Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units
Federal RegisterAug 30, 1999
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
SUMMARY: This action proposes to reestablish emission guidelines for
existing small municipal waste combustion (MWC) units. When
implemented, these emission guidelines will result in stringent
emission limits for organics (dioxins/furans), metals (cadmium, lead,
mercury, and particulate matter), and acid gases (hydrogen chloride,
sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides). Emission guidelines for small MWC
units were originally promulgated in December 1995 but were vacated by
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in March
1997.
DATES: Comments: Comments on these proposed emission guidelines and
comments on the Information Collection Request (ICR) document
associated with these emission guidelines must be received on or before
October 29, 1999.
Public Hearing: A public hearing will be held if requests to speak
are received by September 14, 1999. The public hearing will provide
interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments
concerning these proposed emission guidelines. If requests to speak are
received, the public hearing will take place in Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, approximately 30 days after August 30, 1999 and will
begin at 10:00 a.m. A message regarding the status of the public
hearing may be accessed by calling (919) 541-5264.
ADDRESSES: Comments: Submit comments on these proposed emission
guidelines (in duplicate, if possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center (MC-6102), Attention Docket No. A-98-18, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460.
Comments may also be submitted electronically. Send electronic
submittals to: ``'A-and-R-D[email protected]'''. Submit electronic
comments in American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII)
format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption.
Electronic comments on these proposed emission guidelines may be filed
online at any Federal Depository Library. For additional information on
comments and public hearing see the Supplementary Information section.
Docket: Docket No. A-98-18 for this proposal and associated Docket
Nos. A-90-45 and A-89-08 contain supporting information for these
emission guidelines. 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 (MC-6102), 401 M
Street SW., Washington, DC 20460, or by calling (202) 260-7548. The
dockets are 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: Mr. Walt Stevenson at (919) 541-5264,
Combustion Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, e-
mail: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comment Information
Comments and data will also be accepted on disks in
WordPerfect Version 5.1 or 6.1 file format (or ASCII file
format). Address all comments and data for this proposal, whether on
paper or in electronic form, such as through e-mail or disk, to Docket
No. A-98-18.
Commenters wishing to submit proprietary information for
consideration must clearly distinguish such information from other
comments and clearly label it Confidential Business Information. Send
submissions containing such proprietary information directly to the
following address, and not to the public docket, to ensure that
proprietary information is not inadvertently placed in the docket:
Attention: Ms. Melva Toomer, U.S. EPA, OAQPS Document Control Officer,
411 W. Chapel Hill Street, Room 944, Durham, NC 27701. Do not submit
Confidential Business Information (CBI) electronically.
The EPA will disclose information identified as Confidential
Business Information only to the extent allowed and by the procedures
set forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies
a submission when it is received by the EPA, the information may be
made available to the public without further notice to the commenter.
Public Hearing
If a public hearing is held, it will take place at EPA's Office of
Administration Auditorium, Research Triangle Park, NC, or at an
alternate site nearby. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony
at the public hearing should notify Ms. Libby Bradley, Combustion
Group, Emission Standard Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone (919)
541-5578, at least 2 days in advance of the public hearing. Persons
interested in attending the public hearing must also call Ms. Bradley
to verify the time, date, and location of the hearing. The final
hearing status and location may be obtained by calling (919) 541-5264.
World Wide Web Site
Electronic versions of this notice, the proposed regulatory text,
and other background information are available at the World Wide Web
site that EPA has established for these proposed emission guidelines
for small MWC units. The address is: ``http://www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/129/
mwc/rimwc2.html.'' For assistance in downloading files, call the EPA's
Technology Transfer Network (TTN) HELP line at (919) 541-5384.
Regulated Entities
No entities would be directly regulated by this action because this
proposal is an emission guideline, which requires additional State or
Federal action for implementation. However, the promulgation of State
or Federal plans implementing these emission guidelines would affect
the following categories of sources:
[[Page 47235]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category NAICS codes SIC codes Examples of regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry, Federal government, and State/local/ 562213 4953 Solid waste combustors or incinerators
tribal governments. 92411 9511 at waste-to-energy facilities that
generate electricity or steam from
the combustion of garbage (typically
municipal waste); and solid waste
combustors or incinerators at
facilities that combust garbage
(typically municipal waste) and do
not recover energy from the waste.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide regarding the entities EPA expects to be regulated by applicable
State or Federal plans implementing these emission guidelines for small
MWC units. These emission guidelines would primarily impact facilities
in North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes 562213
and 92411, formerly Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes 4953
and 9511, respectively. Not all facilities classified under these codes
would be affected. To determine whether your facility would be
regulated by State or Federal plans implementing these emission
guidelines, carefully examine the applicability criteria in section
II.A of this preamble and in Secs. 60.1550 through 60.1565 of these
proposed emission guidelines. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to your small MWC unit or any other
question or comment, please submit comments to Docket No. A-98-18 or
refer to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Organization of This Document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble. Each section heading of
the preamble is presented as a question and the text in the section
answers the question.
I. Background Information
II. Summary of These Proposed Emission Guidelines
A. What sources would be directly or indirectly regulated by
these proposed emission guidelines?
B. Has the small MWC unit population been subcategorized within
this proposal?
C. What pollutants would be regulated by these proposed emission
guidelines?
D. What is the format of the proposed emission limits in these
emission guidelines?
E. Where can I find a more detailed summary of these proposed
emission guidelines?
III. Changes in These Proposed Emission Guidelines Relative to the
1995 Emission Guidelines
A. How has the conversion to plain language affected these
emission guidelines?
B. How has the size definition of the small MWC category been
revised?
C. How has the population of small MWC units been
subcategorized?
D. What are the proposed emission limits?
E. Have carbon monoxide emission limits been revised for
fluidized bed combustion units that cofire wood and refuse derived
fuel?
F. Have any changes been made to the operator certification
requirements?
G. Have any changes been made to the operating practice
requirements?
H. Have any changes been made to the monitoring and stack
testing requirements?
I. Have any changes been made to the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements?
IV. What Would be the Impacts of These Proposed Emission Guidelines?
A. Air Impacts
B. Cost and Economic Impacts
V. Companion Proposal for New Small MWC Units
VI. Amendments to 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart B
VII. Administrative Requirements
A. Public Hearing
B. Docket
C. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act/Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
G. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
H. Executive Order 12875--Enhancing the Intergovernmental
Partnership
I. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-income
Populations
J. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
K. Executive Order 13084--Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
L. Executive Memorandum on Plain Language in Government Writing
Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in This Document
ASCII--American Standard Code for Information Interchange
ASME--American Society of Mechanical Engineers
CBI--Confidential Business Information
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
DSI/ESP/CI--dry sorbent injection/electrostatic precipitator/carbon
injection
EPA--Environmental Protection Agency
ESP--electrostatic precipitator
FR--Federal Register
ICR--Information Collection Request
kg/year--kilograms per year
MACT--maximum achievable control technology
mg/dscm--milligrams per dry standard cubic meter
Mg/year--megagrams per year
MSW--municipal solid waste
MWC--municipal waste combustion
NAICS--North American Industrial Classification System
ng/dscm--nanograms per dry standard cubic meter
NSPS--new source performance standards
NTTAA--National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OAQPS--Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OMB--Office of Management and Budget
OP--Office of Policy
Pub. L.--Public Law
ppmv--parts per million by volume
RDF--refuse-derived fuel
RFA--Regulatory Flexibility Act
SBREFA--Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
SD/ESP/CI--spray dryer/electrostatic precipitator/carbon injection
SD/FF/CI/SNCR--spray dryer/fabric filter/carbon injection/selective
noncatalytic reduction
SIC--Standard Industrial Classification
TTN--Technology Transfer Network
UMRA--Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
U.S.C.--United States Code
I. Background Information
On September 20, 1994, EPA proposed emission guidelines for large
and small MWC units under 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cb. Those emission
guidelines covered all MWC units located at plants with an aggregate
plant combustion capacity larger than 35 megagrams per day of municipal
solid waste (MSW), which is approximately 39 tons per day of MSW. The
subpart Cb emission guidelines for large and small MWC units were
promulgated on December 19, 1995.
The 1995 emission guidelines divided the MWC unit population into
MWC units located at large MWC plants and MWC units located at small
MWC plants based on the total aggregate capacity of all MWC units at
the MWC plant. The large plant category included all MWC units located
at MWC plants with aggregate plant combustion capacities greater than
225 megagrams per day (approximately 248 tons per
[[Page 47236]]
day). The small plant category comprised all MWC units located at MWC
plants with aggregate plant combustion capacities of 35 to 225
megagrams per day (approximately 39 to 248 tons per day).
Following promulgation of the 1995 emission guidelines, a petition
for review was filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit regarding the use of aggregate plant capacity as the
basis for initial categorization of the MWC unit population. An initial
opinion was issued by the court on December 6, 1996 (Davis County Solid
Waste Management and Recovery District v. EPA, 101 F. 3d 1395, D.C.
Cir. 1996). The initial opinion would have vacated (canceled) the 1995
emission guidelines for both large and small MWC units.
The EPA filed a petition for rehearing on February 4, 1997
requesting the court to reconsider the remedy portion of its opinion
and to vacate these emission guidelines only as they apply to small MWC
units (units having an individual capacity of 35 to 250 tons per day).
The court granted EPA's petition, reconsidered its opinion, and issued
a revised opinion on March 21, 1997 (Davis County Solid Waste
Management and Recovery District v. EPA, 108 F. 3d 1454, D.C. Cir.
1997). The revised opinion remanded to EPA the 1995 emission guidelines
for the large MWC unit category for amendment to be consistent with the
court's final opinion and vacated these emission guidelines only as
they applied to small MWC units.
Amendments to the 1995 emission guidelines incorporating the
court's final opinion were published on August 25, 1997 (62 FR 45116).
The amendments made the subpart Cb emission guidelines consistent with
the court's decision and included other minor technical corrections to
improve clarity. The principal change was to remove small MWC units
from the applicability of subpart Cb. This was accomplished by
increasing the lower size cutoff for large MWC units from 35 megagrams
per day on a plant capacity basis to 250 tons per day on a unit
capacity basis. No adverse comments were received on the proposal and
they became effective on October 24, 1997.
With the increase in the lower size cutoff for large MWC units from
248 tons per day on a plant capacity basis to 250 tons per day on a
unit capacity basis, 45 MWC units that were previously in the large MWC
plant category were moved into the newly classified small MWC unit
category. These units are commonly referred to as ``Davis class'' MWC
units (referencing the name of the court's opinion that clarifies that
EPA must move these units from the large MWC unit category to the small
MWC unit category).
Today's proposal would reestablish emission guidelines for existing
small municipal waste combustion capacities of 35 to 250 tons per day
of MSW.
II. Summary of These Proposed Emission Guidelines
This section summarizes these proposed emission guidelines for
small MWC units, including identification of the subcategories used in
this proposal for small MWC units. Overall, these proposed emission
guidelines for small MWC units are functionally equivalent to the 1995
emission guidelines for small MWC units.
A. What Sources Would be Directly or Indirectly Regulated by These
Proposed Emission Guidelines?
Today's proposed emission guidelines would not directly regulate
small MWC units, but they would require States to develop plans to
limit air emissions from existing small MWC units. In this proposal and
in associated State plans, a small MWC unit would be defined as any MWC
unit with a combustion design capacity of 35 to 250 tons per day.
B. Has the Small MWC Unit Population Been Subcategorized Within this
Proposal?
Yes, within these proposed emission guidelines, the small MWC unit
population is subcategorized based on: (1) Aggregate capacity of the
plant where the individual MWC unit is located, and (2) combustor type.
The resulting subcategories are as follows: (1) Class A units are
defined as nonrefractory-type small MWC units located at plants with an
aggregate plant capacity greater than 250 tons per day of MSW, (2)
Class B units are refractory-type small MWC units located at plants
with an aggregate plant capacity greater than 250 tons per day of MSW,
and (3) Class C units are all small MWC units located at plants with an
aggregate plant capacity less than or equal to 250 tons per day of MSW.
C. What Pollutants Would be Regulated by These Proposed Emission
Guidelines?
Section 129 of the Clean Air Act requires EPA to establish
numerical emission limits for dioxins/furans, cadmium, lead, mercury,
particulate matter, opacity, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride,
nitrogen oxides, and carbon monoxide. Section 129 specifies that EPA
may also:
* * * promulgate numerical emission limitations or provide for the
monitoring of post-combustion concentrations of surrogate
substances, parameters, or periods of residence times in excess of
stated temperatures with respect to pollutants other than those
listed [above] * * *.
Therefore, in addition to emission limits, EPA is proposing
guidelines for unit operating load, flue gas temperature at the
particulate matter control device inlet, and carbon feed rate as part
of the good combustion practice requirements. The EPA is also proposing
requirements for the control of fugitive ash emissions. All of these
requirements were contained in the 1995 emission guidelines.
D. What is the Format of the Proposed Emission Limits in These Emission
Guidelines?
The format of the proposed emission limits is identical to the
format of the emission limits in the 1995 emission guidelines. The
format is in the form of emission limits based on pollutant
concentration. Alternative percentage reduction requirements are
provided for mercury, sulfur dioxide, and hydrogen chloride. Opacity
and fugitive ash requirements are identical to the 1995 emission
guidelines. In addition to controlling stack emissions, these proposed
emission guidelines incorporate the same good combustion practice
requirements (i.e., operator training, operator certification, and
operating requirements) that were included in the 1995 emission
guidelines. Additionally, this proposal includes a clarification to the
operator certification requirements to address periods when the
certified chief facility operator and certified shift supervisor must
be offsite. Section III.F provides more detail on the differences in
operator certification requirements between these proposed subpart BBBB
guidelines and the 1995 subpart Cb guidelines. Today's proposal also
includes a revision to the activated carbon feed rate requirement.
(Section III.G provides additional information on proposed changes to
the carbon feed rate requirements.)
E. Where Can I Find a More Detailed Summary of These Proposed Emission
Guidelines?
A concise summary of these proposed emission guidelines can be
found either in: (1) Tables 2 through 5 of the proposed subpart BBBB
emission guidelines following this preamble; or (2) the Technical Fact
Sheet for this proposal that can be downloaded from the EPA World Wide
Web site for small MWC units
[[Page 47237]]
(http://www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/129/mwc/rimwc2.html).
III. Changes in These Proposed Emission Guidelines Relative to the
1995 Emission Guidelines
This section summarizes changes in the proposed emission guidelines
compared to the 1995 emission guidelines. Overall, these emission
guidelines are functionally equivalent to the 1995 emission guidelines,
with minimal changes. The most significant change is the use of the
plain language style for organizing and writing these emission
guidelines. These proposed emission guidelines retain subcategorization
by aggregate plant capacity and only a few emission limits have been
revised.
Compared to the 1995 emission guidelines for large and small MWC
units, these proposed emission guidelines have identical requirements
for all small MWC units except for Class B units. The requirements for
the Class A and Class C units remain the same as the 1995 requirements,
except that the nitrogen oxides emission limit for Class A units has
been changed to reflect revised MACT floors.
A. How Has the Conversion to Plain Language Affected These Emission
Guidelines?
These proposed emission guidelines are organized and written in the
plain language style. This style has not affected the content of these
proposed emission guidelines when compared to the 1995 emission
guidelines. However, it has changed their appearance. The EPA considers
the question and answer format of the plain language style to be more
user friendly and understandable to all audiences when compared with
previous rules that were not written in this style.
The question and answer format that is used in the regulatory text
for this proposal significantly minimizes cross-referencing within
these emission guidelines. Additionally, these proposed emission
guidelines have been drafted as a stand-alone subpart without the
cross-referencing to the NSPS required by the 1995 emission guidelines.
To improve the presentation of these emission guidelines requirements,
additional tables have been added.
B. How Has the Size Definition of the Small MWC Category Been Revised?
As a result of the 1997 court decision, both the upper and lower
size definitions (cutoffs) have been changed so that the small MWC unit
category is based on the capacity of an individual MWC unit rather than
on the total capacity of the plant where an MWC unit is located.
Additionally, English units of measure (tons per day capacity) are used
instead of metric units of measure (megagrams per day capacity).
1. Upper Size Cutoff
The upper size cutoff for small MWC units is proposed as 250 tons
per day on a unit capacity basis. In the 1995 emission guidelines, the
upper size cutoff was 225 megagrams per day (approximately 248 tons per
day) based on total plant capacity. This revised upper size cutoff is
consistent with the 1997 court ruling.
2. Lower Size Cutoff
The lower size cutoff for small MWC units is proposed as 35 tons
per day on a unit capacity basis. In the 1995 emission guidelines, the
lower size cutoff for small MWC units was 35 megagrams per day
(approximately 39 tons per day) based on total plant capacity. In this
proposal, the lower size cutoff has been changed to a unit capacity
basis to make both the upper size cutoff and lower size cutoff based on
a unit capacity basis (Docket No. A-98-18).
C. How has the Population of Small MWC Units Been Subcategorized?
These proposed emission guidelines retain the use of aggregate
plant capacity to subcategorize small MWC units.
After first dividing the MWC unit population into units above 250
tons per day (large units) and units less than 250 tons per day (small
units), the court's decision allowed EPA to:
* * * exercise its discretion to distinguish among units within a
category and create subcategories of small units, for which it can
then calculate MACT floors and standards separately.
Thus, the court allowed EPA to subcategorize by unit location
(aggregate plant capacity) at its discretion. The EPA has elected to
retain the subcategorization used in the 1995 emission guidelines.
Therefore, today's proposal establishes separate subcategories for
small MWC units at: (1) Facilities with aggregate plant capacities
greater than 250 tons per day (Davis class units), and (2) facilities
with aggregate plant capacities less than or equal to 250 tons per day
(non-Davis class units).
The EPA has noted that design and operational characteristics of
refractory-type units are noticeably different than those of
nonrefractory-type units. Further analysis of MWC unit operation showed
that refractory-type MWC units generate approximately 50 percent more
flue gas (exhaust) per ton of waste burned than nonrefractory-type MWC
units. Higher levels of excess combustion air are used with refractory
units by design to avoid overheating the refractory walls (Docket No.
A-98-18). Because of this technical difference, EPA has elected to
subdivide the Davis class units into a Davis refractory-type class and
a Davis nonrefractory-type class.
In summary, today's proposal divides the small MWC unit population
into three classes. Class A comprises small nonrefractory-type MWC
units located at plants with an aggregate plant capacity greater than
250 tons per day of MSW. Class B comprises small refractory-type MWC
units located at plants with an aggregate plant capacity greater than
250 tons per day of MSW. Class C comprises all small MWC units located
at plants with an aggregate plant capacity less than or equal to 250
tons per day of MSW.
D. What are the Proposed Emission Limits?
1. Summary of the Proposed Emission Limits for Small MWC Units
To propose emission limits for small MWC units, EPA had to
recalculate the MACT floors to account for changes in the small MWC
unit definition (from a plant basis to a unit basis and from metric
units of measure to English units) and the establishment of the three
MWC unit subcategories. After establishing the MACT floor for each
pollutant in each small MWC unit subcategory, EPA considered the cost,
nonair quality health and environmental impacts, and energy
requirements associated with any alternatives more stringent than the
MACT floor in selecting MACT for each pollutant.
For each of the three MWC unit subcategories (Classes A, B, and C),
EPA is proposing emission limits for organics (dioxins/furans), metals
(cadmium, lead, mercury, particulate matter, and opacity), and acid
gases (sulfur dioxide and hydrogen chloride). In addition, a nitrogen
oxides emission limit is proposed for Class A units.
The emission limits proposed for Class A and Class C units are
identical to those promulgated in the 1995 emission guidelines for
large and small MWC plants, respectively, except that the nitrogen
oxides emission limit for Class A units has changed to reflect the
revised MACT floor. The emission limits proposed today for the Class B
units are less stringent than those contained in the 1995 emission
guidelines for large MWC plants.
[[Page 47238]]
2. Summary of the MACT Floor for Small MWC Units
To calculate the MACT floors, the small MWC unit population had to
first be subdivided. This was done by modifying the MWC unit population
in the 1995 MWC inventory database to: (1) Incorporate the 45 Davis
class MWC units into the small MWC unit category, and (2) assign those
45 units to the Class A or Class B subcategories. The remaining small
MWC units originally in the 1995 MWC inventory database are Class C
units.
After establishing the small MWC unit population in each of the
three classes, the MACT floors were calculated using a similar method
and the same emissions data that were used to calculate the MACT floors
for the 1995 emission guidelines. In summary, the MACT floor for each
pollutant in each of the three classes was determined by: (1)
Identifying the most stringent emission limitations achieved by the
small MWC units, and (2) calculating the average emission limitation of
the best performing 12 percent of units in each class. In identifying
the most stringent emission limitations achieved by small MWC units,
EPA relied on permit limits. Where EPA did not have permit information
for a sufficient number of units to account for 12 percent of the units
in a particular class, EPA used an uncontrolled default emission value
based on AP-42 emission factors and test data to account for the
additional number of units necessary to represent 12 percent of the
units in the class. The default values were also used for a small MWC
unit if: (1) The unit was not in compliance with its permit; or (2) the
unit had a permit limit value higher than typical uncontrolled
emissions from small MWC units. The EPA believes the uncontrolled
default emission values used are a reasonable surrogate for actual data
for the following reasons. First, EPA made an exhaustive effort to
obtain permit information for each small MWC unit. Some small MWC units
did not have permits, while others had permits which did not contain
emission limitations for one or more of the pollutants specified in
section 129. The EPA believes that it is reasonable to assume that
uncontrolled emission values reasonably reflect actual emissions for
such units. Second, EPA believes that the uncontrolled emission default
values used reasonably reflect uncontrolled emissions for small MWC
units. The MACT floor development for this proposal is discussed in
more detail in ``Determination of the Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) Floor for Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units''
(Docket No. A-98-18), the September 1995 EPA report ``Municipal Waste
Combustion: Background Information Document for Promulgated Standards
and Guidelines--Public Comments and Responses'' (EPA-453/R-95-013b),
and the 1994 proposal preamble (59 FR 48228).
3. Emission Limits for Class A Units
Class A units in this proposal are nonrefractory Davis class units
that were in the large MWC plant population in the 1995 emission
guidelines. Table 1 presents the MACT floor emission levels for Class A
units.
Table 1.--MACT Floor Emission Levels for Class A MWC Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant a MACT floor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dioxins/furans (ng/dscm) b................................ 1000
Cadmium (mg/dscm)......................................... 0.45
Lead (mg/dscm)............................................ 1.0
Mercury (mg/dscm)......................................... 0.37
Particulate matter (mg/dscm).............................. 34
Sulfur dioxide (ppmv)..................................... 50
Hydrogen chloride (ppmv).................................. 50
Nitrogen oxides (ppmv).................................... 171
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a All concentrations are corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
b Total mass of tetra- through octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and
dibenzofurans.
The EPA has concluded that a SD/FF/CI/SNCR air pollution control
system is needed to achieve the MACT floor emission levels for sulfur
dioxide, hydrogen chloride, mercury, nitrogen oxides, and particulate
matter presented in table 1. This is the same air pollution control
technology that served as the basis of these emission guidelines
promulgated in 1995 for large MWC plants. This air pollution control
technology would also provide substantial reductions of dioxins/furans,
cadmium, and lead. Therefore, EPA is proposing the same emission limits
for Class A units for all pollutants, except nitrogen oxides, as those
promulgated for large MWC plants in the 1995 emission guidelines.
The EPA is proposing a single emission limit for nitrogen oxides of
171 ppmv. Unlike the emission limits promulgated in 1995 that had
separate nitrogen oxides limits for each different combustion unit
design type (e.g., mass burn waterwall, fluidized bed combustor, mass
burn rotary waterwall), EPA is proposing one nitrogen oxides emission
limit for all combustion unit design types within Class A. This
proposed nitrogen oxides emission limit is the MACT floor emission
level. The EPA has concluded that this limit could be achieved with the
same control technology (SNCR) that served as the basis of the nitrogen
oxides emission limits for large MWC plants in 1995 (Docket No. A-90-
45). This single nitrogen oxides emission limit also simplifies these
emission guidelines. Table 2 presents the proposed emission limits for
Class A units.
Table 2.--Emission Limits for Class A MWC Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant a Emission limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dioxins/furans (ng/dscm) b................ 30/60 c
Cadmium (mg/dscm)......................... 0.04
Lead (mg/dscm)............................ 0.49
Mercury (mg/dscm)......................... 0.08
(or 85-percent reduction)
Particulate matter (mg/dscm).............. 27
Sulfur dioxide (ppmv)..................... 31
(or 75-percent reduction)
Hydrogen chloride (ppmv).................. 31
(or 95-percent reduction)
Nitrogen oxides (ppmv).................... 171
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a All concentrations are corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
b Total mass of tetra- through octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and
dibenzofurans.
c The emission limit is 60 ng/dscm for MWC units using an electrostatic
precipitator-based air pollution control system and is 30 ng/dscm for
MWC units using a non-electrostatic precipitator-based air pollution
control system.
The 1994 proposal preamble (59 FR 48228) provides thorough
documentation of: (1) the capability of an SD/FF/CI/SNCR air pollution
control system to meet the emission limits being proposed, and (2) the
rationale for selection of these limits for Class A units.
4. Emission Limits for Class B Units
Class B units in this proposal are the refractory-type MWC units in
the Davis class that were in the large MWC plant population for the
1995 emission guidelines. Table 3 presents the MACT floor emission
levels for Class B units.
Table 3.--MACT Floor Emission Levels for Class B MWC units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MACT
Pollutant a floor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dioxins/furans (ng/dscm) b.................................... 123
Cadmium (mg/dscm)............................................. 1.2
Lead (mg/dscm)................................................ 1.8
Mercury (mg/dscm)............................................. 0.29
Particulate matter (mg/dscm).................................. 34
Sulfur dioxide (ppmv)......................................... 55
Hydrogen chloride (ppmv)...................................... 200
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a All concentrations are corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
[[Page 47239]]
b Total mass of tetra- through octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and
dibenzofurans.
The EPA has concluded that a DSI/ESP/CI air pollution control
system is needed to achieve the MACT floor emission levels for sulfur
dioxide, hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans, mercury, and particulate
matter presented in table 3. Unlike the MACT floors for large MWC
plants for the 1995 emission guidelines, which requires an air
pollution control technology equivalent to a SD/ESP/CI or SD/FF/CI, it
is not necessary to use this technology to meet these MACT floors for
Class B units.
The EPA considered the feasibility of going beyond the MACT floor
level of technology and proposing the same emission limits for Class B
units as those for Class A units (i.e., emission limits based on SD/
ESP/CI or SD/FF/CI technology). However, the refractory-type combustor
design of Class B units is distinctly different from the nonrefractory-
type design of Class A units. The design and operational
characteristics of refractory and nonrefractory-type units were
evaluated (Docket No. A-98-18). This evaluation demonstrated that
refractory-type MWC units (Class B) generate approximately 50 percent
more flue gas (exhaust volume) per ton of waste burned than
nonrefractory-type MWC units (Class A). Higher levels of excess air are
used in refractory-type units by design to avoid overheating the
refractory walls. Large flue gas exhaust volume from refractory-type
units result in more flue gas to be cleaned. Therefore, EPA does not
believe it is reasonable to propose emission limits for Class B units
based on SD/FF/CI or SD/ESP/CI technology.
For this reason, EPA proposes to set the emission limits for Class
B units based on the MACT floor level control technology (DSI/ESP/CI).
For dioxins/furans, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, and hydrogen
chloride, the proposed emission limits are the MACT floor emission
levels. For cadmium, lead, and mercury, EPA is proposing emission
limits that are more stringent than the MACT floor level but have been
demonstrated to be achievable by DSI/ESP/CI technology. The emission
limits for these three pollutants are the same as the limits in the
1995 emission guidelines for small MWC plants where DSI/ESP/CI
technology was the basis of the MACT limits. The proposed emission
limits for Class B units are summarized in table 4.
Table 4.--Emission Limits for Class B MWC Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant a Emission limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dioxins/furans (ng/dscm) b................ 123
Cadmium (mg/dscm)......................... 0.1
Lead (mg/dscm)............................ 1.6
Mercury (mg/dscm)......................... 0.08
(or 85-percent reduction)
Particulate matter (mg/dscm).............. 34
Sulfur dioxide (ppmv)..................... 55
(or 50-percent reduction)
Hydrogen chloride (ppmv).................. 200
(or 50-percent reduction)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a All concentrations are corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
b Total mass of tetra through octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and
dibenzofurans.
Thorough documentation of the capability of a DSI/ESP/CI system to
meet these proposed emission limits is available in the 1994 proposal
(59 FR 48228) and the document ``Municipal Waste Combustors--Background
Information for Proposed Standards: Post-Combustion Technology
Performance'' (Docket No. A-89-08). As in the 1995 emission guidelines
for large refractory-type MWC units, no nitrogen oxides emission limit
is proposed for Class B units (see the 1994 proposal preamble, 59 FR
48228).
5. Emission Limits for Class C Units
Class C units in this proposal are those units that were in the
small MWC plant population in the 1995 emission guidelines. Table 5
presents the MACT floor emission levels for Class C units.
Table 5.--Mact Floor Emission Levels for Class C MWC Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant a MACT floor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dioxins/furans (ng/dscm) b................................ 837
Cadmium (mg/dscm)......................................... 1.2
Lead (mg/dscm)............................................ 23
Mercury (mg/dscm)......................................... 0.65
Particulate matter (mg/dscm).............................. 91
Sulfur dioxide (ppmv)..................................... 85
Hydrogen chloride (ppmv).................................. 291
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a All concentrations are corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
b Total mass of tetra through octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and
dibenzofurans.
The EPA has concluded that a DSI/ESP air pollution control system
is needed to achieve the MACT floor emission levels for sulfur dioxide,
hydrogen chloride, and particulate matter presented in table 5. This is
the same air pollution control technology (DSI/ESP) used as the basis
of the emission limits promulgated in 1995 for small MWC plants. This
air pollution control technology would also provide substantial
reductions in cadmium and lead. The MACT floor for mercury is at a
level typical for units that are uncontrolled. As discussed in the 1994
proposal preamble (59 FR 48249), for units that would need a DSI/ESP
system to meet MACT floor requirements, activated carbon injection
could be added to a DSI/ESP system at a minimal incremental cost. The
addition of a CI air pollution control system would provide substantial
reductions in dioxins/furans and mercury. The EPA considers that the
cost to install CI is reasonable given the potential health effects
associated with the bioaccumulation of mercury in the environment and
the toxic nature of dioxins/furans. Therefore, EPA is proposing the
same emission limits for Class C units as those promulgated for small
MWC plants in the 1995 emission guidelines as MACT. These emission
limits reflect MACT performance and are based on the performance of a
DSI/ESP/CI air pollution control technology. Table 6 presents the
proposed emission limits for Class C units.
Table 6.--Emission Limits for Class C MWC Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant a Emission limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dioxins/furans (ng/dscm) b................ 125
Cadmium (mg/dscm)......................... 0.1
Lead (mg/dscm)............................ 1.6
Mercury (mg/dscm)......................... 0.08
(or 85-percent reduction)
Particulate matter (mg/dscm).............. 70
Sulfur dioxide (ppmv)..................... 80
(or 50-percent reduction)
Hydrogen chloride (ppmv).................. 250
(or 50-percent reduction)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a All concentrations are corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
b Total mass of tetra through octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and
dibenzofurans.
These proposed emission limits are identical to those promulgated
in the 1995 emission guidelines for small MWC units. Because of this,
the 1994 proposal preamble (59 FR 48228) provides thorough
documentation of: (1) The capability of a DSI/ESP/CI system to meet the
emission limits being proposed, and (2) the rationale for selection of
these limits for Class C units. As in the 1995 emission guidelines for
small MWC units, no nitrogen oxides emission limit is proposed for
Class C units.
[[Page 47240]]
E. Have Carbon Monoxide Emission Limits Been Revised for Fluidized Bed
Combustion Units That Cofire Wood and Refuse-derived Fuel?
The EPA has concluded that another MWC unit category should be
established for carbon monoxide emission limits. Fluidized bed
combustion units that burn a mixture of wood and RDF have exhibited
higher variations in carbon monoxide than expected.
The EPA conducted an analysis of carbon monoxide data from a
fluidized bed combustion unit that burns a mixture of wood and RDF and
has incorporated good combustion practice modifications (Docket No. A-
98-18). The EPA has determined that an additional carbon monoxide
emission limit would be appropriate for cofired fluidized bed
combustion units. Based on this analysis, EPA observed that a long-term
average carbon monoxide emission level of less than 100 ppmv can be
achieved and a carbon monoxide emission limit for this combustion unit
type of 200 ppmv (24-hour average) would be appropriate. The carbon
monoxide data used to establish this new carbon monoxide emission limit
were compared with dioxin/furan emission tests conducted on this same
MWC unit following the good combustion practice modifications. This
comparison showed that fluidized bed combustion units burning wood and
RDF and applying good combustion practices emit carbon monoxide up to
200 ppmv, and substantial dioxin/furan emission reductions are achieved
by good combustion practices at these carbon monoxide levels.
F. Have Any Changes Been Made to the Operator Certification
Requirements?
One change is proposed for the operator certification section of
the good combustion practice requirements since the 1995 guidelines. In
response to questions since the 1995 emission guidelines were
promulgated, EPA has clarified what actions an MWC unit owner must take
to continue operating an MWC unit during times when the certified chief
facility operator and certified shift supervisor must be temporarily
offsite for an extended period of time and there are no other certified
chief facility operators or certified shift supervisors onsite. The EPA
has addressed this issue by adding specific requirements for MWC units
when the certified chief facility operator and certified shift
supervisor must be offsite. Different requirements apply depending on
the length of time the certified chief facility operator and certified
shift supervisor must be offsite. These changes have been added to
Sec. 60.1685 of these proposed emission guidelines.
G. Have Any Changes Been Made to the Operating Practice Requirements?
One change is proposed for the operating practice requirements
since the 1995 guidelines. The EPA has clarified how the required level
of carbon feed rate is established and how the required monitoring
parameter and quarterly carbon usage are used to determine compliance
with the operating practice requirements. As discussed below, this
results in two enforceable requirements for carbon feed rate.
As in the 1995 emission guidelines, the MWC plant owner must select
an operating parameter (e.g., screw feeder speed) that can be used to
calculate carbon feed rate. During each dioxin/furan and mercury stack
test, the total amount of carbon used during each stack test must be
measured. The total amount of carbon used during the test is divided by
the duration (hours) of the stack test to give an average carbon feed
rate in kilograms (or pounds) per hour. The MWC plant owner must also
monitor the selected operating parameter during each dioxin/furan and
mercury stack test and record the average operating parameter level.
After the dioxin/furan and mercury stack tests are complete, the MWC
owner must establish a relationship between the selected operating
parameter and the measured carbon feed rate so that the selected
parameter can be used to calculate the carbon feed rate. The selected
operating parameter must then be continuously monitored during MWC unit
operation and used to calculate the carbon feed rate. The calculated
carbon feed rate cannot fall below the carbon feed rate measured during
the dioxin/furan or mercury stack test (depending on which test
establishes the higher carbon feed rate).
The 1995 emission guidelines did not clearly specify an averaging
time for calculating the carbon feed rate. Because the baseline carbon
feed rate is established as the average feed rate during the annual
dioxin/furan or mercury stack test, EPA is clarifying that the
averaging time used for monitoring this feed rate (using parametric
data) should be of similar duration. Therefore, EPA is proposing an 8-
hour block averaging period for monitoring carbon feed rates. This
would allow facilities to compensate for interruptions in carbon feed
rates (due to calibration, malfunction, or repair) by offsetting the
interruption with an increase in carbon feed rates within the 8-hour
averaging period.
The quarterly carbon usage requirements in the 1995 emission
guidelines have also been revised and clarified. The EPA is proposing
that MWC plant owners calculate required plantwide carbon usage on a
quarterly basis and compare this required level of carbon usage to the
actual amount of carbon purchased and delivered to the MWC plant. After
an average carbon feed rate is established for an MWC unit based on the
most recent dioxin/furan or mercury stack test, the required quarterly
carbon usage level for the MWC unit is calculated by multiplying the
kilogram (or pound) per hour rate by the number of operating hours for
each quarter. Next, the required quarterly carbon usage for the plant
is calculated by summing the carbon usage value for each small MWC unit
located at the plant.
The MWC plant owner must then compare the required quarterly carbon
usage level, based on the carbon usage during the stack test and the
hours of operation, with the amount of carbon purchased and delivered
to the MWC plant. The MWC plant owner must demonstrate that they are
using the required amount of carbon during each quarter. This
comparison is done on a plant basis rather than a unit basis because
MWC units typically use a common carbon storage system; therefore,
purchase, delivery, and usage are best tracked on a plant basis. If a
plant does not meet the quarterly carbon usage requirement, all units
at the plant would be considered out of compliance.
An MWC plant owner can choose to track quarterly carbon usage on an
MWC unit basis if that is practical at the plant. The required
quarterly carbon usage for each individual unit would then be compared
to the carbon purchased and delivered to that unit. In this case, if an
MWC unit does not meet the quarterly carbon usage requirement, only the
one MWC unit, instead of the entire MWC plant, would be considered out
of compliance.
H. Have any Changes Been Made to the Monitoring and Stack Testing
Requirements?
No changes are proposed to the monitoring and stack testing
requirements contained in the 1995 guidelines. However, to clarify
differences between stack testing and continuous emission monitoring
system requirements, these two topics have been divided into separate
sections within these proposed guidelines.
The nitrogen oxides trading and averaging provisions that were
included
[[Page 47241]]
in the 1995 emission guidelines are not included in this proposal. No
large MWC units have used the trading and averaging provisions provided
in the subpart Cb emission guidelines for large MWC units. Therefore,
EPA does not anticipate that any small MWC units will use the nitrogen
oxides trading and averaging provisions. Furthermore, the majority of
small MWC units affected by this proposed subpart would not have
nitrogen oxides emission limits and therefore, would not need trading
and averaging provisions.
I. Have any Changes Been Made to the Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements?
No changes are proposed to the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements since the 1995 emission guidelines. However, consistent
with the proposed changes in subpart B contained in this proposal, a
reduction in the number of increments of progress reporting
requirements for Class C small MWC units would occur.
This change affects the number of increments of progress required
for State plans under subpart B of this part. Subpart B generally
requires specific milestone dates and notification for five increments
of progress when compliance will take longer than 12 months. For Class
C units, EPA is proposing a requirement of only two increments of
progress: submittal of a control plan and final compliance. For Class C
units, the other three increments of progress are not appropriate or
necessary to ensure progress toward compliance. Reducing the number of
increments required for Class C units reduces the reporting and
recordkeeping burden on smaller facilities. Section VI of this
preamble, ``Amendments to Subpart B,'' addresses the subpart B
revision.
Furthermore, EPA is proposing one minor change to clarify
recordkeeping and reporting of: (1) 8-hour average calculated carbon
feed rate, and (2) quarterly amounts of carbon purchased and delivered.
These changes make the recordkeeping and reporting sections consistent
with the operating practice requirements described above in section
III.G.
IV. What Would Be the Impacts of These Proposed Emission
Guidelines?
This section describes the impacts (i.e., air, water, solid waste,
energy, cost, and economic impacts) of these proposed emission
guidelines for small MWC units. The impact analysis conducted to
evaluate the 1995 emission guidelines is available at 59 FR 48228. The
discussion in this section focuses only on the air, cost, and economic
impacts of these proposed emission guidelines.
In the preamble for the 1995 emission guidelines, EPA determined
that the water, solid waste, and energy impacts associated with these
proposed emission guidelines were not significant. Today's proposal
affects only a subset of the MWC units that were addressed in the
earlier impact analysis. Again, EPA has concluded that the water, solid
waste, and energy impacts associated with today's proposal would not be
significant.
For further information on the impacts of these proposed emission
guidelines, refer to the document entitled ``Economic Impact Analysis:
Small Municipal Waste Combustor--Section 111/129 Emission Guidelines
and New Source Performance Standards'' (Docket No. A-98-18).
A. Air Impacts
The national air emission reductions that would result from full
implementation of these emission guidelines compared to current
estimated national emission levels have been calculated. Table 7
summarizes these air emission reductions and the percentage change in
emissions relative to current baseline levels associated with the full
implementation of these proposed emission guidelines for small MWC
units.
Table 7. National air Emission Impacts of These Emission Guidelines for
Small MWC Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent
change from
1998
Pollutant Air emission reduction baseline
emission
level a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dioxins/furans b................... 2.7 kg/year........... 97
Cadmium............................ 309 kg/year........... 84
Lead............................... 12.7 Mg/year.......... 91
Mercury............................ 4.1 Mg/year........... 95
Particulate matter................. 351 Mg/year........... 73
Sulfur dioxide..................... 1,196 Mg/year......... 49
Hydrogen chloride.................. 2,390 Mg/year......... 85
Nitrogen oxides.................... 384 Mg/year........... 9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Percent national emission reduction relative to national baseline
emissions that would occur in the absence of these emission
guidelines.
b Total mass of tetra- through octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and
dibenzofurans.
B. Cost and Economic Impacts
The EPA estimates that 90 small MWC units located at 41 plants
would be affected by these proposed emission guidelines. The total MSW
combustion capacity of these 90 units is 8,551 tons per day. Of these
90 units, 69 percent are owned by city or county governments, 29
percent are owned by private businesses, and 2 percent are owned by
nonprofit organizations.
To estimate the cost impacts of the proposed guidelines, EPA has
taken into account all of the existing control equipment currently in
operation at small MWC units. The cost estimates presented here, which
are in 1997 dollars, are incremental costs over the control equipment
already in use. The method used to estimate the cost and economic
impacts of today's proposal is similar to the method used in the 1995
emission guidelines. For more details on the cost and economic
analysis, refer to the impact analysis in the document entitled
``Economic Impact Analysis: Small Municipal Waste Combustor--Section
111/129 Emission Guidelines and New Source Performance Standards''
(Docket No. A-98-18).
The total annual cost (including annualized capital and operating
costs) of these proposed emission guidelines would be approximately $50
million, which is equivalent to $18.75 per ton of MSW combusted. The
total nationwide cost is approximately one-tenth of the nationwide cost
that was estimated for both large and small MWC units for the 1995
emission guidelines. This is because most of the impacts of the 1995
emission guidelines were associated with large MWC units and because
there has been a decrease in the small MWC population.
V. Companion Proposal for New Small MWC Units
A companion proposal to these proposed emission guidelines is being
published in today's Federal Register to establish NSPS for new small
MWC units. Following promulgation, the NSPS for new small MWC units
will be contained in 40 CFR part 60, subpart AAAA.
VI. Amendments to Subpart B
Also included in today's Federal Register is a proposal to amend
subpart B of this part, ``Adoption and Submittal of State Plans for
Designated Facilities.'' Subpart B establishes procedures that are used
in developing State plans and Federal plans to implement section 111(d)
emission guidelines for existing facilities. Subpart B would be used to
develop State plans implementing the subpart BBBB emission guidelines
proposed today for small MWC units. The EPA is proposing two amendments
to subpart B.
[[Page 47242]]
The first amendment addresses compliance schedules for designated
facilities. The amendment affects the increments of progress
requirements specified in Sec. 60.24(e)(1) of subpart B of 40 CFR part
60. The EPA is adding the following language to the increments of
progress requirements: ``unless otherwise specified in the applicable
subpart.'' The purpose of this amendment is to allow EPA subpart-
specific discretion in the number of increments of progress that a
designated facility must meet. The intent of the increments of progress
is to ensure designated facilities make continued progress toward
meeting the compliance schedules established in these emission
guidelines for the source category. Emission guidelines that have been
implemented through subpart B include those for sulfuric acid plants,
large MWC units, medical waste incinerators, and municipal solid waste
landfills.
Currently, subpart B requires designated facilities to meet five
increments of progress during their air pollution control device
retrofit. The following five increments, with dates, must be addressed
for the following activities: (1) submitting control plans, (2)
awarding contracts, (3) initiating onsite construction, (4) completing
onsite construction, and (5) final compliance.
For some categories of designated facilities, such as large MWC
units, the five increments are appropriate. Large MWC units must
develop site-specific control plans. Retrofit of controls is normally
associated with large onsite field-erected construction projects.
Although the current subpart B increments are appropriate for large MWC
units, they are inappropriate for smaller MWC units. Most small Class C
MWC units will achieve compliance by installing preconstructed modular
control systems. When a control system for a small MWC unit is ordered
from a vendor and then delivered, installation is relatively quick
without extensive onsite construction. This is different from a complex
retrofit where detailed site-specific planning, multiple contracts, and
months of onsite construction are required to complete the retrofit.
Therefore, EPA believes that establishing and reporting five increments
of progress is overly burdensome for small Class C MWC units and is not
necessary to ensure compliance. Other source categories covered by
future emission guidelines may experience similar situations where some
of the five increments of progress are also not appropriate. Therefore,
EPA is proposing to allow subpart-specific flexibility in establishing
increments of progress for a particular subpart.
The proposed second amendment to subpart B addresses the public
hearing requirements specified in Sec. 60.27(f) of subpart B of 40 CFR
part 60. The EPA is proposing additional text to clarify that EPA will
hold a public hearing for Federal plan development just as a State
holds a public hearing for State plan development.
The purpose of this revision is to clarify how the public hearing
requirements apply if EPA is developing a Federal plan for designated
facilities in States that did not develop approvable State plans. If
State regulatory authorities are developing a plan that affects
designated facilities in their States, Sec. 60.23(c)(1) of subpart B of
40 CFR part 60 requires at least one public hearing per State (a State
has the discretion to hold more than one hearing). The proposed
revisions would clarify that EPA must conduct at least one public
hearing for the Federal plan (EPA will also have the discretion to hold
more than one public hearing).
VII. Administrative Requirements
A. Public Hearing
In accordance with section 307(d)(5) of the Clean Air Act, EPA will
hold a public hearing if individuals request to speak. If a public
hearing is held, EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral
presentation but will not respond to the presentations or comments. To
provide an opportunity for all who may wish to speak, oral
presentations will be limited to 15 minutes each. Any member of the
public may submit written comments (see the DATES and ADDRESSES
sections). The EPA will consider written comments and supporting
information with equivalent weight as any oral statement and supporting
information presented at a public hearing.
B. Docket
The docket is an organized and complete file of the administrative
record compiled by EPA in the development of this proposal. Material is
added to the docket throughout the rule development process. The
principal purposes of the docket are: (1) to allow members of the
public to identify and locate documents so that they can effectively
participate in the rulemaking process, and (2) to serve as the record
in case of judicial review except for interagency review material. The
docket numbers for these emission guidelines are Docket No. A-98-18 and
associated Docket Nos. A-90-45 and A-89-08, which have been
incorporated by reference into Docket No. A-98-18.
C. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Under section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113), all Federal agencies
are required to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory
and procurement activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, business practices) developed or adopted by one or
more voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA requires Federal agencies to
provide Congress, through annual reports to the OMB, with explanations
when an agency does not use available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
Consistent with the NTTAA, the EPA conducted searches to identify
voluntary consensus standards for use in process and emissions
monitoring. The search for emissions monitoring procedures identified
20 voluntary consensus standards that appeared to have possible use in
lieu of EPA standard reference methods. However, after reviewing
available standards, EPA determined that 12 of the candidate consensus
standards identified for measuring emissions of pollutants or
surrogates subject to emission standards in the rule would not be
practical due to lack of equivalency, documentation, validation data,
and other important technical and policy considerations. Eight of the
remaining candidate consensus standards are new standards under
development that EPA plans to follow, review and consider adopting at a
later date.
One consensus standard, ASTM D6216-98, appears to be practical for
EPA use in lieu of EPA Performance Specification 1 (40 CFR part 60,
appendix B). On September 23, 1998, EPA proposed incorporating by
reference ASTM D6216-98 under a separate rulemaking (63 FR 50824) that
would allow broader use and application of this consensus standard. The
EPA plans to complete this action in the near future. For these
reasons, EPA does not propose in these emission guidelines to adopt
D6216-98 in lieu of PS-1 requirements as it would be impractical for
EPA to act independently from separate rulemaking activities already
undergoing notice and comment.
The EPA solicits comment on proposed emission monitoring
[[Page 47243]]
requirements proposed in these emission guidelines and specifically
invites the public to identify potentially-applicable voluntary
consensus standards. Commenters should also explain why this regulation
should incorporate these voluntary consensus standards, in lieu of
EPA's standards. Emission test methods and performance specifications
submitted for evaluation should be accompanied with a basis for the
recommendation, including method validation data and the procedure used
to validate the candidate method (if method other than Method 301, 40
CFR part 63, appendix A was used).
The EPA also conducted searches to identify voluntary consensus
standards for process monitoring and process operation. Candidate
voluntary consensus standards for process monitoring and process
operation were identified for: (1) MWC unit load level (steam output),
(2) designing, constructing, installing, calibrating, and using nozzles
and orifices, and (3) MWC plant operator certification requirements.
One consensus standard by the ASME was identified for use in these
proposed emission guidelines for measurement of MWC unit load level
(steam output). The EPA believes this standard is practical to use in
these proposed emission guidelines as the method to measure MWC unit
load. The EPA takes comment on the incorporation by reference of ``ASME
Power Test Codes: Test Code for Steam Generating Units, Power Test Code
4.1--1964 (R1991)'' in the proposed guidelines.
A second consensus standard by ASME was identified for use in these
proposed emission guidelines for designing, constructing, installing,
calibrating, and using nozzles and orifices. The EPA believes this
standard is practical to use in these proposed emission guidelines for
the design, construction, installation, calibration, and use of nozzles
and orifices. The EPA takes comment on the incorporation by reference
of ``American Society of Mechanical Engineers Interim Supplement 19.5
on Instruments and Apparatus: Application, Part II of Fluid Meters'',
6th edition (1971).
A third consensus standard by ASME (QRO-1-1994) was identified for
use in these proposed emission guidelines for MWC plant operator
certification requirements instead of developing new operator
certification procedures. The EPA believes this standard is practical
to use in these proposed emission guidelines that require a chief
facility operator and shift supervisor to successfully complete the
operator certification procedures developed by ASME.
Tables 6, 7, and 8 of these proposed emission guidelines list the
EPA testing methods and performance standards included in the proposed
regulations. Most of these standards have been used by States and
industry for more than 10 years. Nevertheless, under Sec. 60.8 of 40
CFR part 60, subpart A, the proposal also allows any State or source to
apply to EPA for permission to use an alternative methods in place of
any of the EPA testing methods or performance standards listed in
Tables 6, 7, and 8.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The EPA submitted the information collection requirements (ICR) in
these proposed emission guidelines to OMB for approval under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The EPA prepared an ICR
document (ICR No. 1900.01.01) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy
Farmer by mail at the OP, Regulatory Information Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (2137), 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC
20460, by e-mail at ``[email protected]'' or by calling
(202) 260-2740. A copy may also be downloaded off the Internet at
``http://www.epa.gov/icr''.
Comments are requested on the Agency's need for this information,
the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested
methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of
automated collection techniques. Send comments on the ICR to the
Director, OP Regulatory Information Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (2137), 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, and
to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, 725 17th
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, marked ``Attention: Desk Officer for
EPA (ICR Tracking No. 1900.01).'' Include the ICR number in any
correspondence. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the
ICR between 30 and 60 days after August 30, 1999, a comment to OMB is
best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by September
29, 1999. The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on
the information collection requirements contained in this proposal.
The information would be used by the Agency to ensure that the
small MWC unit requirements are implemented properly and are complied
with on a continuous basis. Records and reports are necessary to enable
EPA to identify small MWC units that may not be in compliance with
these emission guidelines. Based on reported information, EPA would
decide which small MWC units should be inspected and what records or
processes should be inspected. The records that owners and operators of
small MWC units maintain would indicate to EPA whether personnel are
operating and maintaining control equipment properly.
These proposed emission guidelines are projected to affect
approximately 90 small MWC units located at 41 plants. The estimated
average annual burden for industry for the first 3 years after
promulgation of these emission guidelines would be 1,297 person-hours
annually. There will be no capital costs for monitoring or
recordkeeping during the first 3 years. The estimated average annual
burden, over the first 3 years, for the implementing agency would be
773 hours with a cost of $30,869 (including travel expenses) per 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 chapter 15.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act/Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
Section 605 of the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires Federal
agencies to give special consideration to the impacts of regulations on
small entities, which are small businesses, small organizations, and
small governments. In 1996, the SBREFA amended the RFA to strengthen
the RFA's analytical and procedural requirements and to establish a new
mechanism for expedited congressional review. The major purpose of
these Acts is to keep paperwork and regulatory requirements from
getting out of proportion to the scale of the entities being regulated
without compromising the objectives of
[[Page 47244]]
the Clean Air Act. If a regulation is likely to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the EPA may
give special consideration to those small entities when analyzing
regulatory alternatives and drafting the regulation. Under these Acts,
EPA must generally prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for a rule
subject to notice and comment rulemaking procedures unless the EPA
certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small government
jurisdictions.
Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the EPA certifies
that today's proposed emission guidelines will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The EPA
conducted a regulatory flexibility analysis that shows eight existing
small MWC units (operated by one small business and seven small
governments) that would be subject to these emission guidelines are
considered ``small entities'' according to the Small Business
Administration's definitions for the affected industries. Also in the
initial analysis, EPA calculated compliance costs as a percentage of
sales for business and a percentage of income (total household income)
for the relevant population of owning governments for the MWC units
that are considered small entities. The estimated annual compliance
cost as a percentage of income is 0.03 percent for the seven small
potentially affected government entities and 39 percent for the one
small business. For the seven potentially affected government entities,
the maximum compliance cost was 0.25 percent. None of the governmental
impacts are considered significant. The impact on the one small
business is considered significant but one small business is not a
substantial number of entities.
Based on the results of the initial analysis, EPA concluded that
these emission guidelines do not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, it is not necessary
to prepare a final regulatory flexibility analysis.
F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the 1995 UMRA, Pub. L. 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, EPA 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 to 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 EPA 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
allow EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least-costly, most
cost-effective, or least-burdensome alternative if the Administrator
publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was
not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that
may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including
tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the
UMRA a small government agency plan. 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 EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
The EPA has determined that these proposed emission guidelines do
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. The economic impact
analysis (Docket No. A-98-18) shows that the total annual costs of
these proposed emission guidelines is about $50 million per year (in
1997 dollars), starting on the fifth year after the rule is
promulgated. Thus, today's proposed emission guidelines are not subject
to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. Although these
emission guidelines are not subject to UMRA, EPA did prepare a cost-
benefit analysis under section 202 of the UMRA for the 1995 emission
guidelines. For a discussion of how EPA complied with the UMRA for the
1995 emission guidelines, including its extensive consultations with
State and local governments, see the preamble to the 1995 emission
guidelines (60 FR 65405-65412, December 19, 1995). Because today's
proposed emission guidelines are functionally equivalent to the 1995
emission guidelines, no additional consultations were necessary.
G. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant,'' and
therefore, subject to OMB review and the requirements of this Executive
Order. The Executive Order defines ``significant'' regulatory action as
one that is likely to lead to 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 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.
The EPA considers these emission guidelines proposed today to be
``not significant'' because these guidelines will not have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million or more and do not impose any
additional control requirements above the 1995 emission guidelines. The
EPA considered the 1995 emission guidelines to be ``significant''
because the 1995 guidelines were expected to have an annual effect on
the economy in excess of $100 million. The EPA submitted the 1995
emission guidelines to OMB for review (60 FR 65405, December 19, 1995).
However, these emission guidelines proposed today are projected to have
an impact of approximately $50 million annually (Docket No. A-98-18).
Therefore, these proposed emission guidelines are considered to be
``not significant'' under Executive Order 12866 and will not be
submitted to OMB for review.
H. Executive Order 12875--Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local,
or tribal government unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to
[[Page 47245]]
OMB a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected State, local, and tribal governments, the
nature of their concerns, copies of any written communications from the
governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of State, local and tribal governments ``to provide
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals
containing significant unfunded mandates.''
The EPA has concluded that these emission guidelines may create a
mandate on a number of city and county governments, and the Federal
government would not provide the funds necessary to pay the direct
costs incurred by these city and county governments in complying with
the mandate. However, today's proposed emission guidelines do not
impose any additional costs or result in any additional control
requirements above those considered during promulgation of the 1995
emission guidelines. In developing the 1995 emission guidelines, EPA
consulted extensively with State and local governments to enable them
to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of those
emission guidelines. Because these proposed emission guidelines are the
same as those developed in 1995, these previous consultations still
apply. For a discussion of EPA's consultations with State and local
governments, the nature of the governments' concerns, and EPA's
position supporting the need to issue these emission guidelines, see
the preamble to the 1995 emission guidelines (60 FR 65405-65413,
December 19, 1995).
I. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 directs Federal agencies to ``determine
whether their programs, policies, and activities have
disproportionately high adverse human health or environmental effects
on minority populations and low-income populations'' (sections 3-301
and 3-302). In developing these emission guidelines for small MWC
units, EPA analyzed environmental justice issues that could be relevant
to this proposal.
An impact analysis was conducted to determine the distribution of
minority and low-income groups in the surrounding area where MWC units
are located in the United States. The EPA reviewed the demographic
characteristics presented in this impact analysis (Docket No. A-90-45)
and other analyses. The EPA concluded that there is no significant
difference in ethnic makeup or income level in counties where MWC units
are located when compared to the average ethnic and income levels of
the respective States in which the units are located.
In addition, this proposal would reduce air emissions from small
MWC units, thereby improving air quality, health, and the environment
in areas where MWC units are located.
Therefore, EPA has concluded that this proposal would not have a
disproportionately high adverse human health or environmental effect on
minority populations or low-income populations.
J. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (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 EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency 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 considered by the Agency.
The EPA interprets 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.
These emission guidelines are not subject to Executive Order 13045
because they are not economically significant as defined in Executive
Order 12866 and because they are based on technology performance and
not on health and safety risks. No children's risk analysis was
performed because no alternative technologies exist that would provide
greater stringency at a reasonable cost. Therefore, the results of any
such analysis would have no impact on the stringency decision.
K. Executive Order 13084--Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to OMB, in a separately identified section of
the preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a
summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to
provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory
policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their
communities.''
Today's emission guidelines do not significantly or uniquely affect
the communities of Indian tribal governments. The EPA is not aware of
any small MWC units located in Indian territory. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to
these emission guidelines.
L. Executive Memorandum on Plain Language in Government Writing
On June 1, 1998, President Clinton issued an Executive Memorandum
entitled ``Plain Language in Government Writing,'' which instructs
Federal agencies to use plain language in all proposed and final
rulemakings by January 1, 1999. Therefore, these proposed emission
guidelines are organized and written in a plain language format and
style. The plain language format and style do not alter the content or
intent of this proposal compared to the 1995 emission guidelines. The
EPA considers this plain language format and style to be more user
friendly and understandable to all audiences when compared with
previous proposals that were not written in plain language.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Municipal waste
combustion.
Dated: August 6, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
60 of
[[Page 47246]]
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 60--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7413, 7414, 7416, 7429, 7601,
and 7602.
2. Section 60.24 of subpart B of part 60 is amended by revising
paragraph (e)(1) to read as follows:
Subpart B--Adoption and Submittal of State Plans for Designated
Facilities
Sec. 60.24 Emission standards and compliance schedules.
* * * * *
(e)(1) Any compliance schedule extending more than 12 months from
the date required for submittal of the plan must include legally
enforceable increments of progress to achieve compliance for each
designated facility or category of facilities. Unless otherwise
specified in the applicable subpart, increments of progress must
include, where practicable, each increment of progress specified in
Sec. 60.21(h) and must include such additional increments of progress
as may be necessary to permit close and effective supervision of
progress toward final compliance.
* * * * *
3. Section 60.27 of subpart B of part 60 is amended by revising
paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.27 Actions by the Administrator.
* * * * *
(f) Prior to promulgation of a plan under paragraph (d) of this
section, the Administrator will provide the opportunity for at least
one public hearing in either:
(1) Each State that failed to hold a public hearing as required by
Sec. 60.23(c); or
(2) Washington, DC or an alternate location specified in the
Federal Register.
* * * * *
4. Part 60 is amended by adding a new subpart BBBB to read as
follows:
Subpart BBBB--Emission Guidelines: Small Municipal Waste Combustion
Units
Sec.
Introduction
60.1500 What is the purpose of this subpart?
60.1505 Am I affected by this subpart?
60.1510 Is a State plan required for all States?
60.1515 What must I include in my State plan?
60.1520 Is there an approval process for my State plan?
60.1525 What if my State plan is not approvable?
60.1530 Is there an approval process for a negative declaration
letter?
60.1535 What compliance schedule must I include in my State plan?
60.1540 Are there any State plan requirements for this subpart that
apply instead of the requirements specified in subpart B?
60.1545 Does this subpart directly affect municipal waste
combustion unit owners and operators in my State?
Applicability of State Plans
60.1550 What municipal waste combustion units must I address in my
State plan?
60.1555 Are any small municipal waste combustion units exempt from
my State plan?
60.1560 Can an affected municipal waste combustion unit reduce its
capacity to less than 35 tons per day rather than comply with my
State plan?
60.1565 What subcategories of small municipal waste combustion
units must I include in my State plan?
Use of Model Rule
60.1570 What is the purpose of the ``Model Rule'' in this subpart?
60.1575 How does the model rule relate to the required elements of
my State plan?
60.1580 What are the principal components of the model rule?
Model Rule--Increments of Progress
60.1585 What are my requirements for meeting increments of progress
and achieving final compliance?
60.1590 When must I complete each increment of progress?
60.1595 What must I include in the notifications of achievement of
my increments of progress?
60.1600 When must I submit the notifications of achievement of
increments of progress?
60.1605 What if I do not meet an increment of progress?
60.1610 How do I comply with the increment of progress for
submittal of a control plan?
60.1615 How do I comply with the increment of progress for awarding
contracts?
60.1620 How do I comply with the increment of progress for
initiating onsite construction?
60.1625 How do I comply with the increment of progress for
completing onsite construction?
60.1630 How do I comply with the increment of progress for
achieving final compliance?
60.1635 What must I do if I close my municipal waste combustion
unit and then restart my municipal waste combustion unit?
60.1640 What must I do if I plan to permanently close my municipal
waste combustion unit and not restart it?
Model Rule--Good Combustion Practices: Operator Training
60.1645 What types of training must I do?
60.1650 Who must complete the operator training course? By when?
60.1655 Who must complete the plant-specific training course?
60.1660 What plant-specific training must I provide?
60.1665 What information must I include in the plant-specific
operating manual?
60.1670 Where must I keep the plant-specific operating manual?
Model Rule--Good Combustion Practices: Operator Certification
60.1675 What types of operator certification must the chief
facility operator and shift supervisor obtain and by when must they
obtain it?
60.1680 After the required date for operator certification, who may
operate the municipal waste combustion unit?
60.1685 What if all the certified operators must be temporarily
offsite?
Model Rule--Good Combustion Practices: Operating Requirements
60.1690 What are the operating practice requirements for my
municipal waste combustion unit?
60.1695 What happens to the operating requirements during periods
of startup, shutdown, and malfunction?
Model Rule--Emission Limits
60.1700 What pollutants are regulated by this subpart?
60.1705 What emission limits must I meet? By when?
60.1710 What happens to the emission limits during periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunction?
Model Rule--Continuous Emission Monitoring
60.1715 What types of continuous emission monitoring must I
perform?
60.1720 What continuous emission monitoring systems must I install
for gaseous pollutants?
60.1725 How are the data from the continuous emission monitoring
systems used?
60.1730 How do I make sure my continuous emission monitoring
systems are operating correctly?
60.1735 Am I exempt from any appendix B or appendix F requirements
to evaluate continuous emission monitoring systems?
60.1740 What is my schedule for evaluating continuous emission
monitoring systems?
60.1745 What must I do if I choose to monitor carbon dioxide
instead of oxygen as a diluent gas?
60.1750 What is the minimum amount of monitoring data I must
collect with my continuous emission monitoring systems and is this
requirement enforceable?
60.1755 How do I convert my 1-hour arithmetic averages into
appropriate averaging times and units?
[[Page 47247]]
60.1760 What is required for my continuous opacity monitoring
system and how are the data used?
60.1765 What additional requirements must I meet for the operation
of my continuous emission monitoring systems and continuous opacity
monitoring system?
60.1770 What must I do if my continuous emission monitoring system
is temporarily unavailable to meet the data collection requirements?
Model Rule--Stack Testing
60.1775 What types of stack tests must I conduct?
60.1780 How are the stack test data used?
60.1785 What schedule must I follow for the stack testing?
60.1790 What test methods must I use to stack test?
60.1795 May I conduct stack testing less often?
60.1800 May I deviate from the 12-month testing schedule if
unforeseen circumstances arise?
Model Rule--Other Monitoring Requirements
60.1805 Must I meet other requirements for continuous monitoring?
60.1810 How do I monitor the load of my municipal waste combustion
unit?
60.1815 How do I monitor the temperature of flue gases at the inlet
of my particulate matter control device?
60.1820 How do I monitor the injection rate of activated carbon?
60.1825 What is the minimum amount of monitoring data I must
collect with my continuous parameter monitoring systems and is this
requirement enforceable?
Model Rule--Recordkeeping
60.1830 What records must I keep?
60.1835 Where must I keep my records and for how long?
60.1840 What records must I keep for operator training and
certification?
60.1845 What records must I keep for stack tests?
60.1850 What records must I keep for continuously monitored
pollutants or parameters?
60.1855 What records must I keep for municipal waste combustion
units that use activated carbon?
Model Rule--Reporting
60.1860 What reports must I submit and in what form?
60.1865 What are the appropriate units of measurement for reporting
my data?
60.1870 When must I submit the initial report?
60.1875 What must I include in my initial report?
60.1880 When must I submit the annual report?
60.1885 What must I include in my annual report?
60.1890 What must I do if I am out of compliance with these
standards?
60.1895 If a semiannual report is required, when must I submit it?
60.1900 What must I include in the semiannual out-of-compliance
reports?
60.1905 Can reporting dates be changed?
Model Rule--Air Curtain Incinerators That Burn 100 Percent Yard Waste
60.1910 What is an air curtain incinerator?
60.1915 What is yard waste?
60.1920 What are the emission limits for air curtain incinerators
that burn 100 percent yard waste?
60.1925 How must I monitor opacity for air curtain incinerators
that burn 100 percent yard waste?
60.1930 What are the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for
air curtain incinerators that burn 100 percent yard waste?
Equations
60.1935 What equations must I use?
Definitions
60.1940 What definitions must I know?
Tables
Table 1 of Subpart BBBB--Model Rule--Compliance Schedules and
Increments of Progress
Table 2 of Subpart BBBB--Model Rule--Class A Emission Limits For
Existing Municipal Waste Combustion Units
Table 3 of Subpart BBBB--Model Rule--Class B Emission Limits For
Existing Municipal Waste Combustion Units
Table 4 of Subpart BBBB--Model Rule--Class C Emission Limits For
Existing Municipal Waste Combustion Units
Table 5 of Subpart BBBB--Model Rule--Carbon Monoxide Emission Limits
For Existing Municipal Waste Combustion Units
Table 6 of Subpart BBBB--Model Rule--Requirements for Validating
Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS)
Table 7 of Subpart BBBB--Model Rule--Requirements for Continuous
Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS)
Table 8 of Subpart BBBB--Model Rule--Requirements for Stack Tests
Introduction
Sec. 60.1500 What is the purpose of this subpart?
This subpart establishes emission guidelines and compliance
schedules for the control of emissions from existing small municipal
waste combustion units. The pollutants addressed by these emission
guidelines are listed in tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this subpart. These
emission guidelines are developed in accordance with sections 111(d)
and 129 of the Clean Air Act and subpart B of this part.
Sec. 60.1505 Am I affected by this subpart?
(a) If you are the Administrator of an air quality program in a
State or United States protectorate with one or more existing small
municipal waste combustion units that commenced construction before
August 30, 1999, you must submit a State plan to EPA that implements
these emission guidelines contained in this subpart.
(b) You must submit the State plan to EPA within 1 year after the
promulgation of this subpart.
Sec. 60.1510 Is a State plan required for all States?
No. You are not required to submit a State plan if there are no
existing small municipal waste combustion units in your State and you
submit a negative declaration letter in place of the State plan.
Sec. 60.1515 What must I include in my State plan?
(a) Include nine items:
(1) Inventory of affected municipal waste combustion units,
including those that have ceased operation but have not been
dismantled.
(2) Inventory of emissions from affected municipal waste combustion
units in your State.
(3) Compliance schedules for each affected municipal waste
combustion unit.
(4) Good combustion practices and emission limits for affected
municipal waste combustion units that are at least as protective as
these emission guidelines contained in this subpart.
(5) Stack testing, continuous emission monitoring, recordkeeping
and reporting requirements.
(6) Transcript of the public hearing on the State plan.
(7) Provision for State progress reports to EPA.
(8) Identification of enforceable State mechanisms that you
selected for implementing these emission guidelines of this subpart.
(9) Demonstration of your State's legal authority to carry out the
section 111(d) and section 129 State plan.
(b) Your State plan can deviate from the format and content of
these emission guidelines contained in this subpart. However, if your
State plan does deviate, you must demonstrate that your State plan is
as protective as these emission guidelines contained in this subpart.
Your State plan must address regulatory applicability, increments of
progress for retrofit, operator training and certification, operating
practice, emission limits, continuous emission monitoring, stack
testing, recordkeeping, reporting, and air curtain incinerator
requirements.
(c) Follow the requirements of subpart B of this part in your State
plan.
Sec. 60.1520 Is there an approval process for my State plan?
The EPA will review your State plan according to Sec. 60.27 of
subpart B of this part.
[[Page 47248]]
Sec. 60.1525 What if my State plan is not approvable?
If you do not submit an approvable State plan (or a negative
declaration letter), EPA will develop a Federal plan, according to
Sec. 60.27 of subpart B of this part, to implement these emission
guidelines contained in this subpart. Owners and operators of municipal
waste combustion units not covered by an approved and currently
effective State plan must comply with the Federal plan. The Federal
plan is an interim action and, by its own terms, will cease to apply
when your State plan is approved and becomes effective.
Sec. 60.1530 Is there an approval process for a negative declaration
letter?
No. The EPA has no formal review process for negative declaration
letters. Once your negative declaration letter has been received, EPA
will place a copy in the public docket and publish a notice in the
Federal Register. If, at a later date, an existing small municipal
waste combustion unit is identified in your State, the Federal plan
implementing these emission guidelines contained in this subpart will
automatically apply to that municipal waste combustion unit until your
State plan is approved.
Sec. 60.1535 What compliance schedule must I include in my State plan?
(a) Your State plan must include compliance schedules that require
small municipal waste combustion units to achieve final compliance as
expeditiously as practicable but not later than the earlier of two
dates:
(1) Five years after [the date of publication of the final rule].
(2) Three years after the effective date of State plan approval.
(b) For compliance schedules longer than 1 year after the effective
date of State plan approval, State plans must include two items:
(1) Dates for enforceable increments of progress as specified in
Sec. 60.1590.
(2) For Class A and Class B units (see definition in Sec. 60.1940),
dioxin/furan stack test results for at least one test conducted during
or after 1990. The stack tests must have been conducted according to
the procedures specified under Sec. 60.1790.
(c) Class A and Class B units that commenced construction after
June 26, 1987 must comply with the dioxin/furan and mercury limits
specified in tables 2 and 3 of this subpart by the later of two dates:
(1) One year after the effective date of State plan approval.
(2) One year following the issuance of a revised construction or
operation permit, if a permit modification is required.
Sec. 60.1540 Are there any State plan requirements for this subpart
that apply instead of the requirements specified in subpart B?
Subpart B establishes general requirements for developing and
processing section 111(d) plans. This subpart applies, instead of the
requirements in subpart B of this part, for two items:
(a) Option for case-by-case less stringent emission standards and
longer compliance schedules. State plans developed to implement this
subpart must be as protective as these emission guidelines contained in
this subpart. State plans must require all municipal waste combustion
units to comply within 5 years after [publication date of final rule].
This requirement applies, instead of the option for case-by-case less
stringent emission standards and longer compliance schedules in
Sec. 60.24(f) of subpart B of this part.
(b) Increments of progress requirements. For Class C units (see
definition in Sec. 60.1940), a State plan must include at least two
increments of progress for the affected municipal waste combustion
units. These two minimum increments are the final control plan
submittal date and final compliance date in Sec. 60.21(h)(1) and (5) of
subpart B of this part. This requirement applies, instead of the
requirement of Sec. 60.24(e)(1) of subpart B of this part that would
require a State plan to include all five increments of progress for all
municipal waste combustion units. For Class A and Class B units under
this subpart, the final control plan must contain the five increments
of progress in Sec. 60.24(e)(1) of subpart B of this part.
Sec. 60.1545 Does this subpart directly affect municipal waste
combustion unit owners and operators in my State?
(a) No. This subpart does not directly affect municipal waste
combustion unit owners and operators in your State. However, municipal
waste combustion unit owners and operators must comply with the State
plan you developed to implement these emission guidelines contained in
this subpart. Some States may incorporate these emission guidelines
contained in this subpart into their State plans by direct
incorporation by reference. Others may include the model rule text
directly in their State plan.
(b) All municipal waste combustion units must be in compliance with
the requirements established in this subpart by 5 years after [the date
of publication of the final rule], whether the municipal waste
combustion unit is regulated under a State or Federal plan.
Applicability of State Plans
Sec. 60.1550 What municipal waste combustion units must I address in
my State plan?
(a) Your State plan must address all existing small municipal waste
combustion units in your State that meet two criteria:
(1) The municipal waste combustion unit has the capacity to combust
at least 35 tons per day of municipal solid waste but no more than 250
tons per day of municipal solid waste or refuse-derived fuel.
(2) The municipal waste combustion unit commenced construction
before August 30, 1999.
(b) If an owner or operator of a municipal waste combustion unit
makes changes that meet the definition of modification or
reconstruction after the date 6 months after [the date of publication
of the final rule] for subpart AAAA of this part, the municipal waste
combustion unit becomes subject to subpart AAAA of this part and the
State plan no longer applies to that unit.
(c) If an owner or operator of a municipal waste combustion unit
makes physical or operational changes to an existing municipal waste
combustion unit primarily to comply with your State plan, subpart AAAA
of this part (New Source Performance Standards for Small Municipal
Waste Combustion Units) does not apply to that unit. Such changes do
not constitute modifications or reconstructions under subpart AAAA of
this part.
Sec. 60.1555 Are any small municipal waste combustion units exempt
from my State plan?
(a) Small municipal waste combustion units that combust less than
11 tons per day. These units are exempt from your State plan if four
requirements are met:
(1) The municipal waste combustion unit is subject to a federally
enforceable permit limiting municipal solid waste combustion to less
than 11 tons per day.
(2) You are notified by the owner or operator that the unit
qualifies for this exemption.
(3) You receive from the owner or operator of the unit a copy of
the federally enforceable permit.
(4) The owner or operator of the unit keeps daily records of the
amount of municipal solid waste combusted.
(b) Small power production units. These units are exempt from your
State plan if four requirements are met:
(1) The unit qualifies as a small power production facility under
section 3(17)(C) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(17)(C)).
[[Page 47249]]
(2) The unit combusts homogeneous waste (excluding refuse-derived
fuel) to produce electricity.
(3) You are notified by the owner or operator that the unit
qualifies for this exemption.
(4) You receive documentation from the owner or operator that the
unit qualifies for this exemption.
(c) Cogeneration units. These units are exempt from your State plan
if four requirements are met:
(1) The unit qualifies as a cogeneration facility under section
3(18)(B) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(18)(B)).
(2) The unit combusts homogeneous waste (excluding refuse-derived
fuel) to produce electricity and steam or other forms of energy used
for industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling purposes.
(3) You are notified by the owner or operator that the unit
qualifies for this exemption.
(4) You receive documentation from the owner or operator that the
unit qualifies for this exemption.
(d) Municipal waste combustion units that combust only tires. These
units are exempt from your State plan if three requirements are met:
(1) The municipal waste combustion unit combusts a single-item
waste stream of tires and no other municipal waste (the unit can cofire
coal, fuel oil, natural gas, or other nonmunicipal solid waste).
(2) You are notified by the owner or operator that the unit
qualifies for this exemption.
(3) You receive documentation from the owner or operator that the
unit qualifies for this exemption.
(e) Hazardous waste combustion units. These units are exempt from
your State plan if the unit has received a permit under section 3005 of
the Solid Waste Disposal Act.
(f) Materials recovery units. These units are exempt from your
State plan if the unit combusts waste mainly to recover metals. Primary
and secondary smelters may qualify for this exemption.
(g) Cofired units. These units are exempt from your State plan if
four requirements are met:
(1) The unit has a federally enforceable permit limiting municipal
solid waste combustion to 30 percent of the total fuel input by weight.
(2) You are notified by the owner or operator that the unit
qualifies for this exemption.
(3) You receive from the owner or operator of the unit a copy of
the federally enforceable permit.
(4) The owner or operator records the weights, each quarter, of
municipal solid waste and of all other fuels combusted.
(h) Plastics/rubber recycling units. These units are exempt from
your State plan if four requirements are met:
(1) The pyrolysis/combustion unit is an integrated part of a
plastics/rubber recycling unit as defined under ``Definitions''
(Sec. 60.1940).
(2) The owner or operator of the unit records the weight, each
quarter, of plastics, rubber, and rubber tires processed.
(3) The owner or operator of the unit records the weight, each
quarter, of feed stocks produced and marketed from chemical plants and
petroleum refineries.
(4) The owner or operator of the unit keeps the name and address of
the purchaser of the feed stocks.
(i) Units that combust fuels made from products of plastics/rubber
recycling plants. These units are exempt from your State plan if two
requirements are met:
(1) The unit combusts 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 feed stocks produced by plastics/rubber recycling units.
(2) The unit does not combust any other municipal solid waste.
(j) Cement kilns. Cement kilns that combust municipal solid waste
are exempt from your State plan.
(k) Air curtain incinerators. If an air curtain incinerator (see
Sec. 60.1940 for definition) combusts 100 percent yard waste, then
these units must meet only the requirements under ``Model Rule--Air
Curtain Incinerators That Burn 100 Percent Yard Waste'' (Secs. 60.1910
through 60.1930).
Sec. 60.1560 Can an affected municipal waste combustion unit reduce
its capacity to less than 35 tons per day rather than comply with my
State plan?
(a) Yes, an owner or operator of an affected municipal waste
combustion unit may choose to reduce, by your final compliance date,
the maximum combustion capacity of the unit to less than 35 tons per
day of municipal solid waste rather than comply with your State plan.
They must submit a final control plan and the notifications of
achievement of increments of progress as specified in Sec. 60.1610.
(b) The final control plan must, at a minimum, include two items:
(1) A description of the physical changes that will be made to
accomplish the reduction.
(2) Calculations of the current maximum combustion capacity and the
planned maximum combustion capacity after the reduction. Use the
equations specified under Sec. 60.1935(d) and (e) to calculate the
combustion capacity of a municipal waste combustion unit.
(c) A permit restriction or a change in the method of operation
does not qualify as a reduction in capacity. Use the equations
specified under Sec. 60.1935(d) and (e) to calculate the combustion
capacity of a municipal waste combustion unit.
Sec. 60.1565 What subcategories of small municipal waste combustion
units must I include in my State plan?
This subpart specifies different requirements for different
subcategories of municipal waste combustion units. You must use these
same three subcategories in your State plan. These three subcategories
are based on aggregate capacity of the municipal waste combustion plant
and the type of municipal waste combustor unit as follows:
(a) Class A units. These are nonrefractory-type small municipal
waste combustion units that are located at municipal waste combustion
plants with aggregate plant combustion capacity greater than 250 tons
per day of municipal solid waste. (See the definition of municipal
waste combustion plant capacity in Sec. 60.1940 for specification of
which units at a plant are included in the aggregate capacity
calculation.)
(b) Class B units. These are refractory-type small municipal waste
combustion units that are located at municipal waste combustion plants
with aggregate plant combustion capacity greater than 250 tons per day
of municipal solid waste. (See the definition of municipal waste
combustion plant capacity in Sec. 60.1940 for specification of which
units at a plant are included in the aggregate capacity calculation.)
(c) Class C units. These are all small municipal combustion units
that are located at municipal waste combustion plants with aggregate
plant combustion capacity no more than 250 tons per day of municipal
solid waste. (See the definition of municipal waste combustion plant
capacity in Sec. 60.1940 for specification of which units at a plant
are included in the aggregate capacity calculation.)
Use of Model Rule
Sec. 60.1570 What is the purpose of the ``Model Rule'' in this
subpart?
(a) The model rule provides these emission guidelines requirements
in a standard regulation format. You must develop a State plan that is
as protective as the model rule. You may use the
[[Page 47250]]
model rule language as part of your State plan. Alternative language
may be used in your State plan if you demonstrate that the alternative
language is as protective as the model rule contained in this subpart.
(b) In the model rule of Secs. 60.1585 through 60.1905, ``you''
means the owner or operator of a small municipal waste combustion unit.
Sec. 60.1575 How does the model rule relate to the required elements
of my State plan?
The model rule may be used to satisfy the State plan requirements
specified in Sec. 60.1515(a)(4) and (5). Alternatives may be used, but
only if you can demonstrate that they are as protective as the model
rule.
Sec. 60.1580 What are the principal components of the model rule?
The model rule contains five major components:
(a) Increments of progress toward compliance.
(b) Good combustion practices.
(1) Operator training.
(2) Operator certification.
(3) Operating requirements.
(c) Emission limits.
(d) Monitoring and stack testing.
(e) Recordkeeping and reporting.
Model Rule--Increments of Progress
Sec. 60.1585 What are my requirements for meeting increments of
progress and achieving final compliance?
(a) Class A and Class B units. If you plan to achieve compliance
more than 1 year following the effective date of State plan approval
and a permit modification is not required, or more than 1 year
following the date of issuance of a revised construction or operation
permit if a permit modification is required, you must meet five
increments of progress:
(1) Submit a final control plan.
(2) Submit a notification of retrofit contract award.
(3) Initiate onsite construction.
(4) Complete onsite construction.
(5) Achieve final compliance.
(b) Class C units. If you plan to achieve compliance more than 1
year following the effective date of State plan approval and a permit
modification is not required, or more than 1 year following the date of
issuance of a revised construction or operation permit if a permit
modification is required, you must meet two increments of progress:
(1) Submit a final control plan.
(2) Achieve final compliance.
Sec. 60.1590 When must I complete each increment of progress?
Table 1 of this subpart specifies compliance dates for each of the
increments of progress for Class A, B, and C units. (See Sec. 60.1940
for definitions of classes.)
Sec. 60.1595 What must I include in the notifications of achievement
of my increments of progress?
Your notification of achievement of increments of progress must
include three items:
(a) Notification that the increment of progress has been achieved.
(b) Any items required to be submitted with the increment of
progress (Secs. 60.1610 through 60.1630).
(c) The notification must be signed by the owner or operator of the
municipal waste combustion unit.
Sec. 60.1600 When must I submit the notifications of achievement of
increments of progress?
Notifications of the achievement of increments of progress must be
postmarked no later than 10 days after the compliance date for the
increment.
Sec. 60.1605 What if I do not meet an increment of progress?
If you fail to meet an increment of progress, you must submit a
notification to the Administrator postmarked within 10 business days
after the specified date in table 1 of this subpart for achieving that
increment of progress. This notification must inform the Administrator
that you did not meet the increment. You must include in the
notification an explanation of why the increment of progress was not
met and your plan for meeting the increment as expeditiously as
possible. You must continue to submit reports each subsequent month
until the increment of progress is met.
Sec. 60.1610 How do I comply with the increment of progress for
submittal of a control plan?
For your control plan increment of progress, you must complete two
items:
(a) Submit the final control plan, including a description of the
devices for air pollution control and process changes that you will use
to comply with the emission limits and other requirements of this
subpart.
(b) You must maintain an onsite copy of the final control plan.
Sec. 60.1615 How do I comply with the increment of progress for
awarding contracts?
You must submit a signed copy of the contracts awarded to initiate
onsite construction, initiate onsite installation of emission control
equipment, and incorporate process changes. Submit the copy of the
contracts with the notification that this increment of progress has
been achieved.
Sec. 60.1620 How do I comply with the increment of progress for
initiating onsite construction?
You must initiate onsite construction and installation of emission
control equipment and initiate the process changes outlined in the
final control plan.
Sec. 60.1625 How do I comply with the increment of progress for
completing onsite construction?
You must complete onsite construction and installation of emission
control equipment and complete process changes outlined in the final
control plan.
Sec. 60.1630 How do I comply with the increment of progress for
achieving final compliance?
For the final compliance increment of progress, you must complete
two items:
(a) Complete all process changes and complete retrofit construction
as specified in the final control plan.
(b) Connect the air pollution control equipment with the municipal
waste combustion unit identified in the final control plan and complete
process changes to the municipal waste combustion unit so that if the
affected municipal waste combustion unit is brought online, all
necessary process changes and air pollution control equipment are
operating as designed.
Sec. 60.1635 What must I do if I close my municipal waste combustion
unit and then restart my municipal waste combustion unit?
(a) If you close your municipal waste combustion unit but will
reopen it prior to the final compliance date in your State plan, you
must meet the increments of progress specified in Sec. 60.1585.
(b) If you close your municipal waste combustion unit but will
restart it after your final compliance date, you must complete emission
control retrofit and meet the emission limits and good combustion
practices on the date your municipal waste combustion unit restarts
operation.
Sec. 60.1640 What must I do if I plan to permanently close my
municipal waste combustion unit and not restart it?
(a) If you plan to close your municipal waste combustion unit
rather than comply with the State plan, you must submit a closure
notification, including the date of closure, to the Administrator by
the date your final control plan is due.
(b) If the closure date is later than 1 year after the effective
date of State plan approval, you must enter into a legally binding
closure agreement with the
[[Page 47251]]
Administrator by the date your final control plan is due. The agreement
must specify the date by which operation will cease.
Model Rule--Good Combustion Practices: Operator Training
Sec. 60.1645 What types of training must I do?
There are two types of required training:
(a) Training of operators of municipal waste combustion units using
the EPA or a State-approved training course.
(b) Training of plant personnel using a plant-specific training
course.
Sec. 60.1650 Who must complete the operator training course? By when?
(a) Three types of employees must complete the EPA or State-
approved operator training course:
(1) Chief facility operators.
(2) Shift supervisors.
(3) Control room operators.
(b) These employees must complete the operator training course by
the later of three dates:
(1) One year after the effective date of State plan approval.
(2) Six months after your municipal waste combustion unit starts
up.
(3) The date before an employee assumes responsibilities that
affect operation of the municipal waste combustion unit.
(c) The requirement in paragraph (a) of this section 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
State plan approval.
(d) You may request that the EPA Administrator waive the
requirement in paragraph (a) of this section 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 State plan
approval.
Sec. 60.1655 Who must complete the plant-specific training course?
All employees with responsibilities that affect how a municipal
waste combustion unit operates must complete the plant-specific
training course. Include at least six types of employees:
(a) Chief facility operators.
(b) Shift supervisors.
(c) Control room operators.
(d) Ash handlers.
(e) Maintenance personnel.
(f) Crane or load handlers.
Sec. 60.1660 What plant-specific training must I provide?
For plant-specific training, you must do four things:
(a) For training at a particular plant, develop a specific
operating manual for that plant by the later of two dates:
(1) Six months after your municipal waste combustion unit starts
up.
(2) One year after the effective date of State plan approval.
(b) Establish a program to review the plant-specific operating
manual with people whose responsibilities affect the operation of your
municipal waste combustion unit. Complete the initial review by the
later of three dates:
(1) One year after the effective date of State plan approval.
(2) Six months after your municipal waste combustion unit starts
up.
(3) The date before an employee assumes responsibilities that
affect operation of the municipal waste combustion unit.
(c) Update your manual annually.
(d) Review your manual with staff annually.
Sec. 60.1665 What information must I include in the plant-specific
operating manual?
You must include 11 items in the operating manual for your plant:
(a) A summary of all applicable standards in this subpart.
(b) A description of the basic combustion principles that apply to
municipal waste combustion units.
(c) Procedures for receiving, handling, and feeding municipal solid
waste.
(d) Procedures to be followed during periods of startup, shutdown,
and malfunction of the municipal waste combustion unit.
(e) Procedures for maintaining a proper level of combustion air
supply.
(f) Procedures for operating the municipal waste combustion unit
within the standards contained in this subpart.
(g) Procedures for responding to periodic upset or off-
specification conditions.
(h) Procedures for minimizing carryover of particulate matter.
(i) Procedures for handling ash.
(j) Procedures for monitoring emissions from the municipal waste
combustion unit.
(k) Procedures for recordkeeping and reporting.
Sec. 60.1670 Where must I keep the plant-specific operating manual?
You must keep your operating manual in an easily accessible
location at your plant. It must be available for review or inspection
by all employees who must review it and by the Administrator.
Model Rule--Good Combustion Practices: Operator Certification
Sec. 60.1675 What types of operator certification must the chief
facility operator and shift supervisor obtain and by when must they
obtain it?
(a) Each chief facility operator and shift supervisor must obtain
and keep a current provisional operator certification from the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (QRO-1-1994 (incorporated by reference
in Sec. 60.17 of subpart A of this part)) or a current provisional
operator certification from your State certification program.
(b) Each chief facility operator and shift supervisor must obtain a
provisional certification by the later of three dates:
(1) For Class A and Class B units, 12 months after the effective
date of State plan approval. For Class C units, 18 months after the
effective date of State plan approval.
(2) Six months after the municipal waste combustion unit starts up.
(3) Six months after they transfer to the municipal waste
combustion unit or 6 months after they are hired to work at the
municipal waste combustion unit.
(c) Each chief facility operator and shift supervisor must take one
of three actions:
(1) Obtain a full certification from the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers or a State certification program in your State.
(2) Schedule a full certification exam with the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers (QRO-1-1994 (incorporated by reference in
Sec. 60.17 of subpart A of this part)).
(3) Schedule a full certification exam with your State
certification program.
(d) The chief facility operator and shift supervisor must obtain
the full certification or be scheduled to take the certification exam
by the later of the following dates:
(1) For Class A and Class B units, 12 months after the effective
date of State plan approval. For Class C units, 18 months after the
effective date of State plan approval.
(2) Six months after the municipal waste combustion unit starts up.
(3) Six months after they transfer to the municipal waste
combustion unit or 6 months after they are hired to work at the
municipal waste combustion unit.
Sec. 60.1680 After the required date for operator certification, who
may operate the municipal waste combustion unit?
After the required date for full or provisional certification, you
must not operate your municipal waste combustion unit unless one of
four employees is on duty:
[[Page 47252]]
(a) A fully certified chief facility operator.
(b) A provisionally certified chief facility operator who is
scheduled to take the full certification exam.
(c) A fully certified shift supervisor.
(d) A provisionally certified shift supervisor who is scheduled to
take the full certification exam.
Sec. 60.1685 What if all the certified operators must be temporarily
offsite?
If the certified chief facility operator and certified shift
supervisor both must leave your municipal waste combustion unit, a
provisionally certified control room operator at the municipal waste
combustion unit may fulfill the certified operator requirement.
Depending on the length of time that a certified chief facility
operator and certified shift supervisor is away, you must meet one of
three criteria:
(a) When the certified chief facility operator and certified shift
supervisor are both offsite for less than 8 hours and no other
certified operator is onsite, the provisionally certified control room
operator may perform those duties without notice to, or approval by,
the Administrator.
(b) When the certified chief facility operator and certified shift
supervisor are offsite for more than 8 hours, but less than 2 weeks,
and no other certified operator is onsite, the provisionally certified
control room operator may perform those duties without notice to, or
approval by, the Administrator. However, you must record the periods
when the certified chief facility operator and certified shift
supervisor are offsite and include this information in the annual
report as specified under Sec. 60.1885(l).
(c) When the certified chief facility operator and certified shift
supervisor are offsite for more than 2 weeks and no other certified
operator is onsite, the provisionally certified control room operator
may perform those duties without notice to, or approval by, the
Administrator. However, you must take two actions:
(1) Notify the Administrator in writing. In the notice, state what
caused the absence and what you are doing to ensure that a certified
chief facility operator or certified shift supervisor is onsite.
(2) Submit a status report and corrective action summary to the
Administrator every 4 weeks following the initial notification. If the
Administrator notifies you that your status report or corrective action
summary is disapproved, the municipal waste combustion unit may
continue operation for 90 days, but then must cease operation. If
corrective actions are taken in the 90-day period such that the
Administrator withdraws the disapproval, municipal waste combustion
unit operation may continue.
Model Rule--Good Combustion Practices: Operating Requirements
Sec. 60.1690 What are the operating practice requirements for my
municipal waste combustion unit?
(a) You must not operate your municipal waste combustion unit at
loads greater than 110 percent of the maximum demonstrated load of the
municipal waste combustion unit (4-hour block average), as specified
under ``Definitions'' (Sec. 60.1940).
(b) You must not operate your municipal waste combustion unit so
that the temperature at the inlet of the particulate matter control
device exceeds 17 deg.C above the maximum demonstrated temperature of
the particulate matter control device (4-hour block average), as
specified under ``Definitions'' (Sec. 60.1940).
(c) If your municipal waste combustion unit uses activated carbon
to control dioxin/furan or mercury emissions, you must maintain an 8-
hour block average carbon feed rate at or above the highest average
level established during the most recent dioxin/furan or mercury test.
(d) If your municipal waste combustion unit uses activated carbon
to control dioxin/furan or mercury emissions, you must evaluate total
carbon usage for each calendar quarter. The total amount of carbon
purchased and delivered to your municipal waste combustion plant must
be at or above the required quarterly usage of carbon. At your option,
you may choose to evaluate required quarterly carbon usage on a
municipal waste combustion unit basis for each individual municipal
waste combustion unit at your plant. Calculate the required quarterly
usage of carbon using the appropriate equation in Sec. 60.1935.
(e) Your municipal waste combustion unit is exempt from limits on
load level, temperature at the inlet of the particulate matter control
device, and carbon feed rate during any of five situations:
(1) During your annual tests for dioxins/furans.
(2) During your annual mercury tests (for carbon feed rate
requirements only).
(3) During the 2 weeks preceding your annual tests for dioxins/
furans.
(4) During the 2 weeks preceding your annual mercury tests (for
carbon feed rate requirements only).
(5) Whenever the Administrator or delegated State authority permits
you to do any of five activities:
(i) Evaluate system performance.
(ii) Test new technology or control technologies.
(iii) Perform diagnostic testing.
(iv) Perform other activities to improve the performance of your
municipal waste combustion unit.
(v) Perform other activities to advance the state of the art for
emission controls for your municipal waste combustion unit.
Sec. 60.1695 What happens to the operating requirements during periods
of startup, shutdown, and malfunction?
(a) The operating requirements of this subpart apply at all times
except during periods of municipal waste combustion unit startup,
shutdown, or malfunction.
(b) Each startup, shutdown, or malfunction must not last for longer
than 3 hours.
Model Rule--Emission Limits
Sec. 60.1700 What pollutants are regulated by this subpart?
Eleven pollutants, in four groupings, are regulated:
(a) Organics. Dioxins/furans.
(b) Metals.
(1) Cadmium.
(2) Lead.
(3) Mercury.
(4) Opacity.
(5) Particulate matter.
(c) Acid gases.
(1) Hydrogen chloride.
(2) Nitrogen oxides.
(3) Sulfur dioxide.
(d) Other.
(1) Carbon monoxide.
(2) Fugitive ash.
Sec. 60.1705 What emission limits must I meet? By when?
(a) After the date the initial stack test and continuous emission
monitoring system evaluation are required or completed (whichever is
earlier), you must meet the applicable emission limits specified in the
following four tables of this subpart:
(1) For Class A units, see table 2.
(2) For Class B units, see table 3.
(3) For Class C units, see table 4.
(4) For carbon monoxide emission limits for all classes of units,
see table 5.
(b) If your Class A or Class B municipal waste combustion unit
began construction, reconstruction, or modification after June 26,
1987, then you must comply with the dioxin/furan and mercury emission
limits specified in table 2 or 3 as applicable by the later of the
following two dates:
[[Page 47253]]
(1) One year after the effective date of State plan approval.
(2) One year after the issuance of a revised construction or
operating permit, if a permit modification is required.
Sec. 60.1710 What happens to the emission limits during periods of
startup, shutdown, and malfunction?
(a) The emission limits of this subpart apply at all times except
during periods of municipal waste combustion unit startup, shutdown, or
malfunction.
(b) Each startup, shutdown, or malfunction must not last for longer
than 3 hours.
Model Rule--Continuous Emission Monitoring
Sec. 60.1715 What types of continuous emission monitoring must I
perform?
To continuously monitor emissions, you must perform four tasks:
(a) Install continuous emission monitoring systems for certain
gaseous pollutants.
(b) Make sure your continuous emission monitoring systems are
operating correctly.
(c) Make sure you obtain the minimum amount of monitoring data.
(d) Install a continuous opacity monitoring system.
Sec. 60.1720 What continuous emission monitoring systems must I
install for gaseous pollutants?
(a) You must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate continuous
emission monitoring systems for oxygen (or carbon dioxide), sulfur
dioxide, and carbon monoxide. If you operate a Class A municipal waste
combustion unit, also install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a
continuous emission monitoring system for nitrogen oxides. Install the
continuous emission monitoring system for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen
oxides at the outlet of the air pollution control device.
(b) You must install, evaluate, and operate each continuous
emission monitoring system according to the ``Monitoring Requirements''
in Sec. 60.13 of subpart A of this part.
(c) You must monitor the oxygen (or carbon dioxide) concentration
at each location where you monitor sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide.
Additionally, if you operate a Class A municipal waste combustion unit,
you must also monitor the oxygen (or carbon dioxide) concentration at
the location where you monitor nitrogen oxides.
(d) You may choose to monitor carbon dioxide instead of oxygen as a
diluent gas. If you choose to monitor carbon dioxide, then an oxygen
monitor is not required and you must follow the requirements in
Sec. 60.1745.
(e) If you choose to demonstrate compliance by monitoring the
percent reduction of sulfur dioxide, you must also install a continuous
emission monitoring system for sulfur dioxide and oxygen (or carbon
dioxide) at the inlet of the air pollution control device.
Sec. 60.1725 How are the data from the continuous emission monitoring
systems used?
You must use data from the continuous emission monitoring systems
for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and carbon monoxide to demonstrate
continuous compliance with the applicable emission limits specified in
tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this subpart. To demonstrate compliance for
dioxins/furans, cadmium, lead, mercury, particulate matter, opacity,
hydrogen chloride, and fugitive ash, see Sec. 60.1780.
Sec. 60.1730 How do I make sure my continuous emission monitoring
systems are operating correctly?
(a) Conduct initial, daily, quarterly, and annual evaluations of
your continuous emission monitoring systems that measure oxygen (or
carbon dioxide), sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides (Class A municipal
waste combustion units only), and carbon monoxide.
(b) Complete your initial evaluation of the continuous emission
monitoring systems within 180 days after your final compliance date.
(c) For initial and annual evaluations, collect data concurrently
(or within 30 to 60 minutes) using your oxygen (or carbon dioxide)
continuous emission monitoring system, your sulfur dioxide, nitrogen
oxides, or carbon monoxide continuous emission monitoring systems, as
appropriate, and the appropriate test methods specified in table 6 of
this subpart. Collect these data during each initial and annual
evaluation of your continuous emission monitoring systems following the
applicable performance specifications in appendix B of this part. Table
7 of this subpart shows the performance specifications that apply to
each continuous emission monitoring system.
(d) Follow the quality assurance procedures in Procedure 1 of
appendix F of this part for each continuous emission monitoring system.
These procedures include daily calibration drift and quarterly accuracy
determinations.
Sec. 60.1735 Am I exempt from any appendix B or appendix F
requirements to evaluate continuous emission monitoring systems?
Yes, the accuracy tests for your sulfur dioxide continuous emission
monitoring system require you to also evaluate your oxygen (or carbon
dioxide) continuous emission monitoring system. Therefore, your oxygen
(or carbon dioxide) continuous emission monitoring system is exempt
from two requirements:
(a) Section 2.3 of Performance Specification 3 in appendix B of
this part (relative accuracy requirement).
(b) Section 5.1.1 of appendix F of this part (relative accuracy
test audit).
Sec. 60.1740 What is my schedule for evaluating continuous emission
monitoring systems?
(a) Conduct annual evaluations of your continuous emission
monitoring systems no more than 12 months after the previous evaluation
was conducted.
(b) Evaluate your continuous emission monitoring systems daily and
quarterly as specified in appendix F of this part.
Sec. 60.1745 What must I do if I choose to monitor carbon dioxide
instead of oxygen as a diluent gas?
You must establish the relationship between oxygen and carbon
dioxide during the initial evaluation of your continuous emission
monitoring system. You may reestablish the relationship during annual
evaluations. To establish the relationship use three procedures:
(a) Use EPA Reference Method 3 or 3A to determine oxygen
concentration at the location of your carbon dioxide monitor.
(b) Conduct at least three test runs for oxygen. Make sure each
test run represents a 1-hour average and that sampling continues for at
least 30 minutes in each hour.
(c) Use the fuel-factor equation in EPA Reference Method 3B to
determine the relationship between oxygen and carbon dioxide.
Sec. 60.1750 What is the minimum amount of monitoring data I must
collect with my continuous emission monitoring systems and is this
requirement enforceable?
(a) Where continuous emission monitoring systems are required,
obtain 1-hour arithmetic averages. Make sure the averages for sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxides (Class A municipal waste combustion units
only), and carbon monoxide are in parts per million by dry volume at 7
percent oxygen (or the equivalent carbon dioxide level). Use the 1-hour
averages of oxygen (or carbon dioxide) data from your continuous
emission monitoring system to determine the actual oxygen (or carbon
[[Page 47254]]
dioxide) level and to calculate emissions at 7 percent oxygen (or the
equivalent carbon dioxide level).
(b) Obtain at least two data points per hour in order to calculate
a valid 1-hour arithmetic average. Section 60.13(e)(2) of subpart A of
this part requires your continuous emission monitoring systems to
complete at least one cycle of operation (sampling, analyzing, and data
recording) for each 15-minute period.
(c) Obtain valid 1-hour averages for 75 percent of the operating
hours per day and for 90 percent of the operating days per calendar
quarter. An operating day is any day the unit combusts any municipal
solid waste or refuse-derived fuel.
(d) If you do not obtain the minimum data required in paragraphs
(a) through (c) of this section, you are in violation of this data
collection requirement regardless of the emission level monitored, and
you must notify the Administrator according to Sec. 60.1885(e).
(e) If you do not obtain the minimum data required in paragraphs
(a) through (c) of this section, you must still use all valid data from
the continuous emission monitoring systems in calculating emission
concentrations and percent reductions in accordance with Sec. 60.1755.
Sec. 60.1755 How do I convert my 1-hour arithmetic averages into
appropriate averaging times and units?
(a) Use the equation in Sec. 60.1935(a) to calculate emissions at 7
percent oxygen.
(b) Use EPA Reference Method 19, section 4.3, to calculate the
daily geometric average concentrations of sulfur dioxide emissions. If
you are monitoring the percent reduction of sulfur dioxide, use EPA
Reference Method 19, section 5.4, to determine the daily geometric
average percent reduction of potential sulfur dioxide emissions.
(c) If you operate a Class A municipal waste combustion unit, use
EPA Reference Method 19, section 4.1, to calculate the daily arithmetic
average for concentrations of nitrogen oxides.
(d) Use EPA Reference Method 19, section 4.1, to calculate the 4-
hour or 24-hour daily block averages (as applicable) for concentrations
of carbon monoxide.
Sec. 60.1760 What is required for my continuous opacity monitoring
system and how are the data used?
(a) Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous opacity
monitoring system.
(b) Install, evaluate, and operate each continuous opacity
monitoring system according to Sec. 60.13 of subpart A of this part.
(c) Complete an initial evaluation of your continuous opacity
monitoring system according to Performance Specification 1 in appendix
B of this part. Complete this evaluation by 180 days after your final
compliance date.
(d) Complete each annual evaluation of your continuous opacity
monitoring system no more than 12 months after the previous evaluation.
(e) Use tests conducted according to EPA Reference Method 9, as
specified in Sec. 60.1790, to determine compliance with the applicable
emission limit for opacity in tables 2, 3, or 4 of this subpart. The
data obtained from your continuous opacity monitoring system are not
used to determine compliance with the limit on opacity emissions.
Sec. 60.1765 What additional requirements must I meet for the
operation of my continuous emission monitoring systems and continuous
opacity monitoring system?
Use the required span values and applicable performance
specifications in table 8 of this subpart.
Sec. 60.1770 What must I do if my continuous emission monitoring
system is temporarily unavailable to meet the data collection
requirements?
Refer to table 8 of this subpart. It shows alternate methods for
collecting data when these systems malfunction or when repairs,
calibration checks, or zero and span checks keep you from collecting
the minimum amount of data.
Model Rule--Stack Testing
Sec. 60.1775 What types of stack tests must I conduct?
Conduct initial and annual stack tests to measure the emission
levels of dioxins/furans, cadmium, lead, mercury, particulate matter,
opacity, hydrogen chloride, and fugitive ash.
Sec. 60.1780 How are the stack test data used?
You must use results of stack tests for dioxins/furans, cadmium,
lead, mercury, particulate matter, opacity, hydrogen chloride, and
fugitive ash to demonstrate compliance with the applicable emission
limits in tables 2, 3, and 4 of this subpart. To demonstrate compliance
for carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide, see
Sec. 60.1725.
Sec. 60.1785 What schedule must I follow for the stack testing?
(a) Conduct initial stack tests for the pollutants listed in
Sec. 60.1775 by 180 days after your final compliance date.
(b) Conduct annual stack tests for these pollutants after the
initial stack test. Conduct each annual stack test within 12 months
after the previous stack test.
Sec. 60.1790 What test methods must I use to stack test?
(a) Follow table 8 of this subpart to establish the sampling
location and to determine pollutant concentrations, number of traverse
points, individual test methods, and other specific testing
requirements for the different pollutants.
(b) Make sure that stack tests for all these pollutants consist of
at least three test runs, as specified in Sec. 60.8 (Performance Tests)
of subpart A of this part. Use the average of the pollutant emission
concentrations from the three test runs to determine compliance with
the applicable emission limits in tables 2, 3, or 4 of this subpart.
(c) Obtain an oxygen (or carbon dioxide) measurement at the same
time as your pollutant measurements to determine diluent gas levels, as
specified in Sec. 60.1720.
(d) Use the equations in Sec. 60.1935(a) to calculate emission
levels at 7 percent oxygen (or an equivalent carbon dioxide basis), the
percent reduction in potential hydrogen chloride emissions, and the
reduction efficiency for mercury emissions. See the individual test
methods in table 6 of this subpart for other required equations.
Sec. 60.1795 May I conduct stack testing less often?
(a) You may test less often if you own or operate a Class C
municipal waste combustion unit and if all stack tests for a given
pollutant over 3 consecutive years show you comply with the emission
limit. In this case, you are not required to conduct a stack test for
that pollutant for the next 2 years. However, you must conduct another
stack test within 36 months of the anniversary date of the third
consecutive stack test that shows you comply with the emission limit.
Thereafter, you must perform stack tests every third year but no later
than 36 months following the previous stack tests. If a stack test
shows noncompliance with an emission limit, you must conduct annual
stack tests for that pollutant until all stack tests over a 3-year
period show compliance.
(b) You can test less often if you own or operate a municipal waste
combustion plant that meets two conditions. First, you have multiple
municipal waste combustion units onsite that are subject to this
subpart. Second, all these municipal waste combustion units have
demonstrated levels of dioxin/furan emissions no more than 15 nanograms
per dry
[[Page 47255]]
standard cubic meter (total mass) for Class A units, or 30 nanograms
per day standard cubic meter (total mass) for Class B and Class C
units, for 2 consecutive years. In this case, you may choose to conduct
annual stack tests on only one municipal waste combustion unit per year
at your plant.
(1) Conduct the stack test no more than 12 months following a stack
test on any municipal waste combustion unit subject to this subpart at
your plant. Each year, test a different municipal waste combustion unit
subject to this subpart and test all municipal waste combustion units
subject to this subpart in a sequence that you determine. Once you
determine a testing sequence, it must not be changed without approval
by the Administrator.
(2) If each annual stack test shows levels of dioxin/furan
emissions less than 15 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total
mass) for Class A units, or 30 nanograms per day standard cubic meter
(total mass) for Class B and Class C units, you may continue stack
tests on only one municipal waste combustion unit subject to this
subpart per year.
(3) If any annual stack test indicates levels of dioxin/furan
emissions greater than 15 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total
mass) for Class A units, or 30 nanograms per day standard cubic meter
(total mass) for Class B and Class C units, conduct subsequent annual
stack tests on all municipal waste combustion units subject to this
subpart at your plant. You may return to testing one municipal waste
combustion unit subject to this subpart per year if you can demonstrate
dioxin/furan emission levels less than 15 nanograms per dry standard
cubic meter (total mass) for Class A units, or 30 nanograms per day
standard cubic meter (total mass) for Class B and Class C units, for
all municipal waste combustion units at your plant subject to this
subpart for 2 consecutive years.
Sec. 60.1800 May I deviate from the 12-month testing schedule if
unforeseen circumstances arise?
You may not deviate from the 12-month testing schedules specified
in Secs. 60.1785(b) and 60.1795(b)(1) unless you apply to the
Administrator for an alternative schedule, and the Administrator
approves your request for alternate scheduling prior to the date on
which you would otherwise have been required to conduct the next stack
test.
Model Rule--Other Monitoring Requirements
Sec. 60.1805 Must I meet other requirements for continuous monitoring?
You must also monitor three operating parameters:
(a) Load level of each municipal waste combustion unit.
(b) Temperature of flue gases at the inlet of your particulate
matter air pollution control device.
(c) Carbon feed rate if activated carbon is used to control dioxin/
furan or mercury emissions.
Sec. 60.1810 How do I monitor the load of my municipal waste
combustion unit?
(a) If your municipal waste combustion unit generates steam, you
must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a steam flowmeter or a
feed water flowmeter and meet five requirements:
(1) Continuously measure and record the measurements of steam (or
feed water) in kilograms per hour (or pounds per hour).
(2) Calculate your steam (or feed water) flow in 4-hour block
averages.
(3) Calculate the steam (or feed water) flow rate using the method
in ``American Society of Mechanical Engineers Power Test Codes: Test
Code for Steam Generating Units, Power Test Code 4.1--1964 (R1991),''
section 4 (incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17 of subpart A of this
part).
(4) Design, construct, install, calibrate, and use nozzles or
orifices for flow rate measurements, using the recommendations in
``American Society of Mechanical Engineers Interim Supplement 19.5 on
Instruments and Apparatus: Application, Part II of Fluid Meters'', 6th
Edition (1971), chapter 4 (incorporated by reference in Sec. 60.17 of
subpart A of this part).
(5) Before each dioxin/furan stack test, or at least once a year,
calibrate all signal conversion elements associated with steam (or feed
water) flow measurements according to the manufacturer instructions.
(b) If your municipal waste combustion unit does not generate
steam, you must determine, to the satisfaction of the Administrator,
one or more operating parameters that can be used to continuously
estimate load level (for example, the feed rate of municipal solid
waste or refuse-derived fuel). You must continuously monitor the
selected parameters.
Sec. 60.1815 How do I monitor the temperature of flue gases at the
inlet of my particulate matter control device?
You must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a device to
continuously measure the temperature of the flue gas stream at the
inlet of each particulate matter control device.
Sec. 60.1820 How do I monitor the injection rate of activated carbon?
If your municipal waste combustion unit uses activated carbon to
control dioxin/furan or mercury emissions, you must meet three
requirements:
(a) Select a carbon injection system operating parameter that can
be used to calculate carbon feed rate (for example, screw feeder
speed).
(b) During each dioxin/furan and mercury stack test, determine the
average carbon feed rate in kilograms (or pounds) per hour. Also,
determine the average operating parameter level that correlates to the
carbon feed rate. Establish a relationship between the operating
parameter and the carbon feed rate in order to calculate the carbon
feed rate based on the operating parameter level.
(c) Continuously monitor the selected operating parameter during
all periods when the municipal waste combustion unit is operating and
combusting waste and calculate the 8-hour block average carbon feed
rate in kilograms (or pounds) per hour, based on the selected operating
parameter. When calculating the 8-hour block average, do two things:
(1) Exclude hours when the municipal waste combustion unit is not
operating.
(2) Include hours when the municipal waste combustion unit is
operating but the carbon feed system is not working correctly.
Sec. 60.1825 What is the minimum amount of monitoring data I must
collect with my continuous parameter monitoring systems and is this
requirement enforceable?
(a) Where continuous parameter monitoring systems are used, obtain
1-hour arithmetic averages for three parameters:
(1) Load level of the municipal waste combustion unit.
(2) Temperature of the flue gases at the inlet of your particulate
matter control device.
(3) Carbon feed rate if activated carbon is used to control dioxin/
furan or mercury emissions.
(b) Obtain at least two data points per hour in order to calculate
a valid 1-hour arithmetic average.
(c) Obtain valid 1-hour averages for at least 75 percent of the
operating hours per day and for 90 percent of the operating days per
calendar quarter. An operating day is any day the unit combusts any
municipal solid waste or refuse-derived fuel.
(d) If you do not obtain the minimum data required in paragraphs
(a) through
[[Page 47256]]
(c) of this section, you are in violation of this data collection
requirement and you must notify the Administrator according to
Sec. 60.1885(e).
Model Rule--Recordkeeping
Sec. 60.1830 What records must I keep?
You must keep four types of records:
(a) Operator training and certification.
(b) Stack tests.
(c) Continuously monitored pollutants and parameters.
(d) Carbon feed rate.
Sec. 60.1835 Where must I keep my records and for how long?
(a) Keep all records onsite in paper copy or electronic format
unless the Administrator approves another format.
(b) Keep all records on each municipal waste combustion unit for at
least 5 years.
(c) Make all records available for submittal to the Administrator,
or for onsite review by an inspector.
Sec. 60.1840 What records must I keep for operator training and
certification?
You must keep records of six items:
(a) Records of provisional certifications. Include three items:
(1) For your municipal waste combustion plant, names of the chief
facility operator, shift supervisors, and control room operators who
are provisionally certified by the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers or an equivalent State-approved certification program.
(2) Dates of the initial provisional certifications.
(3) Documentation showing current provisional certifications.
(b) Records of full certifications. Include three items:
(1) For your municipal waste combustion plant, names of the chief
facility operator, shift supervisors, and control room operators who
are fully certified by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers or
an equivalent State-approved certification program.
(2) Dates of initial and renewal full certifications.
(3) Documentation showing current full certifications.
(c) Records showing completion of the operator training course.
Include three items:
(1) For your municipal waste combustion plant, names of the chief
facility operator, shift supervisors, and control room operators who
have completed the EPA or State municipal waste combustion operator
training course. Dates on which each person completed the operator
training course.
(2) Dates of completion of the operator training course.
(3) Documentation showing completion of operator training course.
(d) Records of reviews for plant-specific operating manuals.
Include three items:
(1) Names of persons who have reviewed the operating manual.
(2) Date of the initial review.
(3) Dates of
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.