Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 27, 2000 / Proposed Rules 39581

The proposed rule would not directly

affect any small entities. Only VA

beneficiaries could be directly affected.

Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b),

these amendments are exempt from the

initial and final regulatory flexibility

analysis requirements of sections 603

and 604.

(The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

program numbers are 64.100, 64.101, 64.104,

64.105, 64.106, 64.109, 64.110, and 64.127.)

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 3

Administrative practice and

procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,

Health care, Pensions, Veterans,

Vietnam.

Approved: June 14, 2000.

Togo D. West, Jr.,

Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, 38 CFR Part 3 is proposed to

be amended as follows:

PART 3—ADJUDICATION

Subpart A—Pension, Compensation,

and Dependency and Indemnity

Compensation

1. The authority citation for Part 3,

subpart A continues to read as follows:

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless

otherwise noted.

§ 3.203 [Amended]

2. In § 3.203, paragraph (a)(1) is

revised by adding ‘‘or, if the copy was

submitted by an accredited agent,

attorney, or service organization

representative who has successfully

completed VA-prescribed training on

military records, and who certifies that

it is a true and exact copy of either an

original document or of a copy issued

by the service department or a public

custodian of records;’’ after ‘‘custody;’’.

[FR Doc. 00–16163 Filed 6–26–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 63 and 266

[FRL–6721–8]

NESHAPS: Standards for Hazardous

Air Pollutants for Hazardous Waste

Boilers and Industrial Furnaces; Notice

of Data Availability

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of data availability for

future Phase II combustion rulemaking.

SUMMARY: This notice of data

availability presents for public comment

the data base the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA or Agency)

plans to use to propose National

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants (NESHAPs) for hazardous

waste burning boilers, halogen acid

furnaces, and sulfuric acid recovery

furnaces (our Phase II combustion

rulemaking). We are providing this

opportunity for comment to ensure that

the data base used to establish standards

in the Phase II combustion rulemaking

is as accurate and complete as possible.

DATES: Comments must be submitted by

August 28, 2000.

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment on

this NODA, you must send an original

and two copies of the comments

referencing Docket Number F–2000–

RC2A–FFFFF to: RCRA Information

Center (RIC), Office of Solid Waste

(5305G), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency Headquarters (EPA HQ), Ariel

Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460–

0002; or, (2) if using special delivery,

such as overnight express service: RIC,

Crystal Gateway One, 1235 Jefferson

Davis Highway, First Floor, Arlington,

VA 22202. You may also submit

comments electronically following the

directions in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section below.

You may view public comments and

supporting materials in the RIC. The RIC

is open from 9 am to 4 pm Monday

through Friday, excluding Federal

holidays. To review docket materials,

we recommend that you make an

appointment by calling 703–603–9230.

You may copy up to 100 pages from any

regulatory document at no charge.

Additional copies cost $ 0.15 per page.

For information on accessing an

electronic copy of the data base, see the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

general information, call the RCRA

Hotline at 1–800–424–9346 or TDD 1–

800–553–7672 (hearing impaired).

Callers within the Washington

Metropolitan Area must dial 703–412–

9810 or TDD 703–412–3323 (hearing

impaired). The RCRA Hotline is open

Monday’–Friday, 9 am to 6 pm, Eastern

Standard Time. For more information

on specific aspects of this NODA,

contact Mr. H. Scott Rauenzahn at 703–

308–8477, rauenzahn.scott@epa.gov, or

write him at the Office of Solid Waste,

5302W, U.S. EPA, Ariel Rios Building,

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Submittal of Comments

You may submit comments

electronically by sending electronic

mail through the Internet to: rcradocket@epamail.epa.gov. You should

identify comments in electronic format

with the docket number F–2000–RC2A–

FFFFF. You must submit all electronic

comments as an ASCII (text) file,

avoiding the use of special characters or

any type of encryption. The official

record for this action will be kept in the

paper form. Accordingly, we will

transfer all comments received

electronically into paper form and place

them in the official record which will

also include all comments submitted

directly in writing. The official record is

the paper record maintained at the RIC

as described above. We may seek

clarification of electronic comments that

are garbled in transmission or during

conversion to paper form.

You should not electronically submit

any confidential business information

(CBI). You must submit an original and

two copies of CBI under separate cover

to: RCRA CBI Document Control Officer,

Office of Solid Waste (5305W), U.S.

EPA, Ariel Rios Building, 1200

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

If you do not submit comments

electronically, we are asking prospective

commenters to voluntarily submit one

additional copy of their comments on

labeled personal computer diskettes in

ASCII (text) format or a word processing

format that can be converted to ASCII

(text). It is essential that you specify on

the disk label the word processing

software and version/edition as well as

the commenter’s name. This will allow

us to convert the comments into one of

the word processing formats used by the

Agency. Please use mailing envelopes

designed to protect the diskettes. We

emphasize that submission of diskettes

is not mandatory, nor will it result in

any advantage or disadvantage to any

commenter.

Obtaining the Database Electronically

The data base can be obtained either

from the RIC as described above in the

Addresses section, or by downloading

from the Internet. If you want to

download the data base over the

Internet, you can do so from our ‘‘HWC

MACT’’ web site: http://www.epa.gov/

hwcmact/ph2noda1. Please consult the

web page for specific instructions on

how to download the data base.

Clarification of Comments Requested

In today’s NODA we request that

owners and operators of hazardous

waste burning boilers, halogen acid

39582 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 27, 2000 / Proposed Rules

furnaces, and sulfuric acid recovery

furnaces review our data base to ensure

that it is as accurate and complete as

possible, and to provide corrections and

additions in the form of comments to

this notice. We request comment only

on the accuracy and completeness of the

data base at this time. We do not seek

nor will we use or respond to comments

on how to use the data base to establish

MACT standards. Rather, we will

publish for comment this subject and all

other aspects of the NESHAPS

rulemaking in a future notice of

proposed rulemaking.

Table of Contents

I. Background

II. Am I Affected by This Document?

III. How Did EPA Obtain These Data?

IV. What Quality Assurance or Quality

Control Did EPA Use When Creating the

Data Base?

V. What Data and Information are Available

and How is the Data Base Organized?

VI. What Data Handling Decisions Did EPA

Make and What Are the Data Gaps?

I. Background

This is a notice of data availability

and invitation for comment on the data

base we will use to support the future

Phase II Maximum Achievable Control

Technology (MACT) standards for

hazardous waste combustors (HWCs).

The Phase II HWC MACT rulemaking

covers boilers, halogen acid furnaces

(HAFs), and sulfuric acid recovery

furnaces (burning hazardous waste for

energy recovery and not those that are

just processing spent sulfuric acid)

(SARFs). We expect the MACT

standards developed under the Phase II

rulemaking will supersede the emission

standards for these sources under

authority of the Resource Conservation

and Recovery Act (RCRA), codified at 40

CFR Part 266, Subpart H. Today’s

document is the first step in developing

technology-based MACT emissions

standards for hazardous waste burning

boilers, HAFs, and SARFs.

Additionally, we are developing

MACT standards for nonhazardous

waste burning boilers and process

heaters under a separate but parallel

rulemaking. We divided the boiler

universe into two separate rulemakings,

because hazardous waste burning may

affect the type and concentration of

hazardous air pollutants and because

hazardous waste burning boilers are

currently subject to specific emission

controls under RCRA. For information

on the nonhazardous waste boiler

rulemaking, you may contact Mr. James

A. Eddinger on 919–541–5426.

II. Am I Affected by This Document?

Sources affected by this document

include all hazardous waste burning

boilers, halogen acid furnaces, and

sulfuric acid recovery furnaces (not

including those furnaces just processing

spent sulfuric acid), as defined in 40

CFR 260.10.

III. How Did EPA Obtain These Data?

We gathered these data from

information already submitted by these

sources to EPA Regional Offices or State

agencies about their most recent RCRA

compliance testing, including

certifications of compliance (CoC), trial

burns, and risk burn testing. In total, we

obtained test reports for 115 individual

sources. An additional 38 sources are

‘‘data in lieu of’’ sources, i.e., sources for

which data from a very similar source

was accepted in lieu of performing a

compliance test for that specific source.

Thus, our current data base represents

the most recent compliance test results

for 153 individual boilers, HAFs, and

SARFs (burning hazardous waste for

energy recovery and not those that are

just processing spent sulfuric acid)

nationwide. With the exception of

sources currently operating under the

small quantity on-site burner exemption

in 40 CFR 266.108, we believe this data

base represents nearly all boilers, HAFs

and SARFs subject to Part 266, Subpart

H.

Boilers, HAFs, and SARFs burning

small quantities of hazardous waste are

exempt from Part 266, Subpart H, under

§ 266.108. Consequently, we do not

have emissions or facility design and

operation data for these sources. These

sources are nonetheless potentially

affected sources that will be evaluated

for MACT emission standards at the

same time we are evaluating other

affected sources. To assist in the

evaluation of these small quantity

burners, we request that boiler, HAF,

and SARF sources that are currently

exempt under § 266.108 provide

available information on the items listed

in the Appendix to today’s notice by the

close of the comment period.

IV. What Quality Assurance or Quality

Control Did EPA Use When Creating the

Data Base?

We took steps to ensure that all

pertinent data were accurately extracted

from the collected test reports and

included in the data base. The data base

report, explained in Section V below,

contains a detailed description of the

quality assurance and quality control

steps taken to avoid inaccurate data

interpretation and data entry errors. We

recognize, however, that mistakes can

occur and request that owners and

operators review the data for their

source(s) and provide any necessary

corrections.

V. What Data and Information are

Available and How Is the Data Base

Organized?

Today’s document covers: (1) A data

base report; (2) performance data and

information files for individual sources;

(3) an emissions and feedrate data

summary sheet; and (4) a facility

description summary sheet. Each of

these items is explained below. This

information is available both at the

RCRA docket and electronically on our

web site at www.epa.gov/hwcmact/

ph2noda1.

1. Data Base Report

The Phase II HWC MACT Data Base

Report discusses the organization of the

data base, describes the test report

information collected from Regional and

state offices, and discusses the quality

assurance and quality control plan. This

report also describes the type of data

and information extracted from the test

reports of affected sources.

2. Data and Information File for

Individual Sources

Each individual source with test data

has a separate file containing

performance data and operation

information. The data base contains all

available stack gas emissions data

(including data on metals, chlorine,

particulate matter, dioxins and furans,

carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbons),

process operating data (including

hazardous waste and auxiliary fuel

compositions and feedrates), and facility

equipment design and operational data

(including combustor and air pollution

control device temperatures, pressures,

etc.).

These individual source files are

provided on the internet in two

electronic file formats: Portable

Document Format (PDF) and

spreadsheet. PDF files can be viewed

and printed using the free software

program Adobe Acrobat. One limitation

of PDF is that you are unable to see the

formulas we used to perform

calculations required to present all data

in consistent units. If you would like to

review these formulas, you need to

download the data in spreadsheet

format. To use the spreadsheets, you

must use Microsoft Excel or another

program that can read Excel 97 format

files.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 27, 2000 / Proposed Rules 39583

3. Emissions and Feedrate Data

Summary Sheet

This sheet aggregates key emissions

and feedrate information from

individual source files. The sheet

includes information on the source’s air

pollution control system, system design,

types of hazardous waste and auxiliary

fuel used, heat input capacity, stack gas

emission concentrations of individual

hazardous air pollutants, metals, and

chlorine feedrates, and stack gas

conditions.

4. Facility Description Summary Sheet

This sheet aggregates descriptive

information for sources. The sheet

includes the facility name and location,

identification number, system design,

air pollution control system, types of

hazardous waste and auxiliary fuel

used, and heat input capacity.

VI. What Data Handling Decisions Did

EPA Make and What Are the Data

Gaps?

In this section, we describe the data

handling protocol used during

development of the data base. We also

identify additional data that we want

and request that commenters submit

such information as available.

1. Excluding Data From Sources No

Longer Burning Hazardous Waste

The data base does not include

information from sources no longer

burning hazardous waste. If, during our

data collection effort, we learned that a

source had stopped burning hazardous

waste and is undergoing, or has

indicated to regulatory officials its plan

to begin, RCRA closure procedures, then

we did not obtain a copy of that source’s

test report(s). Although such data may

or may not indicate the capabilities of

control equipment in general, we have

concluded that the data collected from

currently operating combustors

represent the source categories and is

adequate to develop future emission

standards under Section 112(d).

2. Excluding Data From Previous

Compliance Testing

As mentioned earlier, we collected

only the most recent testing information

for a source because these data best

represent current design and operation.

In nearly all instances, the dates of the

test reports collected were either 1998

or 1999. If a more recent RCRA

compliance test report is available (i.e.,

more recent than the test report entered

into our current data base), we

encourage owners and operators to

submit a copy of this more recent report

as a comment to this notice. We request

that commenters not submit data from

testing conducted prior to the date of

the test report in the data base, nor do

we intend to use these older data.

3. The Format of the Feed Constituent

Data

The data base contains concentrations

of various chemicals in the feed to the

boiler or furnace during a given test

condition. The units of measurement

used to report feed stream

concentrations are not uniform across

all sources. For example, feed chemicals

may be reported as ‘‘grams per hour’’ in

one test report, and ‘‘parts per million

by weight’’ in another. To make the feed

data consistent across all sources, we

converted all feedstream concentrations

to a common unit called the ‘‘maximum

theoretical emissions concentration’’ or

MTEC. The MTEC is calculated by

dividing the constituent feedrate by the

gas flow rate. The MTEC is expressed in

the units of the associated emission

standard.

4. Missing Source Description

Information

Some test reports omitted source

description information. For example,

many of the boiler source descriptions

are incomplete. A report might simply

say the source is a boiler, but not

whether it is a watertube or firetube

boiler. In other cases, we were unable to

determine what emission control

equipment, if any, is installed on the

source. We request that owners and

operators provide any such missing

source description information as a

comment to this notice.

We also request additional

information regarding the heat recovery

systems used at many HAFs. In a few

cases, the test report was not clear

whether the HAF has a waste heat boiler

(i.e., a boiler that is not integrally

designed with the combustion

chamber), whether the HAF has a boiler

that is integrally designed with the

combustion chamber, or whether the

HAF has no energy recovery features.

This information is useful in evaluating

whether design and operating features

can affect emissions of hazardous air

pollutants and control strategies.

We also request process information

for HAFs with waste heat boilers. We

would like information on the flue gas

temperature profile across the waste

heat boiler, or at a minimum, the

entrance and exit flue gas temperatures,

and the temperature of the inlet water

and exit steam (or heated water) across

the tubes to accurately evaluate these

systems. We ask owners and operators

of HAFs with waste heat boilers to

provide this information, if it exists,

regarding the operation of the waste

heat boiler during each test condition.

Some test reports for boilers list ‘‘HCl

Absorbers’’ as an emissions control

device. However, we understand that

HCl absorbers are generally used by

HAFs to produce HCl. To properly

classify these devices, we request

clarification as to whether these sources

use the HCl absorber to produce HCl

product, or whether the absorber is used

as a wet scrubber.

5. Submitting Additional Emissions

Data and Corrections to the Data Base

As stated earlier, we encourage

submittal of more recent test data than

now appear in our data base. If the data

are generated during a CoC, Trial Burn,

or Risk Burn test that must be submitted

to a regulatory authority, we will infer

that the QA/QC of your data is

satisfactory. In this case, please submit

the pages from the test report that

document the missing or incorrect

results and the cover page of the test

report as reference. If the results come

from other tests, you should send us the

complete test report, including the QA/

QC procedures followed.

In addition, we request that you

submit the feed constituent information

(i.e., the concentration or mass flow rate

of metals, chlorine, and when

applicable, organic chemicals) and the

process information (i.e., how the

combustion source and emissions

control devices were operating)

observed at the time of the test. Both the

feed constituent and process conditions

impact the resulting emissions and,

more importantly, help us to understand

the circumstances surrounding a

particular test outcome.

Dated: June 16, 2000.

Elizabeth A. Cotsworth,

Director, Office of Solid Waste.

Note: the following appendix will not

appear in the CFR.

Appendix

Data Request Information for Small Quantity

Burners

1. EPA Facility ID No. (i.e.,

TXD012345678).

2. Company, Operator, and Facility Name.

3. Facility Location (City, State).

4. Name of Combustor Unit Used by

Facility (e.g., Boiler No. 1).

5. Combustor Type and Characteristics

including combustion device and design,

manufacturer, installation date, size, fuel

input capacity, and steam generating

characteristics.

6. Air Pollution Control System and

Characteristics including device design and

operating characteristics.

7. Hazardous Waste Characteristics

including types, physical properties

39584 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 124 / Tuesday, June 27, 2000 / Proposed Rules

(viscosity, form), heating value, and the

concentrations of chlorine, arsenic,

beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, lead,

mercury, nickel, and selenium

8. Other Fuels Burned (e.g., natural gas,

fuel oil, etc.).

9. Hazardous Waste and Other Fuel

Feedrates (e.g., lb/yr for waste streams and

fuel oils, ft3/yr for natural gas, etc.).

10. Stack Characteristics including stack

height, diameter, and stack gas velocity and

temperature.

11. Stack Gas Emissions Testing Results

including:

• Stack gas emissions rates of particulate

matter

• HCl

• Cl2

• Metals

• CO

• HC

• Information on stack gas flow rate

• Temperature

• Sootblowing (and whether and how PM

and metals emissions data have been

adjusted to account for soot blowing)

• Oxygen level

• Description of purpose of testing

• Test operating conditions

• Quality assurance/quality control

procedures.

[FR Doc. 00–16073 Filed 6–26–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[I.D. 061500E]

RIN 0648–AL51

Fisheries off West Coast States and in

the Western Pacific; Amendment 14

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability of

amendment to fishery management

plan; request for comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the

Pacific Fishery Management Council

(Council) has submitted Amendment 14

to the Pacific Coast Salmon Plan for

Secretarial review. Amendment 14 has

multiple parts. The major parts of the

amendment include revising the Salmon

FMP to bring it into compliance with

the 1996 amendments to the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and

Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens

Act), including designation of essential

fish habitat (EFH) and new requirements

to reduce bycatch, prevent overfishing,

and rebuild stocks that are overfished;

establishing a new recreational

allocation for the Port of La Push,

Washington and adding flexibility to

deviate from specified recreational Port

allocations based on the agreement of

representatives from the affected Ports;

and establishing preseason flexibility to

deviate from commercial and

recreational gear allocations and

recreational port allocations North of

Cape Falcon, OR in order to access

marked hatchery salmon in selective

fisheries. The majority of Amendment

14 changes are to the Salmon FMP,

while only some of the changes will be

codified in the regulations and are

contained in the proposed rule.

Specifically, the proposed rule makes

minor changes to language regarding

escapement and management goals,

implements a new recreational

allocation to the Port of La Push and

adjusts the Neah Bay allocation relative

to La Push, adds preseason flexibility

for recreational port allocations North of

Cape Falcon, and implements preseason

flexibility in setting recreational port

allocation or recreational and

commercial allocations North of Cape

Falcon to take advantage of selective

fishing opportunities.

DATES: Comments on Amendment 14

must be received at the appropriate

address or fax number, (see

ADDRESSES) no later than 5 p.m.,

Pacific daylight time August 28, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to William Stelle, Jr., Regional

Administrator, Northwest Region,

NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE.,

Seattle, WA 98115-0070, or sent via

facsimile (fax) to: 206-526-6376; or to

Rodney R. McInnis, Acting Regional

Administrator, Southwest Region,

NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard,

Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213,

or sent via facsimile (fax) to: 562-980-

4018. Comments will not be accepted if

submitted via email or Internet.

Copies of Amendment 14 and the

Supplemental Environmental Impact

Statement/Regulatory Impact Review

(RIR)/Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis are available from Dr. Donald

O. McIsaac, Executive Director, Pacific

Fishery Management Council, 2130 SW

Fifth Ave., Suite 224, Portland, OR

97201.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christopher L. Wright at 206–526–6140,

Svein Fougner at 562–980–4005, or the

Pacific Fishery Management Council at

503–326–6352.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that

each Regional Fishery Management

Council submit any new fishery

management plan (FMP) or plan

amendment it prepares to NMFS for

review and approval, disapproval, or

partial approval. The Magnuson-Stevens

Act also requires that NMFS, upon

receiving an FMP or amendment,

immediately publish a notification in

the Federal Register that the FMP or

amendment is available for public

review and comment. NMFS will

consider the public comments received

during the comment period in

determining whether to approve the

FMP or amendment.

The major provisions of Amendment

14 that will bring the Salmon FMP into

compliance with the 1996 amendments

to the Magnuson-Stevens Act include:

An identification and description of

EFH, including a discussion of threats to

EFH and recommended measures to

conserve and enhance EFH; a new

definition of optimum yield; a

definition and new requirements for

bycatch; and new requirements for

prevention of overfishing and rebuilding

of stocks that are overfished. A new

section has been added to the Salmon

FMP in Chapter 1, entitled ‘‘What the

Plan Covers,’’ that provides a clear

description of what the Salmon FMP

covers, and places information on

fishery impacts to salmon stocks in the

chapter on harvest. In addition, the

amendment updates the fishery

description to reference new appendices

to the Salmon FMP.

Amendment 14 also implements a

new recreational allocation to the Port

of La Push and adjusts the Neah Bay

allocation relative to La Push, adds

preseason flexibility for recreational

port allocations North of Cape Falcon,

and implements preseason flexibility in

setting recreational port allocations or

recreational and commercial allocations

North of Cape Falcon to take advantage

of selective fishing opportunities.

The EFH provisions of Amendment

14 identify and describe EFH in aquatic

areas including the exclusive economic

zone, nearshore waters, and rivers. The

EFH provisions of the MagnusonStevens Act require Federal agencies

that authorize, fund, or undertake

actions that may adversely affect EFH to

consult with NMFS, and require NMFS

to provide non-binding conservation

recommendations to Federal and state

agencies regarding actions that would

adversely affect EFH. In most cases EFH

consultations can be combined with

other environmental reviews that are

required under other laws.

The overfishing provisions of

Amendment 14 are guided by the

conservation needs of the species

covered by the Salmon FMP. The

management goals of the Salmon FMP,

referred to as ‘‘conservation objectives,’’

are generally defined in terms of stockVerDate 11<MAY>2000 12:44 Jun 26, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\27JNP1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 27JNP1