[Federal Register: July 14, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 134)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 42117-42122]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14jy04-7]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 60 and 62
[OAR-2004-0007; FRL-7786-8]
RIN 2060-AM11
Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Large Municipal
Waste Combustors That are Constructed on or Before September 20, 1994
and Federal Plan Requirements for Large Municipal Waste Combustors
Constructed on or Before September 20, 1994
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule; amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are amending the large municipal waste combustor (MWC)
emission guidelines to add a carbon monoxide (CO) emission limit for
one type of MWC technology that was not previously addressed. When the
large MWC emission guidelines were developed, all existing MWC units
using the fluidized bed, mixed fuel (wood/refuse-derived fuel)
technology were judged to be small MWC units, i.e., having a design
combustion capacity of 35 to 250 tons per day (tpd) of municipal solid
waste (MSW). Two existing MWC units have since been determined to be
large MWC units, i.e., having a design combustion capacity greater than
250 tpd MSW, and thus subject to the large MWC emission guidelines. The
direct final rule amends the emission guidelines to add a CO emission
limit specific to this technology. The direct final rule also amends
the large MWC Federal plan, which implements the emission guidelines.
The CO emission limit being added of 200 parts per million (ppm) by dry
volume (24-hour geometric mean) for fluidized bed, mixed fuel (wood/
refuse-derived fuel) type MWC unit is the same CO limit used for this
technology in the emission guidelines for small MWC units. Low CO
levels indicate good combustion, and thus, good control of other
pollutants. Good combustion combined with air pollution control devices
significantly reduces the release of air pollutants to the environment.
DATES: The direct final rule is effective September 13, 2004, unless
significant material adverse comments are received by August 13, 2004.
If we receive significant material adverse comments, we will publish a
timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0007. All documents in the docket are listed in
the EDOCKET index at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically in
EDOCKET or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West
Building, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the EPA
Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Walt Stevenson, Combustion Group,
Emission Standards Division (C439-01), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, (919) 541-5264,
e-mail stevenson.walt@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A companion proposal to the direct final
rule is being published in today's Federal Register and is identical to
the
[[Page 42118]]
direct final rule. Any comments on the amendments should address the
proposal. If significant material adverse comments are received by the
date specified in the proposed amendments, the direct final rule will
be withdrawn and the comments on the proposed amendments will be
addressed by EPA in a subsequent final rule. If no significant material
adverse comments are received on any provision of the direct final
rule, then no further action will be taken on the companion proposal
and the amendments will become effective September 13, 2004.
Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated
by the direct final rule are existing MWC units with a design
combustion capacity of greater than 250 tpd of MSW. The MWC emission
guidelines and the MWC Federal plan affect the following categories of
sources:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of potentially
Category NAICS code SIC code regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry, Federal government, and 562213, 92411............ 4953, 9511.............. Solid waste combustors
State/local/tribal governments. or incinerators at
waste-to-energy
facilities that
generate electricity or
steam from the
combustion of garbage
(typically municipal
solid waste); and solid
waste combustors or
incinerators at
facilities that combust
garbage (typically
municipal solid waste)
and do not recover
energy from the waste.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by the
direct final rule. To determine whether your facility is regulated by
the direct final rule, you should examine the applicability criteria in
Sec. 60.32b of subpart Cb, and Sec. 62.14102 of subpart FFF. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of the direct final rule
to a particular entity, contact the person listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Docket. The docket number for the amendment to the emission
guidelines (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cb) and Federal plan (40 CFR part
62, subpart FFF) is OAR-2004-0007. Other dockets incorporated by
reference include Docket ID Nos. A-89-08, A-90-45, and A-98-18 for the
emission guidelines amendment and Docket ID Nos. A-97-45 and A-2000-39
for the Federal plan amendment. The docket includes background
information and supported the proposal and promulgation of the emission
guidelines (40 CFR part 60, subparts Ca and Ea) and large MWC Federal
plan (40 CFR part 62, subpart FFF).
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of the proposed rule is also available on the WWW
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a
copy of the promulgated direct final rule will be posted on the TTN's
policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more
information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN Help line at
(919) 541-5384.
Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), judicial review of the actions taken by the final rule
amendments is available on the filing of petition for review in the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60
days of today's publication of the direct final rule. Under section
307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements that are subject to today's
action may not be challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings
brought by EPA to enforce these requirements. Under section 307(d)(7)
of the CAA, only an objection to a rule or procedure raised with
reasonable specificity during the period for public comment or public
hearing may be raised for judicial review.
Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organize as
follows:
I. Background
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paper Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
The direct final rule amends the MWC emission guidelines and the
MWC Federal plan for large MWC units to add a CO emission limit for
bubbling fluidized bed combustors that burn a mixture of wood and
refuse-derived fuel (RDF). This is the same combustor technology and CO
emission limit that appear in the small MWC emission guidelines. In
developing the emission guidelines for small MWC units, we recognized
the unique characteristics of the existing bubbling fluidized bed MWC
units combusting a mixture of wood and RDF and included a CO emission
limit specific to that technology. Since promulgation of the emission
guidelines for large MWC units, two existing fluidized bed MWC units
combusting a mixture of wood and RDF were determined to be large MWC
units, subject to the large MWC emission guidelines. However, the large
MWC emission guidelines did not include bubbling fluidized bed MWC
units combusting a mixture of wood and RDF because none were judged to
be in the large category when the large MWC emission guidelines were
developed and adopted in 1995. The direct final rule amendments
recognize bubbling fluidized bed (wood/RDF) MWC units as an MWC
technology in the large MWC category and add a CO emission limit of 200
ppm by dry volume (24-hour geometric mean). This is the same CO
emission limit, and is based on the same analysis for this technology,
that appears in the small MWC emission guidelines. The direct final
rule amendments similarly revise the large MWC Federal plan, which
implements the emission guidelines.
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), we must
determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order
defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to
result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or
[[Page 42119]]
State, local, or tribal governments or communities;
(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or
(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
We have determined that the direct final rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order
12866, and, therefore, is not subject to review by OMB because the
final rule will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more and does not impose any additional control requirements
above the 1995 emission guidelines. We considered the 1995 emission
guidelines to be ``significant,'' and OMB reviewed them in 1995 (see 60
FR 65405, December 19, 1995).
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
The amendment contained in the direct final rule results in no changes
to the information collection requirements of the standards or
guidelines and will have no impact on the information collection
estimate of project cost and hour burden made and approved by OMB
during the development of the emission guidelines and Federal plan.
Therefore, the information collection requests have not been revised.
The Office of Management and Budget has previously approved the
information collection requirements contained in the existing emission
guidelines (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cb) and the Federal plan (40 CFR
part 62, subpart FFF) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., at the time the rules were promulgated on
December 1995 and November 1998, respectively. The Office of Management
and Budget assigned OMB control number 2060-0210 (EPA ICR 1506.07) to
the emission guidelines and OMB control number 2060-0390 (EPA ICR
1847.01) to the Federal plan.
Copies of the ICR document(s) may be obtained from Susan Auby by
mail at U.S. EPA, Office of Environmental Information, Collection
Strategies Division (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20460, by email at auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 566-1672.
A copy may also be downloaded off the Internet at http: //http://www.epa.gov/icr
.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or 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 in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996, 5 U.S.C.
601 et seq., generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small government organizations, and
small government jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's direct final rule
on small entities, small entity is defined as follows: (1) A small
business in the regulated industry that has a gross annual revenue less
than $6 million; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a
government of a city, county, town, school district or special district
with a population of less than 50,000; or (3) a small organization that
is any not-for-profit enterprise that is independently owned and
operated and is not dominant in its field.
Section 605 of the RFA requires Federal agencies to give special
consideration to the impacts of regulations on small entities, which
are small businesses, small organizations, and small governments.
During the 1995 MWC 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).
After considering the economic impacts of today's direct final rule
on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The direct final rule will not impose any requirements on small
entities because it does not impose any additional regulatory
requirements.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995, Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, we
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if we
publish with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not
adopted.
Before we establish any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal
governments, we must develop a small government agency plan under
section 203 of the UMRA. The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of our regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
We have determined that the final rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any 1 year. Thus,
[[Page 42120]]
the final rule is not subject to the requirements of section 202 and
205 of the UMRA. In addition, we have determined that the direct final
rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments because the burden is small and the
regulation does not unfairly apply to small governments. Therefore, the
direct final rule is not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government.''
Under section 6 of Executive Order 13132, we may not issue a
regulation that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that
is not required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the
funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State
and local governments, or we consult with State and local officials
early in the process of developing the proposed regulation. Also, we
may not issue a regulation that has federalism implications and that
preempts State law, unless we consult with State and local officials
early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.
The direct final rule does not have federalism implications. It
will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. The direct final
rule will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on State or
local governments, it will not preempt State law. Thus, Executive Order
13132 does not apply to the final rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) requires us
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have Tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on relationship between the
Federal government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian
tribes.''
The direct final rule does not have tribal implications, as
specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct
effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to the direct final rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that we have reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives we considered.
We interpret Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. The direct final rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based on technology
performance and not on health and safety risks. Also, the direct final
rule is not ``economically significant.''
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use
The direct final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66
FR 43255, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d)(15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs us to use voluntary consensus standards in our regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., material specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, business practices) developed or adopted by one or more
voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when we decide not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
The direct final rule does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, the requirements of the NTTAA do not apply.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States. We will submit a report containing the direct final rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the direct final rule in the Federal Register. A
major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in
the Federal Register. The direct final rule is not a ``major rule'' as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 60 and 62
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 8, 2004.
Michael O. Leavitt,
Administrator.
0
For reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 60 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 60--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
[[Page 42121]]
Subpart Cb--[Amended]
0
2. Amend Sec. 60.34b by revising Table 3--Municipal Waste Combustor
Operating Guidelines to read as follows:
Sec. 60.34b Emission guidelines for municipal waste combustor
operating practices.
* * * * *
Table 3.--Municipal Waste Combustor Operating Guidelines
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon monoxide
emissions level
Municipal waste combustor (parts per Averaging time
technology million by (hrs) b
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
Fluidized bed, mixed fuel (wood/ 200 c 24
refuse-derived fuel).............
Bubbling fluidized bed combustor.. 100 4
Circulating fluidized bed 100 4
combustor........................
Pulverized coal/refuse-derived 150 4
fuel mixed fuel-fired combustor..
Spreader stoker coal/refuse- 200 24
derived fuel mixes fuel-fired
combustor........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
c 24-hour block average, geometric mean.
* * * * *
PART 62--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
0
2. Amend subpart FFF by revising Table 3 to read as follows:
Subpart FFF--[AMENDED]
* * * * *
Table 3 of Subpart FFF of Part 62.--Municipal Waste Combustor Operating
Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon monoxide
emissions level
Municipal waste combustor (parts per Averaging time
technology million by (hrs) b
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
Fluidized bed, mixed fuel (wood/ 200 c 24
refuse-derived fuel).............
Bubbling fluidized bed combustor.. 100 4
Circulating fluidized bed 100 4
combustor........................
Pulverized coal/refuse-derived 150 4
fuel mixed fuel-fired combustor..
Spreader stoker coal/refuse- 200 24
derived fuel mixed fuel-fired
combustor........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
c 24-hour block average, geometric mean.
[[Page 42122]]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 04-15942 Filed 7-13-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P