 59 plants in 23 States. A number of additional State
plans will be approved by the time the Federal plan is promulgated, or
within the year following promulgation. When a State plan is approved,
the Federal plan no longer applies to MWC units covered in that State
plan. Thus, the rule will more likely affect about 53 units at 21
plants as of June 1998 and 13 units at 4 plants as of June 1999. The
burden has been estimated under both scenarios and is presented as a
range.
The maximum estimated average annual burden for industry for the
first 3 years after the implementation of the Federal plan would be
40,132 hours annually at a cost of $15,463,317 (including $1,561,654 in
labor costs) per year to meet the monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements. The maximum estimated average annual burden,
over the first 3 years, for the Agency would be 7,254 hours at a cost
of $327,844 (including travel expenses) per year.
The minimum estimated average annual burden for industry for the
first 3 years after the implementation of the Federal plan would be
2,677 hours annually at a cost of $1,285,000 (including $104,185 in
labor costs) per year to meet the monitoring, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements. The minimum estimated average annual burden for
the first 3 years for the Agency would be 827 hours at a cost of
$36,000 (including travel expenses) per year. The minimum burden is
calculated for affected facilities in 5 States for the first year. The
minimum burden is reduced to affected facilities in two States for the
second year and no states are affected in the third year.
Burden means total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide information
to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review
instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and
systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and
providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to
be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or
otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part
9 and 48 CFR part 15.
C. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive
Order. The EPA and OMB determined that this regulatory action is ``not
significant'' under Executive Order 12866. The proposed Federal plan
would simply implement the 1995 guidelines and does not result in any
additional control requirements or impose any additional costs above
those previously considered during promulgation of the 1995 emission
guidelines. The EPA considered the 1995 emission guidelines and
standards to be significant and the rules were reviewed by OMB in 1995
(see 60 FR 65405).
D. Unfunded Mandates Act
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995 (``Unfunded
Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must prepare a
statement to accompany any rule where the estimated costs to State,
local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector will be $100
million or more in any 1 year. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a
plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly impacted by the rule. An unfunded mandates statement was
prepared and published in the 1995 promulgation notice (see 60 FR 65405
to 65412).
The EPA has determined that the proposed Federal plan does not
include any new Federal mandates or additional requirements above those
previously considered during promulgation of the 1995 emission
guidelines. Therefore, the requirements of the Unfunded Mandates Act do
not apply to this proposed rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Section 605 of the RFA requires Federal agencies to give special
consideration to the impacts of regulations on small entities, which
are defined as small businesses, small organizations, and small
governments. During the 1995 rulemaking, EPA estimated that few, if
any, small entities would be affected by the promulgated guidelines and
standards, and therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis was not
required (see 60 FR 65413). This proposed Federal plan would not
establish any new requirements; therefore, pursuant to the provisions
of
[[Page 3523]]
5 U.S.C. 605(b), EPA certifies that this Federal plan will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, and a
regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Incorporation by reference.
Dated: January 14, 1997.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 62--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7642.
2. Amend Sec. 62.02 by revising paragraph (a) and adding paragraph
(g) to read as follows:
Sec. 62.02 Introduction.
(a) This part sets forth the Administrator's approval and
disapproval of State plans for the control of pollutants and facilities
under section 111(d), and section 129 as applicable, of the Act, and
the Administrator's promulgation of such plans or portions of plans
thereof. Approval of a plan or any portion of a plan is based on a
determination by the Administrator that it meets the requirements of
section 111(d), and section 129 as applicable, of the Act and
provisions of part 60 of this chapter.
* * * * *
(g) Substitute plans promulgated by the Administrator for States
that do not have approved plans are contained in separate subparts that
appear after the subparts for States. These Federal plans include
sections identifying the applicability of the plan, emission limits,
compliance schedules, recordkeeping and reporting, performance testing,
and monitoring requirements.
3. Amend subpart A by adding Sec. 62.13.
Sec. 62.13 Federal plans.
The Federal plans apply to owners and operators of affected
facilities that are not covered by an approved State plan, are located
in any State for which a State plan has not been approved, or are
located in any State whose State plan has been vacated in whole or in
part. Affected facilities are defined in each Federal plan.
(a) The Federal plan for municipal waste combustors is contained in
subpart FFF of this part.
(b) Landfills Federal plan. [Reserved]
(c) Medical waste incinerator Federal plan. [Reserved]
4. Amend part 62 by adding and by reserving subparts DDD and EEE as
follows:
Subpart DDD--[Reserved]
Subpart EEE--[Reserved]
5. Amend part 62 by adding subpart FFF consisting of Secs. 62.14100
through 62.14109 to read as follows:
Subpart FFF--Federal Plan Requirements for Large Municipal Waste
Combustors Constructed on or Before September 20, 1994
Sec.
62.14100 Scope.
62.14101 Definitions.
62.14102 Affected facilities.
62.14103 Emission limits for municipal waste combustor metals, acid
gases, organics, and nitrogen oxides.
62.14104 Requirements for municipal waste combustor operating
practices.
62.14105 Requirements for municipal waste combustor operator
training and certification.
62.14106 Emission limits for municipal waste combustor fugitive ash
emissions.
62.14107 Emission limits for air curtain incinerators.
62.14108 Compliance schedules.
62.14109 Reporting and recordkeeping, and compliance and
performance testing.
Table 1 of Subpart FFF--Units Excluded From Subpart FFF
Table 2 of Subpart FFF--Nitrogen Oxides Requirements for Affected
Facilities
Table 3 of Subpart FFF--Municipal Waste Combustor Operating
Requirements
Table 4 of Subpart FFF--Generic Compliance Schedules and Increments
of Progress (Pre-1987)
Table 5 of Subpart FFF--Generic Compliance Schedules and Increments
of Progress (Post-1987)
Table 6 of Subpart FFF--Site-specific Compliance Schedules and
Increments of Progress
Subpart FFF--Federal Plan Requirements for Large Municipal Waste
Combustors Constructed on or Before September 20, 1994
Sec. 62.14100 Scope.
This subpart contains emission requirements and compliance
schedules for the control of pollutants from certain municipal waste
combustors in accordance with section 111(d) and section 129 of the
Clean Air Act and 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. This municipal waste
combustor Federal plan applies to each affected facility as defined in
Sec. 62.14102 that is not covered by a currently approved State plan.
Sec. 62.14101 Definitions.
Terms used but not defined in this subpart have the meaning given
to them in the Clean Air Act and 40 CFR part 60, subparts A, B, and Eb.
Contract means a legally binding agreement or obligation that
cannot be canceled or modified without substantial financial loss.
De-rate means to make a permanent physical change to the municipal
waste combustor unit that reduces the maximum combustion capacity of
the unit to less than or equal to 250 tons per day of municipal solid
waste. A permit restriction or a change in operation does not qualify
as de-rating. (See the procedures specified in 40 CFR 60.58b(j) of
subpart Eb for calculating municipal waste combustor unit capacity.)
Municipal waste combustor plant means one or more affected
facilities (as defined in Sec. 62.14102) at the same location.
Protectorate means American Samoa, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,
the District of Columbia, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the
Virgin Islands.
State means any of the 50 United States and the protectorates of
the United States.
State plan means a plan submitted pursuant to section 111(d) and
section 129(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act and 40 CFR part 60, subpart B
that implements and enforces 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cb.
Sec. 62.14102 Affected facilities.
(a) The affected facility to which this subpart applies is each
municipal waste combustor unit with a capacity to combust greater than
250 tons per day of municipal solid waste for which construction was
commenced on or before September 20, 1994, in all States and
protectorates except for the affected facilities listed in table 1 of
this subpart. Notwithstanding the exclusions in table 1 of this subpart
applies to affected facilities in any State that does not have a State
plan currently approved.
(b) A municipal waste combustor unit regulated by an EPA approved
State plan is not regulated by this subpart.
(c) Any municipal waste combustor unit that has the capacity to
combust more than 250 tons per day of municipal solid waste and is
subject to a Federally enforceable permit limiting the maximum amount
of municipal solid waste that may be combusted in the unit to less than
or equal to 11 tons per day is not subject to this subpart if the owner
or operator:
(1) Notifies the EPA Administrator of an exemption claim;
[[Page 3524]]
(2) Provides a copy of the Federally enforceable permit that limits
the firing of municipal solid waste to less than 11 tons per day; and
(3) Keeps records of the amount of municipal solid waste fired on a
daily basis.
(d) Physical or operational changes made to an existing municipal
waste combustor unit primarily for the purpose of complying with the
emission requirements of this subpart are not considered in determining
whether the unit is a modified or reconstructed facility under 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Ea or subpart Eb.
(e) A qualifying small power production facility, as defined in
section 3(17)(C) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(17)(C)), that
burns homogeneous waste (such as automotive tires or used oil, but not
including refuse-derived fuel) for the production of electric energy is
not subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of the facility
notifies the EPA Administrator of this exemption and provides data
documenting that the facility qualifies for this exemption.
(f) A qualifying cogeneration facility, as defined in section
3(18)(B) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(18)(B)), that burns
homogeneous waste (such as automotive tires or used oil, but not
including refuse-derived fuel) for the production of electric energy
and steam or forms of useful energy (such as heat) that are used for
industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling purposes, is not subject to
this subpart if the owner or operator of the facility notifies the EPA
Administrator of this exemption and provides data documenting that the
facility qualifies for this exemption.
(g) Any unit combusting a single-item waste stream of tires is not
subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of the unit:
(1) Notifies the EPA Administrator of an exemption claim; and
(2) Provides data documenting that the unit qualifies for this
exemption.
(h) Any unit required to have a permit under section 3005 of the
Solid Waste Disposal Act is not subject to this subpart.
(i) Any materials recovery facility (including primary or secondary
smelters) that combusts waste for the primary purpose of recovering
metals is not subject to this subpart.
(j) Any cofired combustor, as defined under 40 CFR 60.51b of
subpart Eb that meets the capacity specifications in paragraph (a) of
this section is not subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of
the cofired combustor:
(1) Notifies the EPA Administrator of an exemption claim;
(2) Provides a copy of the Federally enforceable permit (specified
in the definition of cofired combustor in this section); and
(3) Keeps a record on a calendar quarter basis of the weight of
municipal solid waste combusted at the cofired combustor and the weight
of all other fuels combusted at the cofired combustor.
(k) Air curtain incinerators, as defined under 40 CFR 60.51b of
subpart Eb, that meet the capacity specifications in paragraph (a) of
this section, and that combust a fuel stream composed of 100 percent
yard waste are exempt from all provisions of this subpart except the
opacity standard under Sec. 62.14107, and the testing procedures and
the reporting and recordkeeping provisions under Sec. 62.14109.
(l) Air curtain incinerators that meet the capacity specifications
in paragraph (a) of this section and that combust municipal solid waste
other than yard waste are subject to all provisions of this subpart.
(m) Pyrolysis/combustion units that are an integrated part of a
plastics/rubber recycling unit (as defined in 40 CFR 60.51b of subpart
Eb) are not subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of the
plastics/rubber recycling unit keeps records of the weight of plastics,
rubber, and/or rubber tires processed on a calendar quarter basis; the
weight of chemical plant feedstocks and petroleum refinery feedstocks
produced and marketed on a calendar quarter basis; and the name and
address of the purchaser of the feedstocks. The combustion of gasoline,
diesel fuel, jet fuel, fuel oils, residual oil, refinery gas, petroleum
coke, liquified petroleum gas, propane, or butane produced by chemical
plants or petroleum refineries that use feedstocks produced by
plastics/rubber recycling units are not subject to this subpart.
(n) Cement kilns firing municipal solid waste are not subject to
this subpart.
Sec. 62.14103 Emission limits for municipal waste combustor metals,
acid gases, organics, and nitrogen oxides.
(a) The emission limits for municipal waste combustor metals are
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) of this section.
(1) The owner or operator of an affected facility must not cause to
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases
that contain: particulate matter in excess of 27 milligrams per dry
standard cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen; and opacity in
excess of 10 percent (6-minute average).
(2) The owner or operator of an affected facility must not cause to
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases
that contain: cadmium in excess of 0.040 milligrams per dry standard
cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen; and lead in excess of 0.44
milligrams per dry standard cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
(3) The owner or operator of an affected facility must not cause to
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases
that contain mercury in excess of 0.080 milligrams per dry standard
cubic meter or 15 percent of the potential mercury emission
concentration (85-percent reduction by weight), corrected to 7 percent
oxygen, whichever is less stringent.
(b) The emission limits for municipal waste combustor acid gases,
expressed as sulfur dioxide and hydrogen chloride, are specified in
paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.
(1) The owner or operator of an affected facility must not cause to
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases
that contain sulfur dioxide in excess of 29 parts per million by volume
or 25 percent of the potential sulfur dioxide emission concentration
(75-percent reduction by weight or volume), corrected to 7 percent
oxygen (dry basis), whichever is less stringent. Compliance with this
emission limit is based on a 24-hour daily geometric mean.
(2) The owner or operator of an affected facility must not cause to
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases
that contain hydrogen chloride in excess of 29 parts per million by
volume or 5 percent of the potential hydrogen chloride emission
concentration (95-percent reduction by weight or volume), corrected to
7 percent oxygen (dry basis), whichever is less stringent.
(c) The owner or operator of an affected facility must not cause to
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases
that contain municipal waste combustor organics, expressed as total
mass dioxins/furans, in excess of the emission limits specified in
either paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section, as applicable.
(1) The emission limit for affected facilities that employ an
electrostatic precipitator-based emission control system is 60
nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total mass), corrected to 7
percent oxygen.
[[Page 3525]]
(2) The emission limit for affected facilities that do not employ
an electrostatic precipitator-based emission control system is 30
nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total mass), corrected to 7
percent oxygen.
(d) The owner or operator of an affected facility must not cause to
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases
that contain nitrogen oxides in excess of the emission limits listed in
table 2 of this subpart for affected facilities. Table 2 of this
subpart provides emission limits for the nitrogen oxides concentration
level for each type of affected facility.
Sec. 62.14104 Requirements for municipal waste combustor operating
practices.
(a) The owner or operator of an affected facility must not cause to
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases
that contain carbon monoxide in excess of the emission limits listed in
table 3 of this subpart. Table 3 provides emission limits for the
carbon monoxide concentration level for each type of affected facility.
(b) The owner or operator of an affected facility must comply with
the municipal waste combustor operating practice requirements listed in
40 CFR 60.53b (b) and (c).
Sec. 62.14105 Requirements for municipal waste combustor operator
training and certification.
The owner or operator of an affected facility must comply with the
municipal waste combustor operator training and certification
requirements listed in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section. For
affected facilities, compliance with the municipal waste combustor
operator training and certification requirements specified under
paragraphs (a) through (d), and (g) of this section must be no later
than 12 months after the effective date of this subpart.
(a) Each chief facility operator and shift supervisor must obtain
and maintain a current provisional operator certification from either
the American Society of Mechanical Engineers [QRO-1-1994 (incorporated
by reference--see 40 CFR 60.17(h)(1) of subpart A)] or a State
certification program in Connecticut and Maryland (if the affected
facility is located in the respective State).
(b) Each chief facility operator and shift supervisor must have
completed full certification or must have scheduled a full
certification exam with either the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers [QRO-1-1994 (incorporated by reference--see 40 CFR
60.17(h)(1) of subpart A)] or a State certification program in
Connecticut and Maryland (if the affected facility is located in the
respective State).
(c) The owner or operator of an affected facility must not allow
the facility to be operated at any time unless one of the following
persons is on duty at the affected facility: A fully certified chief
facility operator; a provisionally certified chief facility operator
who is scheduled to take the full certification exam no later than 12
months after the effective date of this subpart; a fully certified
shift supervisor; or a provisionally certified shift supervisor who is
scheduled to take the full certification exam no later than 12 months
after the effective date of this subpart. If one of the persons listed
in this paragraph must leave the affected facility during their
operating shift, a provisionally certified control room operator who is
onsite at the affected facility may fulfill the requirement in this
paragraph.
(d)(1) Each chief facility operator, shift supervisor, and control
room operator at an affected facility must complete the EPA municipal
waste combustor operator training course or the State municipal waste
combustor operator training course in Connecticut (if the affected
facility is located in Connecticut).
(2) The requirement specified in this paragraph does not apply to
chief facility operators, shift supervisors, and control room operators
who have obtained full certification from the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers on or before the effective date of this subpart.
The owner or operator of an affected facility may request that the EPA
Administrator waive the requirement specified in this paragraph for
chief facility operators, shift supervisors, and control room operators
who have obtained provisional certification from the American Society
of Mechanical Engineers on or before the effective date of this
subpart.
(e) The owner or operator of an affected facility must develop and
update on a yearly basis a site-specific operating manual that must, at
a minimum, address the elements of municipal waste combustor unit
operation specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(11) of this
section.
(1) A summary of the applicable standards under this subpart;
(2) A description of basic combustion theory applicable to a
municipal waste combustor unit;
(3) Procedures for receiving, handling, and feeding municipal solid
waste;
(4) Procedures for municipal waste combustor unit startup,
shutdown, and malfunction;
(5) Procedures for maintaining proper combustion air supply levels;
(6) Procedures for operating the municipal waste combustor unit
within the standards established under this subpart;
(7) Procedures for responding to periodic upset or off-
specification conditions;
(8) Procedures for minimizing particulate matter carryover;
(9) Procedures for handling ash;
(10) Procedures for monitoring municipal waste combustor unit
emissions; and
(11) Reporting and recordkeeping procedures.
(f) The owner or operator of an affected facility must establish a
training program to review the operating manual according to the
schedule specified in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this section with
each person who has responsibilities affecting the operation of an
affected facility including, but not limited to, chief facility
operators, shift supervisors, control room operators, ash handlers,
maintenance personnel, and crane/load handlers.
(1) Each person specified in paragraph (f) of this section must
undergo initial training no later than the date specified in paragraph
(f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of this section, whichever is later.
(i) The date prior to the day the person assumes responsibilities
affecting municipal waste combustor unit operation; or
(ii) The date 12 months after the effective date of this subpart.
(2) Annually, following the initial review required by paragraph
(f)(1) of this section.
(g) The operating manual required by paragraph (e) of this section
must be kept in a readily accessible location for each person required
to undergo training under paragraph (f) of this section. The operating
manual and records of training must be available for inspection by the
EPA or its delegated enforcement agency upon request.
Sec. 62.14106 Emission limits for municipal waste combustor fugitive
ash emissions.
(a) The owner or operator of an affected facility must not cause to
be discharged to the atmosphere from that affected facility visible
emissions of combustion ash from an ash conveying system (including
conveyor transfer points) in excess of 5 percent of the observation
period (i.e., 9 minutes per 3-hour period), as determined by EPA
Reference Method 22 observations as specified in 40 CFR 60.58b(k) of
subpart
[[Page 3526]]
Eb, except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
(b) The emission limit specified in paragraph (a) of this section
does not cover visible emissions discharged inside buildings or
enclosures of ash conveying systems; however, the emission limit
specified in paragraph (a) of this section does cover visible emissions
discharged to the atmosphere from buildings or enclosures of ash
conveying systems.
(c) The provisions specified in paragraph (a) of this section do
not apply during maintenance and repair of ash conveying systems.
Sec. 62.14107 Emission limits for air curtain incinerators.
The owner or operator of an air curtain incinerator with the
capacity to combust greater than 250 tons per day of municipal solid
waste and that combusts a fuel feed stream composed of 100 percent yard
waste and no other municipal solid waste materials must not (at any
time) cause to be discharged into the atmosphere from that incinerator
any gases that exhibit greater than 10-percent opacity (6-minute
average), except that an opacity level of up to 35 percent (6-minute
average) is permitted during startup periods during the first 30
minutes of operation of the unit.
Sec. 62.14108 Compliance schedules.
(a) The owner or operator of an affected facility must achieve the
increments of progress specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) to
retrofit air pollution control devices to meet the emission limits of
this subpart. As specified in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B, the compliance
schedules and increments of progress apply to each owner or operator of
an affected facility who is taking longer than 1 year after [date of
publication of the final rule] to comply with the emission limits
specified in this subpart.
(1) Submit a final control plan according to the requirements of
Sec. 62.14109(g).
(2) Award contract(s): Award contract(s) to initiate on-site
construction, initiate on-site installation of emission control
equipment, or incorporate process changes. The owner or operator must
submit a signed copy of the contract(s) awarded according to the
requirements of Sec. 62.14109(h).
(3) Initiate on-site construction: Initiate on-site construction,
initiate on-site installation of emission control equipment, or
initiate process changes needed to meet the emission limits as outlined
in the final control plan.
(4) Complete on-site construction: Complete on-site construction
and installation of emission control equipment or complete process
changes.
(5) Achieve final compliance: Incorporate all process changes or
complete retrofit construction as designed in the final control plan
and connect the air pollution control equipment or process changes with
the affected facility identified in the final control plan such that if
the affected facility is brought on line, all necessary process changes
or air pollution control equipment are operating fully. Within 180 days
after the date the affected facility is required to achieve final
compliance, the initial performance test must be conducted. On and
after the date the initial performance test is completed or is required
to be completed, whichever is earlier, no pollutant may be discharged
into the atmosphere from the affected facility in excess of the
emission limits of this subpart.
(b) The owner or operator of an affected facility must achieve the
increments of progress specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) of
this section according to the schedule specified in paragraphs (b)(1)
through (b)(4) of this section, except as provided in paragraphs (c),
(d), and (e) of this section.
(1) The owner or operator of an affected facility that commenced
construction, modification, or reconstruction on or before June 26,
1987 and will take longer than 1 year after [date of publication of
final rule] (or 1 year after a revised construction permit or a revised
operating permit is issued, if a permit modification is required) to
comply with the emission limits of this subpart must achieve the
increments of progress according to the schedule in table 4 of this
subpart, except for those affected facilities specified in paragraphs
(b)(3) and (b)(4) of this section.
(2) The owner or operator of an affected facility that began
construction, modification, or reconstruction after June 26, 1987 must
achieve the increments of progress according to the schedule in table 5
of this subpart to comply with the emission limits of this subpart,
except for those affected facilities specified in paragraphs (b)(3) and
(b)(4) of this section.
(3) The owner or operator of each specified affected facility in
table 6 of this subpart must achieve the increments of progress
according to the schedule in table 6 of this subpart.
(4) For affected facilities that are subject to the schedule
requirements of paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, the owner
or operator (or the State air pollution control authority) may submit
for approval alternative dates for achieving increments 2, 3, and 4.
The owner or operator that is submitting these alternative dates must
meet the reporting requirements of Sec. 62.14109(l).
(c) The owner or operator of an affected facility that has ceased
operation but will reopen prior to the applicable final compliance date
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this section must meet
the same compliance dates and increments of progress specified in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this section.
(d) The owner or operator of an affected facility that has ceased
or ceases operation of an affected facility and restarts the affected
facility after the compliance dates specified in paragraphs (b)(1)
through (b)(4) of this section must comply with the emission limits,
requirements for combustor operating practices, and operator training
and certification requirements of this subpart upon the date the
affected facility restarts. The initial performance tests required by
Sec. 62.14109(c) must be conducted within 180 days after the date the
unit restarts.
(e) The owner or operator of an affected facility that will be de-
rated prior to the applicable final compliance date instead of
complying with the emission limits of this subpart must meet the same
increments of progress and achieve the de-rating by the final
compliance date (specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this
section) that would be applicable to the affected facility if it did
not de-rate. The owner or operator of an affected facility that will be
de-rated must meet the reporting requirements of Sec. 62.14109(j).
After de-rating is accomplished, the municipal waste combustor affected
facility is no longer subject to this subpart.
Sec. 62.14109 Reporting and recordkeeping and compliance and
performance testing.
(a) The owner or operator of an affected facility must comply with
the reporting and recordkeeping provisions listed in 40 CFR 60.59b,
except as provided in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) of this section.
(1) The siting requirements under 40 CFR 60.59b(a), (b)(5), and
(d)(11) and the notification of construction requirements under 40 CFR
60.59b (b) and (c) do not apply.
(2) 40 CFR 60.54b and 60.56b of Subpart Eb do not apply to this
subpart (see Secs. 62.14105 and 62.14107 of this subpart).
(b) The owner or operator of an affected facility must comply with
the compliance and performance testing
[[Page 3527]]
methods and procedures listed in 40 CFR 60.58b of Subpart Eb, except as
provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section.
(c) The initial performance test must be completed within 180 days
after the date of final compliance specified in Sec. 62.14108, rather
than the date for the initial performance test specified in 40 CFR
60.58b of Subpart Eb.
(d) The owner or operator of an affected facility may follow the
alternative performance testing schedule for dioxin/furan emissions
specified in 40 CFR 60.58b(g)(5)(iii) if all performance tests for all
affected facilities at the MWC plant over a 2-year period indicate that
dioxin/furan emissions are less than or equal to 15 nanograms per dry
standard cubic meter total mass, corrected to 7 percent oxygen (instead
of 7 nanograms specified in Sec. 60.58b(g)(5)(iii) of Subpart Eb).
(e) The owner or operator of an affected facility that is taking
longer than 1 year after [date of publication of the final rule] to
comply with the emission limits of this subpart must submit
notification to the EPA Regional Office within 10 business days of
completing each increment. Each notification must indicate which
increment of progress specified in Sec. 62.14108 (a)(1) through (a)(5)
has been achieved. The notification must be signed by the owner or
operator of the affected facility.
(f) The owner or operator of an affected facility that is taking
longer than 1 year after [date of publication of the final rule] to
comply with the emission limits of this subpart who fails to meet any
increment of progress specified in Sec. 62.14108 (a)(1) through (a)(5)
according to the applicable schedule in Sec. 62.14108 must submit
notification to the EPA Regional Office within 10 business days of the
applicable date in Sec. 62.14108 that the owner or operator failed to
meet the increment.
(g) The owner or operator of an affected facility that is taking
longer than 1 year after [date of publication of the final rule] to
comply with the emission limits of this subpart must submit a final
control plan by the date specified in Sec. 62.14108(b) with the
notification required by Sec. 62.14109(e). The final control plan must,
at a minimum, include the items in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of
this section.
(1) A complete analysis of the applicable regulatory requirements
and methods of compliance and selected control technology options
available to meet the requirements.
(2) A description of the air pollution control devices or process
changes that will be employed for each unit to comply with the emission
limits and other requirements of this subpart.
(3) Engineering specifications and drawings of the air pollution
control equipment and/or process changes that will be employed to
comply with the emission limits and other requirements of this subpart.
(4) The same information that will be used to solicit bids to
install the air pollution control devices or initiate the process
changes.
(h) The owner or operator of an affected facility that is taking
longer than 1 year after [date of publication of the final rule] to
comply with the emission limits of this subpart must submit a signed
copy of the contract or contracts awarded according to the requirements
of Sec. 62.14108(a)(2) with the notification required by
Sec. 62.14109(e).
(i) The owner or operator of an affected facility that plans to
cease operation of an affected facility on or before December 19, 2000
rather than comply with the emission limits of this subpart by the
applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 62.14108 must submit a
notification by the date specified for the final control plan according
to the schedule specified in paragraphs Sec. 62.14108 (b)(1) through
(b)(4), as applicable. (Affected facilities that cease operation on or
before December 19, 2000 rather than comply with the emission limits of
this subpart by the compliance date specified in Sec. 62.14108 are not
required to submit a final control plan.) The notification must state
the date by which the affected facility will cease operation. If the
cease operation date is later than 1 year after [date of publication of
the final rule], the owner or operator must enter into a legally
binding closure agreement with EPA by the date the final control plan
is due. The agreement must specify the date by which operation will
cease.
(j) The owner or operator of an affected facility that plans to de-
rate the affected facility on or before December 19, 2000 rather than
comply with the emission limits of this subpart by the compliance date
specified in Sec. 62.14108 must submit a final control plan as required
by paragraph (g) of this section and submit notification of increments
of progress as required by paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section and
Sec. 62.14108(e) of this subpart.
(1) The final control plan must contain the information in
paragraphs (j)(1)(i) through (j)(1)(iv) of this section rather than the
information in paragraph (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this section.
(i) A description of the physical changes that will be made to
accomplish the de-rating.
(ii) Calculations of the current maximum combustion capacity and
the planned maximum combustion capacity after the de-rating. (See the
procedures specified in 40 CFR 60.58b(j) of Subpart Eb for calculating
municipal waste combustor unit capacity.)
(iii) Engineering specifications and drawings of the physical
changes that will be made to accomplish the de-rating.
(iv) The same information that will be used to solicit bids to
initiate the physical changes.
(2) The owner or operator must submit a signed copy of the contract
or contracts awarded to initiate the de-rating with the notification
required by paragraph (e) of this section.
(k) The owner or operator of an affected facility that is ceasing
operation more than 1 year following [date of publication of the final
rule] must submit performance test results by the date 1 year after the
[date of publication of the final rule] for dioxin/furan emissions
conducted during or after 1990 for each affected facility. The
performance test shall be conducted according to the procedure in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(l) The owner or operator (or the State air pollution control
authority) that is submitting alternative dates for increments 2, 3,
and 4 according to Sec. 62.14108(b)(4) must submit the alternative
dates by the date specified for the final control plan according to the
schedule specified in paragraphs Sec. 62.14108 (b)(1) and (b)(2), as
applicable. The owner or operator must also submit the alternative
dates to the State.
Tables to Subpart FFF
Table 1 of Subpart FFF--Municipal Waste Combustor Units (MWC Units)
Excluded From Subpart FFF
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State MWC units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oregon.............................. MWC units at the following MWC
sites:
(a) Ogden Martin Systems, Marion
County Oregon.
(b) Coos County, Coos Bay,
Oregon.
Florida............................. All affected facilities, as
defined in Sec. 62.14102,
located in Florida.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 3528]]
Table 2 of Subpart FFF--Nitrogen Oxides Requirements for Affected
Facilities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen oxides emission
Municipal waste combustor technology limit (parts per million
by volume) a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mass burn waterwall........................... 205.
Mass burn rotary waterwall.................... 250.
Refuse-derived fuel combustor................. 250.
Fluidized bed combustor....................... 180.
Mass burn refractory combustors............... No limit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Corrected to 7 percent oxygen, dry basis.
Table 3 of Subpart FFF--Municipal Waste Combustor Operating Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon monoxide
Municipal waste combustor emissions level Averaging time
technology (parts per million (hrs) b
by volume) a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mass burn waterwall............. 100 4
Mass burn refractory............ 100 4
Mass burn rotary refractory..... 100 24
Mass burn rotary waterwall...... 250 24
Modular starved air............. 50 4
Modular excess air.............. 50 4
Refuse-derived fuel stoker...... 200 24
Bubbling fluidized bed combustor 100 4
Circulating fluidized bed
combustor...................... 100 4
Pulverized coal/refuse-derived
fuel mixed fuel-fired combustor 150 4
Spreader stoker coal/refuse-
derived fuel mixed fuel-fired
combustor...................... 200 24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Measured at the combustor outlet in conjunction with a measurement of
oxygen concentration, corrected to 7 percent oxygen, dry basis.
Calculated as an arithmetic average.
b Averaging times are 4-hour or 24-hour block averages.
Table 4 of Subpart FFF--Generic Compliance Schedule and Increments of Progress (Pre-1987) a, b
Complete on-
Affected facilities Submit final Award contracts Begin on-site site Final
control plan construction construction compliance
Increment 1.... Increment 2.... Increment 3.... Increment 4 Increment 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected facilities that [Insert date [Insert date [Insert date 11/19/00 12/19/00
commenced construction, 240 days after 480 days after 660 days after
modification, or publication in publication in publication in
reconstruction on or before the Federal the Federal the Federal
June 26, 1987 (All Register]. Register]. Register].
pollutants).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Table 4 or 5 of this subpart applies to MWC units subject to the Federal plan except those with site-specific
compliance schedules shown in Table 6 of this subpart.
b As an alternative to this schedule, the owner or operator may close the affected facility by December 19,
2000, complete the retrofit while the affected facility is closed, and achieve final compliance upon
restarting. See Secs. 62.14108(c), 62.14108(d), and 62.14109(i) of this subpart.
Table 5 of Subpart FFF--Generic Compliance Schedules and Increments of Progress (Post-1987)a, b
Submit final control Begin on-site Complete on-site
Affected facilities plan Award contracts construction construction Final compliance
Increment 1........... Increment 2........... Increment 3.......... Increment 4.......... Increment 5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Affected facilities that commenced
construction modification, or
reconstruction after June 26,
1987:
1. Emission limits for Hg, dioxin/ NAc................... NAc................... NAc.................. NAc.................. 1 year after
furan. promulgation of this
subpart or 1 year
after permit
issuance.d
[[Page 3529]]
2. Emission limits for SO2, HCl, [Insert date 240 days [Insert date 480 days [Insert date 660 days 11/19/00............. 12/19/00.
PM, Pb, Cd, opacity CO, NOX. after publication in after publication in after publication in
the Federal Register]. the Federal Register]. the Federal
Register].
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Table 4 or 5 of this subpart applies to MWC units subject to the Federal plan except those with site-specific compliance schedules shown in Table 6 of
this subpart.
b As an alternative to this schedule, the unit may close by December 19, 2000, complete retrofit while closed, and achieve final compliance upon
restarting. See Secs. 62.14108(c), 62.14108(d), and 62.14109(i) of this subpart.
c Because final compliance is achieved in 1 year, no increments of progress are required.
d Permit issuance is issuance of a revised construction permit or revised operating permit, if a permit modification is required to retrofit controls.
Table 6 of Subpart FFF--Site-Specific Compliance Schedules and Increments of Progress
Affected facilities at the Submit final Complete on-site
following MWC sites City, State control plan Award contracts Begin construction compliance Final compliance
................ Increment 1....... Increment 2....... Increment 3....... Increment 4....... Increment 5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group A
Savannah Energy Systems Co...... Savannah, Georgia. NA................ NA................ NA................ 12/31/97.......... 02/28/98.
Nashville Thermal Transfer Corp. Nashville, NA................ NA................ NA................ 05/01/99.......... 07/01/99.
Tennessee.
Group B a
All large MWC units............. Maine............. 10/01/98.......... 01/01/99.......... 07/01/99.......... 09/01/00.......... 12/19/00.
Baltimore Resco................. Baltimore, NA................ NA................ 04/01/98.......... 09/01/00.......... 12/19/00.
Maryland.
Hennepin Energy Resource Corp... Minneapolis, NA................ NA................ NA................ NA................ 04/30/98.
Minnesota.
United Power Association........ Elk River, NA................ NA................ 12/30/99.......... 06/30/99.......... 12/19/00.
Minnesota.
Northern States Power--Wilmarth. Mankato, Minnesota 10/30/98.......... 03/01/99.......... 09/01/99.......... 11/19/00.......... 12/19/00.
Northern States Power--Red Wing. Red Wing, 01/30/99.......... 07/30/99.......... 04/30/00.......... 11/19/00.......... 12/19/00.
Minnesota.
All large MWC units............. Michigan.......... 03/01/99.......... 09/01/99.......... 12/01/99.......... 11/19/00.......... 12/19/00 b.
Any facility complying by use of New Jersey........ 12/15/99.......... 01/15/00.......... 03/15/00.......... 07/15/00.......... 12/19/00.
NOX trading c.
Westchester RESCO............... Westchester NA................ NA................ 01/01/98.......... 12/19/00.......... 12/19/00.
County, New York.
Adirondack Resource Recovery Hudson Falls, New 10/16/98.......... 01/15/00.......... 04/08/00.......... 11/14/00.......... 12/19/00.
Facility. York.
Onandaga County Resource Onandaga County, No date required d No date required d No date required d No date required d Within 1 year
Recovery Facility. New York. after State plan
approval [or
Federal plan
promulgation].
Niagra Resource Recovery Niagra Falls, New No date required d No date required d No date required d No date required d Within 1 year
Facility. York. after State plan
approval [or
Federal plan
promulgation].
Huntington Resource Recovery East Northport, 10/01/99.......... 10/15/99.......... 03/15/00.......... 07/15/00.......... 08/01/00.
Facility. New York.
Babylon Resource Recovery West Babylon, New 09/15/99.......... 10/15/99.......... 2/15/00........... 07/01/00.......... 07/19/00.
Facility. York.
[[Page 3530]]
Hempstead Resource Recovery Westbury, New York 05/09/98.......... TBD e............. TBD e............. TBD e............. 12/19/00.
Facility.
Whellabrator Falls; Harrisburg Pennsylvania...... 3 months after 3 months after 18 months after 30 months after 12/19/00.g
Authority; American Ref-Fuel; issuance of FESOP issuance of FESOP issuance of FESOP issuance of FESOP
Lancaster Resource Energy; f [or Federal f [or Federal f [or Federal f [or Federal
Monteney Energy Resource of plan plan plan plan
Montgomery County; York County promulgation]. promulgation]. promulgation]. promulgation].
Solid Waste and Refuse
Authority.
I-95 Energy/Resource Recovery Lorton, Virginia.. 06/01/98.......... 08/01/98.......... 12/01/98.......... 10/01/99.......... 11/01/99.
Facility.
Alexandria/ Arlington Resource Alexandria, 06/01/98.......... 08/01/98.......... 12/01/98.......... 10/01/99.......... 11/01/99.
Recovery Facility. Virginia.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NA=not applicable; increment already met.
TBD=to be determined.
a The schedules from Group B have not been reviewed by EPA due to their recent arrival. They will be examined for acceptability at the same time as
those received during the comment period of this proposal. All schedules contained in the final Federal plan will be reviewed and approved by EPA.
b For mercury and dioxins, combustors that commenced construction after June 26, 1987, must comply by 09/01/99 or within 12 months of issuance of permit
to install, whichever is later.
[Note: 09/01/99 date may be modified to 1 year after Federal plan promulgation].
c Applies only to NOX emission limits. Other pollutants would follow Federal plan generic schedule.
d Because final compliance is achieved in 1 year, no increments of progress are required.
e The facility will propose these increments in the control plan to be submitted on 05/09/98.
f Pennsylvania is implementing their State plan through Federally Enforceable State Operating Permits (FESOP).
g Pennsylvania proposes 08/26/02 final compliance date for supplemental emission limits in 40 CFR 60, subpart Cb promulgated August 25, 1997. For
mercury and dioxins, 1 year after State plan approval [or Federal plan promulgation] or 1 year after issuance of a revised permit if a permit
modification is required.
[FR Doc. 98-1521 Filed 1-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
