Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3509

SUMMARY: OSM is correcting a proposed

rule that appeared in the Federal

Register of December 29, 1997 (62 FR

67592). This document announced

receipt of a proposed amendment to the

Texas abandoned mine land reclamation

plan (hereinafter referred to as the

‘‘Texas program’’) under the Surface

Mining Control and Reclamation Act of

1997 (SMCRA).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael C. Wolfrom, Director, Tulsa

Field Office, Telephone: (918) 581–

6430.

In Federal Register document 97–

33662 beginning on page 67592 in the

issue of Monday, December 29, 1997,

make the following corrections:

1. On page 67593 in the first column

under the heading SUMMARY, ‘‘acquire’’

in line 24 should be ‘‘acquired.’’

2. On page 67593 in the first column

under the heading ADDRESSES, ‘‘Texas’’

in line five of the third paragraph

should be ‘‘Oklahoma.’’

3. On page 67593 in the second

column under number 1.a. in line two,

‘‘Sec. 12,805’’ should be ‘‘Sec. 12.805.’’

4. On page 67594 in the first column,

in line three, the ‘‘p’’ in ‘‘paragraph’’

should be capitalized.

5. On page 67594 in the first column,

in line 17, the ‘‘i’’ in ‘‘it’’ should be

capitalized.

6. On page 67594 in the third column

under number 17 in line 5 of the

paragraph, the ‘‘c’’ in ‘‘commission’’

should be capitalized.

7. On page 67595 in the first column

in the heading of number 22, ‘‘Section

21.820’’ should be ‘‘Section 12.820.’’

8. On page 67595 in the first column

in the paragraph under the heading

‘‘Public Hearing,’’ the word

‘‘INFORMAITON’’ in line three should

be ‘‘INFORMATION.’’

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 904

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: January 15, 1998.

Charles E. Sandberg,

Acting Regional Director, Mid-Continent

Regional Coordinating Center.

[FR Doc. 98–1652 Filed 1–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[AD–FRL–5951–5]

Federal Plan Requirements for Large

Municipal Waste Combustors

Constructed on or Before September

20, 1994

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: On December 19, 1995, EPA

adopted emission guidelines for existing

municipal waste combustor (MWC)

units. Section 129 of the Act requires

States with existing MWC units subject

to the guidelines to submit plans to EPA

that implement and enforce the

emission guidelines. The State plans

were due on December 19, 1996. States

without MWC units subject to the

emission guidelines must submit a

negative declaration letter. Following

receipt of a State plan, EPA has up to

6 months to approve or disapprove the

plan. If a State with existing MWC units

does not submit an approvable plan

within 2 years after promulgation of the

guidelines (i.e., December 19, 1997), the

Clean Air Act (ACT) requires EPA to

develop, implement, and enforce a

Federal plan for MWC units in that

State. In this action EPA proposes a

Federal plan to implement emission

guidelines for MWC units located in

States where State plans have not been

approved. For most of these States, the

Federal plan would be an interim action

because when a State plan is approved,

the Federal plan will no longer apply to

MWC units covered by the State plan.

This proposed MWC Federal plan

includes the same required elements as

a State plan as specified in 40 CFR part

60, subpart B. These elements are:

identification of legal authority;

identification of mechanisms for

implementation; inventory of affected

facilities; emission inventory; emission

limits; compliance schedules; public

hearing requirements; reporting and

recordkeeping requirements; and public

progress reports. Also discussed in this

preamble is Federal plan

implementation and delegation of

authority.

DATES: Comments. Comments on this

proposal must be received on or before

March 24, 1998.

Public Hearing. A public hearing will

be held in Washington, DC if

individuals request to speak. In

addition, a public hearing will be held

in any State with an MWC unit that

would be covered by the proposed

MWC Federal plan, if individuals

request to speak. Requests to speak must

be received by February 23, 1998. If

requests to speak are received, one or

more public hearings will be held. A

message regarding the date and location

of the public hearing(s) may be accessed

by calling (919) 541–5339 after February

23, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments on

this proposal should be submitted (in

duplicate, if possible) to: Air and

Radiation Docket and Information

Center (MC–6102), Attention Docket No.

A–97–45, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20460. Comments and

data may be filed electronically by

following the instructions in section I of

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of this

preamble.

Public Hearing. If timely requests to

speak at a public hearing are received,

a public hearing will be held in

Washington, DC or in any State with an

MWC unit that would be covered by the

proposed MWC Federal plan. Persons

wishing to present oral testimony

should notify Ms. Julie Andresen,

Program Review Group, Information

Transfer and Program Integration

Division (MD–12), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Research Triangle

Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone

(919) 541–5339 at EPA. A message

regarding the date and location of the

public hearing(s) may be accessed by

calling (919) 541–5339.

Docket. Docket numbers A–89–08, A–

90–45, and A–97–45 contain the

supporting information for this

proposed rule and the supporting

information for EPA’s promulgation of

emission guidelines for existing MWC

units. These dockets are available for

public inspection and copying between

8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday

through Friday, at EPA’s Air and

Radiation Docket and Information

Center (Mail Code 6102), 401 M Street,

SW, Washington, DC 20460, or by

calling (202) 260–7548. The docket is

located at the above address in Room

M–1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor,

central mall). A reasonable fee may be

charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

information regarding this proposal,

contact Ms. Julie Andresen at (919) 541–

5339, Program Review Group,

Information Transfer and Program

Integration Division (MD–12), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

27711. For technical information,

contact Mr. Walt Stevenson at (919)

541–5264, Combustion Group, Emission

Standards Division (MD–13), U.S.
3510 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

1The small category comprised all MWC units

located at facilities with total capacity to combust

between 35 mg/day (40 tons per day), and 225 mg/

day (250 tons per day) of MSW. The large category

comprised all MWC units located at facilities with

total capacity to combust greater than 250 tons per

day of MSW.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

27711. For information regarding the

implementation of this Federal plan,

contact the appropriate Regional Office

(table 2) as shown in section I of

Supplementary Information.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background of MWC Regulations and

Affected Facilities

A. Background of MWC Regulations

On February 11, 1991 (56 FR 5488),

EPA promulgated in the Federal

Register emission guidelines for existing

MWC units (40 CFR part 60, subpart Ca)

under authority of section 111 of the Act

as amended in 1977. On September 20,

1994, EPA proposed revised emission

guidelines for MWC units (40 CFR part

60, subpart Cb) under sections 111 and

129 of the Act as amended in 1990. On

December 19, 1995, EPA issued final

emission guidelines applicable to small

and large categories of MWC units.1 See

60 FR 65387. On April 8, 1997, the

United States Court of Appeals for the

District of Columbia Circuit vacated

subpart Cb as it applies to MWC units

with an individual capacity to combust

less than or equal to 250 tons per day

of municipal solid waste (MSW) (small

MWC units), and all cement kilns

combusting MSW, consistent with their

opinion in Davis County Solid Waste

Management and Recovery District v.

EPA, 101 F.3d 1395 (D.C. Cir. 1996),

amended, 108 F.3d 1454 (D.C. Cir.

1997). As a result, subpart Cb applies

only to MWC units with an individual

capacity to combust more than 250 tons

per day of MSW per unit (large MWC

units). On August 25, 1997 EPA

published changes to the emission

guidelines to address the court decision

(62 FR 45116). Those changes went into

effect on October 24, 1997.

States with existing large MWC units

subject to the emission guidelines were

required to submit to EPA a plan that

implements and enforces the guidelines

within 1 year after promulgation of the

guidelines, or by December 19, 1996.

The court’s order that vacated the

applicability of the guidelines to small

MWC units and cement kilns did not

affect the due date or the required

content of State plans for large MWC

units. The State plans due date

remained December 19, 1996. Section

129(b)(3) of the Act requires EPA to

develop, implement, and enforce a

Federal plan for large units located in

States that have not submitted an

approvable plan within 2 years after

promulgation of the guidelines, or by

December 19, 1997. This action

proposes a Federal plan for MWC units

that are not covered by a State plan. The

elements of the Federal plan are

summarized in section II of this

preamble.

B. MWC Federal Plan and Affected

Facilities

This proposed MWC Federal plan

would affect all MWC units with a

combustion capacity greater than 250

tons per day of municipal solid waste

(large MWC units) that commenced

construction on or before September 20,

1994 that are located in: (1) Any State

for which a State plan has not been

approved; (2) any State whose State

plan has been approved and

subsequently vacated in whole or in

part; or (3) any State with an approved

State plan that subsequently revises any

component of the plan (e.g., the

underlying legal authority or

enforceable mechanism) such that the

State plan is no longer as protective as

the emission guidelines. The specific

applicability of this plan is described in

§§ 62.14100 and 62.14102 of subpart

FFF.

This proposed MWC Federal plan

would not affect an MWC unit covered

by an EPA approved State plan. If a

State submits a State plan and that State

plan is approved before promulgation of

the Federal plan, the promulgated MWC

Federal plan would not apply to MWC

units covered by that State plan.

Furthermore, promulgation of this MWC

Federal plan does not preclude a State

from submitting a State plan later. If a

State submits a State plan after

promulgation of the MWC Federal plan,

EPA will review and approve or

disapprove the plan. Upon approval of

the State plan, the Federal plan would

no longer apply. The EPA will

periodically amend the exclusion table

in § 62.14102 of subpart FFF to identify

MWC units covered in the approved

State plan that are excluded from

Federal plan applicability. (See the

discussion in State Submits a State Plan

After Large MWC Units Located in the

State Are Subject to the Federal Plan—

Full Transfer of Authority Through

State Plan Approval in section VI of this

preamble.) States are, therefore,

encouraged to continue their efforts to

develop and submit State plans to EPA

for approval.

To clarify which MWC units would

and would not be covered, this

proposed Federal plan lists in the

exclusion table in § 62.14102 of subpart

FFF those units, by State, to which the

MWC Federal plan would not apply.

Only the MWC units listed in that table

are excluded from the proposed Federal

plan. Large MWC units not listed in the

exclusion table would be covered by the

Federal plan. For example, if a large

MWC is located in a State and the large

unit is not either specifically listed in

the applicability section of the State

plan or covered by a general

applicability clause in the State plan,

the large MWC unit would be subject to

the Federal plan. Also, large MWC units

overlooked by a State that submitted a

negative declaration letter would be

subject to the Federal plan. As stated

above, EPA expects additional State

plans to be approved prior to

promulgation of this rule. The

promulgated Federal plan would list in

the exclusion table, those additional

units in States in which an approved

State plan applies.

C. Status of State Plan Submittals

Many States are making significant

progress on their State plans and EPA

expects many State plans to be

submitted in the next few months. Table

1 summarizes the status of State plans

and negative declarations. The table is

based on information from Regional

Offices (A–97–45, II–I–5). The status of

State plan submittals as of December 19,

1997 is as follows:

• The EPA has approved the State plans

for Oregon and Florida and the MWC units

covered in those State plans would not be

covered by the proposed MWC Federal plan

(The EPA has reviewed and approved the

State plan for Illinois. However, the Federal

Register notice approving the plan has not

been published. Therefore, the approval of

the Illinois State plan is not reflected

elsewhere in this proposal.);

• The EPA has received a negative

declaration letter from States listed in section

I of table 1 stating that there are no large

MWC units in these States; thus EPA is not

expecting a State plan to be submitted from

these States. However, in the unlikely event

that large MWC units are subsequently

identified in any of these States, this Federal

plan would automatically apply to them;

• The EPA has received a State plan from

States listed in section II of table 1 and the

State plans currently are being reviewed by

EPA. The proposed Federal plan would cover

large MWC units in these States, but if these

State plans are approved, the promulgated

Federal plan would not cover units

addressed in the approved State plans.

• The EPA has not received a State plan

or a negative declaration letter from the

States listed in section III of table 1. The large

MWC units in these States would be subject

to the proposed MWC Federal plan until a

State plan applicable to large MWC units is

approved by EPA.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3511

TABLE 1.—STATUS OF STATES

WITHOUT AN APPROVED STATE PLAN a

State Status b

I. Negative declaration submitted to EPA

Region I:

Rhode Island ............................. A

Vermont ..................................... A

Region II:

Puerto Rico ............................... A

Virgin Islands ............................ A

Region III:

Delaware ................................... A

District of Columbia ................... A

West Virginia ............................. A

Region IV:

Kentucky ................................... A

Mississippi ................................. A

North Carolina ........................... A

Region V:

Wisconsin .................................. A

Region VI:

Arkansas ................................... A

Louisiana ................................... A

New Mexico .............................. A

Texas ........................................ A

Region VII:

Iowa ........................................... A

Kansas ...................................... A

Missouri ..................................... A

Nebraska ................................... A

Region VIII:

Colorado .................................... A

Montana .................................... A

North Dakota ............................. A

South Dakota ............................ A

Utah ........................................... A

Wyoming ................................... A

Region IX:

Arizona ...................................... A

Nevada ...................................... A

Region X:

Alaska ....................................... A

Idaho ......................................... A

II. State plan submitted to EPA

Region II:

New York .................................. B

TABLE 1.—STATUS OF STATES WITHOUT AN APPROVED STATE PLAN a—

Continued

State Status b

Region III:

Maryland ................................... B

Region IV:

Georgia ..................................... B

Tennessee ................................ B

Region V:

Illinois ........................................ B

III. State plan or negative declaration not

submitted to EPA

Region I:

Connecticut ............................... C

New Hampshire ........................ C

Maine ........................................ C

Massachusetts .......................... C

Region II:

New Jersey ............................... C

Region III:

Pennsylvania ............................. C

Virginia ...................................... C

Region IV:

Alabama .................................... C

South Carolina .......................... C

Region V:

Indiana ...................................... C

Michigan .................................... C

Minnesota .................................. C

Ohio ........................................... C

Region VI:

Oklahoma .................................. C

Region VII:

None.

Region VIII:

None.

Region IX:

American Samoa ...................... C

California ................................... C

Guam ........................................ C

Hawaii ....................................... C

Northern Mariana Islands ......... C

Region X:

Washington ............................... C

aAny large MWC units in these States are

covered by the proposed Federal plan.

bStatus codes.

A=Negative declaration submitted. No State

plan is expected. However, in the unlikely

event that large MWC units are subsequently

identified in any of these States, this Federal

plan would automatically apply to them.

B=State plan has been submitted and is

being reviewed by EPA. If the plan is approved, MWC units in these States would not

be subject to the promulgated Federal plan.

C=State plan or negative declaration submittal has not been received.

While section 129 of the Act specifies

that the Federal plan would apply to

units in any State that has not submitted

an ‘‘approvable’’ plan by December 19,

1997, the proposed language in

§ 62.14100 refers to units in States for

which a State plan has not been

‘‘approved.’’ Because this Federal plan

will be promulgated in 1998, EPA

expects to have approved or

disapproved State plans that are

submitted by December 19, 1997. Thus,

when this Federal plan is promulgated,

any ‘‘approvable’’ State plans that were

submitted by December 19, 1997, will

likely have been ‘‘approved.’’

Regulated Entities. Entities regulated

by this action are existing MWC units

with capacities to combust greater than

250 tons per day of MSW unless the

unit is subject to a section 111(d)/129

State plan that has been approved by

EPA. The EPA projects that this

proposed MWC Federal plan could

initially affect up to 143 MWC units at

59 plants in 23 States. However, many

State plans are expected to be approved

by the time the Federal plan is

promulgated. Based on current

expectations, this Federal plan may

affect 53 MWC units at 21 plants by

June 1998 and 13 MWC units at 4 plants

by June 1999. Regulated categories and

entities include:

Category Examples of regulated entities

Industry and Local Government Agencies ......... Waste-to-energy plants that generate electricity or steam from the combustion of garbage by

feeding municipal waste into large furnaces.

Incinerators that combust trash but do not recover energy from the waste.

The foregoing table is not intended to

be exhaustive, but rather provides a

guide for readers regarding entities

likely to be regulated by this MWC

Federal plan. For specific applicability

criteria, see §§ 62.14100 and 62.14102 of

subpart FFF.

Electronic Submittal of Comments.

Comments and data may be submitted

electronically via electronic mail (Email) or on disk. Electronic comments

on this proposed rule may be filed via

E-mail at most Federal Depository

Libraries. E-mail submittals should be

sent to A-and-RDocket@epamail.epa.gov. No

confidential business information

should be submitted through E-mail.

Comments and data also will be

accepted on disks in WordPerfect 5.1 or

6.1 file format or ASCII file format.

Electronic comments must avoid the use

of special characters and any form of

encryption. All comments and data for

this proposal, whether in paper form or

electronic forms, must be identified by

docket number A–97–45.

Regional Office Contacts. For

information regarding the

implementation of the MWC Federal

plan, contact the appropriate EPA

Regional Office as shown in table 2.
3512 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 2.—EPA REGIONAL CONTACTS FOR MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTORS

Regional contact Phone No. Fax No.

John Courcier, U.S. EPA, Region I (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont), John F. Kennedy Federal Bldg., Boston, MA 02203–0001 ........................................... (617) 565–9462 (617) 565–4940

Christine DeRosa, U.S. EPA, Region II (New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands), 290

Broadway, New York, NY 10007–1866 ................................................................................................... (212) 637–4022 (212) 637–3901

James B. Topsale, U.S. EPA/3AP22, Region III (Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia), 841 Chestnut Bldg., Philadelphia, PA 19107 ............................................. (215) 556–2190 (215) 566–2134

Brian Beals, Scott Davis, U.S. EPA/APTMD, Region IV (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee), 345 Courtland St., N.E., Atlanta, GA 30365 ..... (404) 562–9098

(404) 562–9127

(404) 562–9095

Douglas Aburano (MN), Mark Palermo (IL, IN, OH), Rick Tonielli (MI), Charles Hatten (WI), U.S. EPA/

AT18J, Region V (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin), 77 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604 .......................................................................................................................................... (312) 353–6960

(312) 886–6082

(312) 886–6068

(312) 886–6031

(312) 886–5824

Mick Cote, U.S. EPA, Region VI (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas), 1445 Ross

Ave., Suite 1200, Dallas, TX 75202–2733 ............................................................................................... (214) 665–7219 (214) 665–7263

Wayne Kaiser, U.S. EPA, Region VII (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska), 726 Minnesota Ave., Kansas

City, KS 66101 ......................................................................................................................................... (913) 551–7603 (913) 551–7065

Mike Owens, U.S. EPA, Region VIII (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming), 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202–2466 ................................................................. (303) 312–6440 (303) 312–6064

Patricia Bowlin, U.S. EPA/Air 4, Region IX (American Somoa, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii,

Northern Mariana Islands, Nevada), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105 .......................... (415) 744–1188 (415) 744–1076

Catherine Woo, U.S. EPA, Region X (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington), 1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle,

WA 98101 ................................................................................................................................................. (206) 553–1814 (206) 553–0404

II. Required Elements of the Proposed

MWC Federal Plan

Sections 111(d) and 129 of the Act, as

amended, 42 U.S.C. 7411(d) and

7429(b)(2), require States to develop and

implement State plans for MWC units to

implement and enforce the promulgated

emission guidelines. Subparts B and Cb

of 40 CFR part 60 require States to

submit State plans that include

specified elements. Because this Federal

plan is being proposed in lieu of State

plans, it includes the same essential

elements: (1) identification of legal

authority, (2) identification of

mechanisms for implementation, (3)

inventory of affected facilities, (4)

emission inventory, (5) emission limits,

(6) compliance schedules, (7) public

hearing requirements, (8) reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, and (9)

public progress reports. Each State plan

element is summarized below as it

relates to this proposed MWC Federal

plan.

A. Legal Authority and Mechanisms for

Implementation

As a required element of a State plan,

a State must demonstrate that it has the

legal authority to adopt and implement

the emission requirements and

compliance schedules in the State plan.

The State also must identify the

enforceable State mechanism for

implementing the emission guidelines

(e.g., a State rule or other State

enforcement mechanism). Section

129(b)(3) of the Act requires EPA to

develop a Federal plan for States that do

not submit an approvable State plan

within 2 years after promulgation of the

emission guidelines. By proposing this

MWC Federal plan, EPA is fulfilling its

obligation under the Act to establish

emission limits and other requirements

for MWC units in States that have not

yet submitted approvable plans. The

EPA is proposing a Federal regulation

under the legal authority of the Act as

the mechanism to implement the

emission guidelines. However, as

discussed in section VI of this preamble,

implementation and enforcement of the

Federal plan can be delegated to State

and local agencies. Furthermore, when

a State plan is approved, the Federal

plan will no longer apply to MWC units

covered by a State plan.

B. Inventory of Affected MWC Units

As a required element, a State plan

must include a complete source

inventory of MWC units affected by the

emission guidelines. Consistent with the

requirement for State plans to include

an inventory of MWC units, docket A–

97–45 contains an inventory of large

MWC units covered by this proposed

MWC Federal plan. The inventory is

contained in a memorandum entitled

‘‘Inventory and Emission Estimates for

Large Municipal Waste Combustor Units

Covered by the Proposed Federal

Section 111(d)/129 Plan’’ (A–97–45, II–

B–1). Item II–B–1 serves both the MWC

inventory requirement and the MWC

emission inventory requirement, which

will be discussed in the following

section. The inventory is based on

information available to EPA during

development of the 1995 emission

guidelines and recent information from

EPA Regional Offices.

C. Inventory of Emissions

As a required element, a State plan

must include an emission inventory for

MWC units subject to the emission

guidelines. The pollutants to be

inventoried include dioxins/furans,

cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), mercury (Hg),

particulate matter (PM), hydrogen

chloride (HCl), nitrogen oxides (NOX),

carbon monoxide (CO), and sulfur

dioxide (SO2). For this proposal, EPA

has estimated the emissions from each

MWC unit that would be covered by the

Federal plan for all pollutants regulated

by the Federal plan. This emission

inventory is item II–B–1 in docket A–

97–45. Table 3 of this preamble

summarizes the results of the inventory

for those States that do not have an

approved State plan. Pollutant

emissions are expressed in megagrams

per year (Mg/yr) for most pollutants and

grams per year (g/yr) for dioxins. The

emission inventory is based on

information known about the combustor

and uses emission factors contained in

‘‘Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission

Factors’’ (AP–42). Refer to the emission

estimates memorandum in docket A–

97–45 for the complete emissions

inventory and details on the

calculations.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3513

TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF CURRENT EMISSIONS FROM LARGE MWC UNITS BY STATE

Region/state

Dioxins/

furans

(g/yr)

Cd

(Mg/yr)

Pb

(Mg/yr)

Hg

(Mg/yr)

PM

(Mg/yr)

HCl

(Mg/yr)

SO2

(Mg/yr)

NOX

(Mg/yr)

Region I:

Connecticut ..................................... 53 0.027 0.477 1.74 78 144 476 3684

Maine .............................................. 56 0.006 0.296 0.06 32 24 145 1334

Massachusetts ................................ 673 0.103 1.86 4.13 126 543 1466 5866

New Hampshire .............................. 15 0.002 0.024 0.2 13 48 109 277

Rhode Island .................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vermont .......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Region II:

New Jersey ..................................... 394 0.014 0.521 2.35 56 145 499 2737

New York ........................................ 619 0.304 1.33 4.61 156 2492 1911 5293

Puerto Rico ..................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Region III:

Delaware ........................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

District of Columbia ........................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Maryland ......................................... 493 0.277 1.084 2.47 89 2241 1332 1964

Pennsylvania .................................. 178 0.092 0.506 3.23 93 714 918 3571

Virginia ............................................ 46 0.034 0.712 1.34 58 144 464 3007

Virgin Islands .................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

West Virginia .................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Region IV:

Alabama ......................................... 2 0.003 0.025 0.05 7 22 58 383

Georgia ........................................... 108 0.06 0.226 0.52 16 485 263 277

Kentucky ......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mississippi ...................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

South Carolina ................................ 69 0.001 0.81 0.36 7 15 59 333

Tennessee ...................................... 227 0.125 0.475 1.09 33 1019 551 583

Region V:

Illinois .............................................. 4 0.001 0.3 0.02 14 9 4 283

Indiana ............................................ 28 0.011 0.087 0.96 23 75 199 1311

Michigan ......................................... 465 0.084 0.837 1.03 89 627 589 3085

Minnesota ....................................... 268 0.039 0.807 0.8 168 983 676 2717

Ohio ................................................ 18 0.01 0.264 0.44 5 25 87 206

Wisconsin ....................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Region VI:

Arkansas ......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Louisiana ........................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

New Mexico .................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Oklahoma ....................................... 244 0.134 0.509 1.17 36 1092 590 624

Texas .............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Region VII:

Kansas ............................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Iowa ................................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Missouri .......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nebraska ........................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Region VIII:

Colorado ......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Montana .......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

North Dakota .................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

South Dakota .................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Utah ................................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Wyoming ......................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Region IX:

American Samoa ............................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Arizona ........................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

California ........................................ 31 0.011 0.094 1.04 25 81 216 1017

Guam .............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Hawaii ............................................. 35 0.026 0.387 0.14 32 58 523 1646

Nevada ........................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Northern Mariana Islands ............... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Region X:

Alaska ............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Idaho ............................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Washington ..................................... 10 0.004 0.029 1.19 8 25 67 318

D. Emission Limits

Emission Limits. As a required

element, a State plan must include

emission limits. Section 129(b)(2)

requires these emission limits to be ‘‘at

least as protective as’’ those in the

emission guidelines. The emission

limits in this proposed MWC Federal

plan are the same as those contained in
3514 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

the emission guidelines (40 CFR part 60,

subpart Cb) as amended on August 25,

1997 (62 FR 45116). The emission limits

and additional requirements are

summarized in section V of this

preamble. (See the discussion in An

Approved State Plan Is No Longer As

Protective As The Emission

Guidelines—Partial Transfer of

Authority Through Delegation in section

VI of this preamble for a discussion of

State plans that do not include the

amended emission limits.)

The emission limits for all pollutants

except NOX can be achieved by the

combination of good combustion

practices (GCP), post-combustion

control by a spray dryer with either an

electrostatic precipitator (ESP) or a

fabric filter, and supplemented with

activated carbon injection. For MWC

units requiring NOX control, the limits

can be achieved using selective

noncatalytic reduction (SNCR). This

combination of controls was determined

to represent the Maximum Achievable

Control Technology (MACT) under the

section 129 guidelines. An MWC owner

or operator is free to employ any

techniques to comply with the proposed

MWC Federal plan, as long as the

numerical emission limits for all

pollutants are met.

The emission guidelines, as amended

on August 25, 1997, apply the emission

limits for SO2, HCl, Pb, and NOX in two

stages. The final guidelines require

compliance with the emission limits in

the 1995 guidelines by December 19,

2000 and compliance with the four

amended emission limits by August 25,

2002. Specifically, the final emission

guidelines require compliance with SO2

and HCl limits of 31 parts per million

by volume (ppmv) by December 19,

2000 and 29 ppmv by August 25, 2002.

The lead limit is 0.49 milligrams per dry

standard cubic meter (mg/dscm) by

December 19, 2000, and 0.44 mg/dscm

by August 25, 2002. The NOX limit for

one type of MWC, fluidized bed

combustors, decreases. The four

amended limits were added as a result

of a court decision, as described in 62

FR 45116 (August 25, 1997).

This proposed Federal plan addresses

the emission limits in 40 CFR part 60,

subpart Cb, including the final amended

limits for the four pollutants, and would

require compliance with all limits by

December 19, 2000. The same types of

air pollution control technology served

as the basis for both the 1995 and the

amended limits: spray dryer/fabric filter

or ESP, carbon injection, and SNCR for

non-refractory combustor types. Large

MWC units would need to install these

controls by December 19, 2000 to meet

the original limits, and as soon as the

controls are installed, they will also

meet the final, amended limits. Thus,

for simplicity, this proposed Federal

plan includes only the final, amended

emission limits for these four pollutants.

Operator Training and Certification.

The emission guidelines require

American Society of Mechanical

Engineers (ASME) or a comparable State

program for operator certification for

chief facility operators and shift

supervisors, and an EPA or State MWC

operator training course for chief facility

operators. In States that have not yet

submitted State plans or that do not

have State operator training and

certification programs, ASME

certification and the EPA operator

training course would be required.

However, some States already have

submitted to EPA either a partial or a

complete State plan allowing State

training courses and/or State

certification programs. The EPA is

reviewing these plans, but has not

approved them yet, so the facilities in

these States would be covered by this

proposed MWC Federal plan until EPA

approves the State plan. Because this

Federal plan is an interim action until

State plans are approved, the Federal

plan includes State certification and

State training courses if submitted in a

State plan. Therefore, this proposed

Federal plan would allow ASME or

State certification in Connecticut and

Maryland. This proposed Federal plan

also would allow EPA or State operator

training courses in Connecticut. The

EPA requests information on whether

other States that will be submitting

plans in the near future have State

certification programs and/or State

operator training courses. If States

submit this information to EPA before

the end of the comment period for this

proposal (March 24, 1998), EPA intends

to allow State certification and State

operator training courses in the

promulgated Federal plan for those

States.

NOX Trading. The emission

guidelines [§ 60.33b(d)] allow States to

establish programs to allow owners or

operators of existing MWC units to trade

nitrogen oxide emission credits. At this

time, no State has submitted such a

program for approval as part of their

State plan. However, a State could

include such a program in a future State

plan submittal for approval by the

Administrator on a case-by-case basis

prior to implementation. Trading

programs are not included in the

proposed MWC Federal plan for the

following reasons: (1) No State has

requested such a trading program; (2)

these trading programs, if approved by

the State, are to be proposed by the State

for potential approval by EPA; and (3)

at least one State has specifically

excluded MWC units from their State

trading program. States may still allow

an owner or operator to use that State’s

NOX trading program to meet the

Federal plan emission limits. For

example, if a State allows an owner or

operator to use that State’s NOX trading

program to meet the emission limits

rather than retrofit control equipment,

then the owner or operator would

submit its trading approach to the State

for case-by-case approval. Then, the

State would follow that State’s approved

procedures for approving the owner or

operator’s approach and then the owner

or operator would submit the Stateapproved, source-specific trading

approach to EPA for case-by-case

approval in time to commence the

trading program by the date the final

control plan is due for the specific MWC

units. (See section II.E for additional

discussion on determining the dates for

achieving the increments of progress.)

Please note that both the owner or

operator and the State must act

expeditiously in order to ensure that the

public and EPA have sufficient time to

review the specifics of the proposed

trade. In general, EPA supports open

market concepts, including trading,

especially when they can be harnessed

to achieve environmental limits,

minimize costs, and EPA can ensure the

technical validity and appropriate

tracking of the parameters of the trade.

NOX Emission Averaging. The

emission guidelines allow States to

allow the owner or operator of an

affected facility to implement a NOX

emission averaging plan within an

MWC plant with multiple MWC units.

(See 40 CFR 60.33b(d), subpart Cb.) At

this time, no State has submitted such

plant-wide emission averaging for

approval as part of their State plan, nor

have any States approved such

averaging as part of the initial

compliance report as specified in 40

CFR 60.59b(f) or the annual compliance

report specified in 40 CFR 60.59b(g), as

applicable. Therefore, no source-specific

averaging plans are included in this

Federal plan. However, a State could

propose a NOX emission averaging plan

in a future State plan submittal for

potential approval by EPA prior to

implementation. Furthermore, an owner

or operator may propose to use plantwide NOX emission averaging to meet

the Federal plan NOX emission limits.

The proposed NOX emission averaging

plan must be submitted in the initial

compliance report specified in 40 CFR

60.59b(f) or annual compliance report
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3515

specified in 40 CFR 60.39b(g), as

applicable, prior to implementation.

E. Compliance Schedules and

Increments of Progress

As a required element, a State plan

must include compliance schedules for

retrofitting controls to comply with the

emission guidelines. Because this

proposed MWC Federal plan is being

implemented in lieu of State plans, its

compliance schedule includes the same

five increments of progress as required

in a State plan. The Federal plan

increments of progress are consistent

with the State plan requirements in 40

CFR 60.24 of subpart B. These

increments of progress are required for

compliance schedules that are longer

than 12 months. The increments of

progress in the Federal plan (and any

approved State plan) are the primary

mechanism for ensuring progress

toward final compliance. Each

increment of progress has a specified

date for achievement.

This proposed Federal plan includes

the five increments of progress and

provides three options to establish the

increment dates. Under all three options

the five increment dates are defined and

are enforceable. The Federal plan could

function with only one option, but in

order to provide maximum flexibility,

this proposal includes three options.

The EPA requests comments on each of

the options and on the desirability of

including these multiple options in the

final Federal plan. Based on comments

received, the final Federal plan will

include one, two, or three options. All

three options are discussed in more

detail following the definitions for the

increments of progress as listed below.

1. Increments of Progress

The increments of progress to be

measured are: (1) Submitting a final

control plan, (2) awarding contracts for

control systems or process

modifications or orders for purchase of

components, (3) beginning on-site

construction or installation of the air

pollution control device(s) or process

changes, (4) completing on-site

construction or installation of the air

pollution control device(s) or process

changes, and (5) final compliance.

The MWC owner or operator is

responsible for meeting each of these

five increments of progress for each

MWC unit no later than the applicable

compliance date. The owner or operator

must notify EPA as each increment of

progress is achieved (or missed). The

notification must identify the increment

and the date the achieved increment

was met (or missed). For an increment

achieved late, the notification must

identify the increment and the date the

increment was ultimately achieved.

The owner or operator must mail the

(post-marked) notification to the

applicable EPA Regional Office within

10 business days of the increment date

defined in the Federal plan. (See table

2 under the ‘‘Supplementary

Information’’ section of this document

for a list of Regional Offices.) The

definition of each increment of progress

follows:

Submit a Final Control Plan. To meet

this increment, the owner or operator of

each MWC unit must submit a plan that

describes the air pollution control

devices or process changes that will be

employed so that each MWC unit

complies with the emission limits and

other requirements. The plan must

include a complete analysis of the

applicable regulatory requirements and

methods of compliance and selected

control technology options available to

meet these requirements. (The EPA

intends to provide compliance

assistance information to MWC owners

and operators upon request.) The final

control plan also must contain

engineering specifications and drawings

of all air pollution control equipment

planned to be installed and/or

descriptions of planned process

changes. The owner or operator of an

MWC unit will typically use the

services of architectural and engineering

(A/E) firms to obtain the design

drawings and other operational

characteristics of air pollution control

devices to include in the final control

plan. The final control plan must

include information of sufficient detail

to be used to solicit bids to install the

air pollution control devices or initiate

the process changes. If an MWC owner

or operator plans to close a unit rather

than retrofit controls to comply with the

Federal plan by the applicable

compliance date, a final control plan for

that unit is not required. The owner or

operator, however, must notify EPA of

such a cease operation decision by the

date the final control plan is due. The

owner or operator must also submit a

legally enforceable cease operation

agreement documenting the date by

which the unit will cease operation if

operations cease later than 1 year after

promulgation of the Federal plan. (See

section IV of this preamble for

additional discussion of closed and

closing units.)

Award Contract. To award contract

means the MWC owner or operator

enters into legally binding agreements

or contractual obligations that cannot be

canceled or modified without

substantial financial loss to the owner or

operator. The EPA anticipates that the

owner or operator may award a number

of contracts to complete the retrofit. To

meet this increment of progress, the

MWC owner or operator must award a

contract or contracts to initiate on-site

construction, initiate on-site installation

of air pollution control devices, and/or

incorporate process changes. The owner

or operator must mail a copy of the

signed contract(s) to EPA within 10

business days of entering the contract(s).

Initiate On-site Construction. To

initiate on-site construction, installation

of air pollution control devices, or

process change means to begin any of

the following:

• Installation of an air pollution control

device to be used to comply with the final

emission limits as outlined in the final

control plan;

• Physical preparation necessary for the

installation of an air pollution control device

to be used to comply with the final emission

limits as outlined in the final control plan;

• Alteration of an existing air pollution

control device to be used to comply with the

final emission limits as outlined in the final

control plan;

• Alteration of the municipal waste

combustion process to accommodate

installation of an air pollution control device

to be used to comply with the final emission

limits as outlined in the final control plan;

or

• Process changes identified in the final

control plan being made to meet the emission

standards.

Complete On-site Construction. To

complete on-site construction means

that all necessary air pollution control

devices or process changes identified in

the final control plan are in place, on

site, and ready for operation on the

MWC unit. If the owner or operator of

an MWC unit is unable to complete onsite construction prior to December 19,

2000 and, therefore ceases an MWC

unit’s operation and plans to restart it,

the owner or operator must notify EPA

and enter into a legally enforceable

cease operation agreement by the date

the final control plan is due. (See

section IV of this preamble for

additional discussion of closed and

closing units.)

Final Compliance. To be in final

compliance means to incorporate all

process changes or complete retrofit

construction as designed in the final

control plan and to connect the air

pollution control equipment or process

changes with the affected facility

identified in the final control plan such

that if the affected facility is brought on

line all necessary process changes or air

pollution control equipment are

operating as designed. Within 180 days

after the date the facility is required to

achieve final compliance, the initial

performance test must be conducted. On
3516 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

or after the date the initial performance

test is completed or is required to be

completed, whichever is earlier, no

pollutant may be discharged into the

atmosphere from an affected facility in

excess of the applicable emission limits.

2. Summary of Three Options for

Determining Schedule Increment Dates

The proposed Federal plan includes

three options for establishing the

increment dates. The compliance

schedule for facilities affected by this

MWC Federal plan could be established

by option 1 (generic compliance

schedule proposed by EPA), option 2

(facility-specific schedule consistent

with the State plan submitted to EPA by

the State), or option 3 (facility-specific

schedule submitted to EPA by the

owner or operator of the MWC unit or

the State). Under all three options the

five increment dates would be defined

and are enforceable.

In cases where option 2 or 3 has not

been exercised, the owner or operator of

an affected facility would be subject to

option 1 (generic schedule). However, if

the State or the MWC owner or operator

submits a schedule that EPA approves

(option 2 or 3), the owner or operator

would be subject to that alternative

schedule. Under option 2, States may

submit increment schedules to EPA

prior to the end of the comment period

for this proposal March 24, 1998. Under

option 3, an MWC owner or operator or

the State may submit a schedule to EPA

at the time the final control plan is due

under the option 1 generic compliance

schedule September 21, 1998. In options

2 and 3, EPA would review the

schedules and incorporate them into the

Federal plan. Each of the options is

discussed in detail below.

Option 1. Generic Compliance

Schedule. Option 1 is the generic

default alternative. For MWC units

covered by the Federal plan where State

plans or compliance schedules have not

been submitted, EPA is proposing

generic compliance schedules and

increments of progress. Alone, option 1

could be unnecessarily inflexible and

reflects past approaches to regulatory

compliance. However, option 1 is

necessary to establish a baseline where

neither option 2 nor 3 is exercised.

Within option 1, the same generic

schedule would apply to each MWC

unit for all pollutants except dioxin and

mercury. The compliance schedule for

dioxin and mercury depends on the date

of the MWC unit’s construction, as

described below.

The emission guidelines and section

129(b)(2) allow MWC units to complete

retrofits or close no later than December

19, 2000. To be consistent with the

emission guidelines, the final

compliance date (for all pollutants

except mercury and dioxin) in the

proposed Federal plan is December 19,

2000. Because many MWC units are

expected to retrofit combustion controls,

as well as acid gas, PM, mercury, and/

or NOX controls to meet the emission

limits (e.g., spray dryer/fabric filter or

ESP, carbon injection, and/or SNCR),

under this proposal they are given the

maximum time (until December 19,

2000) to complete retrofits.

The emission guidelines require MWC

units that commenced construction,

reconstruction, or modification after

June 26, 1987 to achieve compliance

with the mercury and dioxin limits

within 1 year after State plan approval

(or 1 year after a revised construction

permit or a revised operating permit is

issued, if a permit modification is

required, whichever is later). The EPA

is, therefore, proposing to require

compliance with the mercury and

dioxin limits within 1 year after

promulgation of the MWC Federal plan

(or 1 year after a revised construction

permit or a revised operating permit is

issued, if a permit modification is

required, whichever is later).

The EPA is proposing increments of

progress as part of the generic

compliance schedule. Tables in subpart

FFF show the proposed increments of

progress for pre-1987 units (December

19, 2000 schedule for all pollutants) and

post-1987 units (1 year schedule for

dioxin and mercury, December 19, 2000

schedule for all other pollutants).

While the generic compliance

schedule is ambitious, EPA believes it is

achievable because MWC owners and

operators and States have known that

they would need to install controls by

December 19, 2000 as a result of the

promulgation of the emission guidelines

on December 19, 1995. Thus, MWC

units already should have been

developing their final control plans and

should be ready to begin retrofits

quickly. Furthermore, EPA believe that

the generic compliance schedules are

necessary to ensure final compliance by

December 19, 2000.

The generic compliance schedule and

increments of progress are based on case

studies of four MWC plants that either

completed or are in the process of

completing retrofits of the controls

needed to meet the subpart Cb emission

limits. The EPA reviewed the retrofit

schedules for MWC units at four MWC

plants containing 12 MWC units. The

retrofit case studies are documented in

docket A–97–45 (II–A–1 through II–A–

5).

The EPA compared the four retrofits

to the increments of progress required

by subpart B and determined

appropriate time intervals for each

increment. To provide maximum

flexibility, the first three Federal plan

increments are based on the maximum

time required by any of the retrofits

studied. The fourth increment was

established to provide the maximum

time to complete retrofits and still meet

the final compliance date. The final

increment (final compliance by

December 19, 2000) is dictated by the

Act.

The generic compliance schedule

would apply to all MWC units subject

to this MWC Federal plan, except those

units that are subject to site-specific

compliance schedules as submitted

under option 2 or 3. If a large MWC unit

will not complete construction and

achieve final compliance by December

19, 2000, the guidelines allow and this

proposed Federal plan would allow the

unit to cease operation by December 19,

2000, complete the retrofit while not

operating, and comply upon restarting.

(See section IV of this preamble for a

discussion of closed and closing units.)

Option 2. Site-specific Compliance

Schedules Submitted by States. Under

option 2, States would submit

increment dates as negotiated with

MWC owners or operators to EPA before

the end of the comment period of this

proposal. Following review and

approval of these schedules, EPA would

add them to the Federal plan. This

assures the Federal plan is fully

consistent with State plans that are

approved after the Federal plan is

promulgated. In some cases the State

already has negotiated a retrofit

schedule with the MWC owner or

operator, determined what retrofit

schedule is feasible, held public

hearings, and considered public

comments.

Several States have already submitted

compliance schedules to EPA and these

site-specific compliance schedules are

included in this proposed Federal plan.

The following States have submitted

compliance schedules as of December

19, 1997: Georgia, New York, New

Jersey, Maine, Maryland, Michigan,

Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Tennessee,

and Virginia. Some schedules have

already been reviewed by EPA. Other

schedules have not yet been reviewed

because of their late arrival. The EPA

will review these schedules

concurrently with other compliance

schedules submitted under this option.

The site-specific compliance schedule

table in subpart FFF contains the sitespecific compliance schedules

submitted to EPA. Some MWC units

have already met some of their

increments of progress.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3517

Option 3. Site-specific Compliance

Schedules Submitted by MWC Owners

or Operators or the State. The third

option for determining the compliance

dates is for the MWC owner or operator

or the State to submit a site-specific date

for achieving increments 2, 3, and 4 to

EPA for approval. The dates for

increment 1 (submitting a final control

plan) and increment 5 (achieving final

compliance) would be the same as

option 1. As documented in the retrofit

studies (docket A–97–45), the date for

achieving the first increment

(September 21, 1998) reflects the

maximum time required by any of the

retrofits studied. The final increment

compliance date (December 19, 2000) is

dictated by the Act.

The EPA recognizes that flexibility

may be needed for the award contract

date, the start construction date, and the

finish construction date given facilityspecific retrofit considerations and

constraints. Therefore, under option 3,

EPA is requesting facility-specific

compliance schedules from MWC

owners or operators or the State.

The State or the MWC owner or

operator (preferably after consulting

with the State) would submit alternative

dates for increments 2, 3, and 4 to EPA

on September 21, 1998, at the time the

final control plan is due. The MWC

owner or operator would submit a copy

of the compliance schedule to both EPA

and the State. The EPA would review

the schedule and coordinate with the

owner or operator and the State.

Following EPA approval, EPA would

add the schedule to the site-specific

compliance schedule table in subpart

FFF as a technical amendment.

In summary, the proposed MWC

Federal plan includes three options for

defining the five increment dates. The

EPA believes including all three options

in the Federal plan maximizes

flexibility and increases regulatory

efficiency. The EPA specifically

requests comments on each of the

options provided in this proposal, as

well as comments on the desirability of

including only a subset of the options in

the final Federal plan.

F. Record of Public Hearings

As a required element of a State plan,

a State must include opportunity for

public participation in developing,

adopting, and implementing the State

plan. For this MWC Federal plan, a

public hearing will be held in

Washington, DC, if individuals request

to speak. In addition, a public hearing

will be held in any State with an MWC

unit covered by the proposed MWC

Federal plan, if individuals request to

speak. (See the Dates section of this

preamble.) The hearing record will

appear in docket A–97–45. A hearing

would be held in Washington, DC

because most of the MWC units affected

by the Federal plan are located in the

eastern United States and Washington,

DC is easily accessible. Written public

comments also are solicited. (See the

Addresses section of this document.)

The EPA will review and consider the

oral and written comments in

developing the final Federal plan.

G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping,

and Reporting

As a required element, a State plan

must include the test methods listed in

40 CFR 60.58b of subpart Eb and the

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements listed in 40 CFR 60.59b of

subpart Eb. The proposed MWC Federal

plan includes the same provisions.

H. Progress Reports

As a required element of a State plan,

a State must submit to EPA annual

reports on progress in the

implementation of the emission

guidelines. Emissions data would be

reported to the Aerometric Emissions

Information Retrieval System Facility

Subsystem as specified in 40 CFR part

60, appendix D. If a State has been

delegated authority to implement and

enforce the proposed Federal plan, the

State would submit annual progress

reports to EPA, as required by 40 CFR

60.25(e) of subpart B. These reports can

be combined with the State

Implementation Plan report required by

40 CFR 51.32 of subpart Q, in order to

avoid duplicative reporting. Each

progress report should include

compliance status, enforcement actions,

increments of progress, identification of

sources that have ceased operation or

started operation, updated emission

inventory and compliance information,

and copies of technical reports on any

performance testing and monitoring. For

MWC units in States where authority

has not been delegated, EPA intends to

prepare annual progress reports.

III. Proposed Amendments to General

Provisions of 40 CFR Part 62

The proposed Federal plan would be

added as a new subpart to 40 CFR part

62. Part 62 currently contains approvals

and promulgations of State plans

developed under section 111(d) of the

Act. The MWC Federal plan is

developed under both sections 111(d)

and 129 of the Act. This proposal would

amend the general provisions (subpart

A) of part 62 to specify that Federal

plans are contained in part 62. It would

also amend the introductory text in

§ 62.02 to refer to section 129, as

applicable, in addition to section 111(d).

This is necessary because MWC State

plans that are approved and published

in part 62, as well as the proposed

Federal plan, are developed to meet the

requirements of both sections 111(d)

and 129 of the Act.

IV. Implications for Closed Units, Units

That Plan To Close, and Units That

Plan To De-Rate

The emission guidelines (40 CFR part

60, subpart Cb) require MWC units to

comply with the emission limits or

close within 3 years following approval

of a State plan, but no later than

December 19, 2000. Units subject to the

Federal plan would also be required to

comply or close by December 19, 2000.

The Federal plan, consistent with the

emission guidelines, would further

require that if the owner or operator of

a large MWC unit is planning to cease

operation of the unit, the owner or

operator must either cease operation of

the unit within 1 year of promulgation

of this Federal plan or submit a ‘‘closure

agreement’’ (i.e., a cease operation

agreement) that defines the date

operation will cease. Cease operation

agreements must be legally enforceable.

This section describes how this

Federal plan addresses various

categories of closed MWC units and derated MWC units, including:

• Dismantled MWC units;

• MWC units that have ceased operation;

• MWC units that will cease operation

within 1 year of Federal plan promulgation;

• MWC units that will cease operation

later than 1 year after Federal plan

promulgation;

• MWC units that will cease operation and

plan to restart after December 19, 2000; and

• MWC units that will de-rate (reduce

capacity).

A. Dismantled Units

Units that are partially or fully

dismantled are not required to be

included in the MWC unit inventory

that is an element of a State plan or this

Federal plan. MWC units are partially or

fully dismantled if they have been

physically altered so they cannot

operate. Dismantled units cannot be

restarted without extensive work; and if

they were restarted, they would be

considered a new unit and would be

subject to the subpart Eb new source

performance standard (NSPS) rather

than to the State or Federal plan for

existing units.

B. Units That Have Ceased Operation

MWC units that are known to have

ceased operation already (but are not

known to be dismantled) are included

in the inventory element of this

proposed Federal plan. Such units must
3518 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

also be identified in any State plans

submitted to EPA. If the owner or

operator of these inactive MWC units

plans to restart these units before

December 19, 2000, the units would be

required to achieve the same

compliance schedule required for other

MWC units and final compliance would

be achieved for all pollutants no later

than December 19, 2000. In order to

assure compliance by the required date,

the owner or operator of units that have

ceased operation, but who plans to

restart the units before December 19,

2000, must submit a final control plan

and the units must comply with the five

increments of progress on the same

generic schedule as other MWC units

subject to this Federal plan. (See section

II.E for a discussion of compliance

schedules and increments of progress.)

If inactive MWC units will not be

restarted until after December 19, 2000,

a control plan would not be needed.

However, the proposed Federal plan

specifies that any units that have ceased

operation and are planned to be

restarted after December 19, 2000, must

complete retrofit and comply with the

emission limits and operational

requirements immediately upon

restarting. Performance testing to

demonstrate compliance would be

required within 180 days after

restarting. The dates for increments of

progress that lead to final compliance

(e.g., awarding contracts, initiating onsite construction, completing on-site

construction) would not need to be

specified for units that have ceased

operation and plan to restart after

December 19, 2000, because these

activities would occur before restart

while the units are closed and have no

emissions. If a unit was operated after

December 19, 2000 without complying,

it would be a violation of the Federal

plan.

C. Units That Will Cease Operation

Within 1 Year of Federal Plan

Promulgation

The owner or operator of currently

operating MWC units subject to this

Federal plan who will cease operation

of the units rather than comply with the

emission limits would be required to

notify EPA at the time that final control

plans are due. The owner operator

would specify whether the MWC units

will cease operation within 1 year or at

a later date. If the owner or operator

notifies EPA that the MWC units will

cease operation within 1 year of

promulgation of this Federal plan, the

owner or operator would not be

required to enter into a cease operation

agreement. However, if the owner or

operator does not cease operation of the

units by the date 1 year after

promulgation, it would be a violation of

the Federal plan.

D. Units That Will Cease Operation

Later Than 1 Year After Federal Plan

Promulgation

The owner or operator of an MWC

unit that will cease operations more

than 1 year after promulgation of the

Federal plan would be required to notify

EPA at the time the final control plan is

due that the owner or operator will

cease operation of the unit. The owner

or operator of such an MWC unit also

would need to enter into a legally

enforceable cease operation agreement

with EPA by the date the final control

plan is due. The cease operation

agreement would include the date that

operation will cease. The owner or

operator of an affected MWC unit that

is ceasing operation more than 1 year

after promulgation of this Federal plan

would also submit data for dioxin/furan

emission tests by the date 1 year after

promulgation of this Federal plan per

§ 62.14109 of the proposed Federal plan

rule. This requirement is consistent

with subpart Cb. The cease operation

agreement ensures that the MWC unit

will cease operation by an agreed-upon

enforceable date. In all cases, this date

would be no later than December 19,

2000.

E. Units That Will Cease Operation and

Plan to Restart After December 19, 2000

MWC units covered by this Federal

plan that will cease operation can be

restarted after December 19, 2000 if the

units achieve compliance upon

restarting. The proposed Federal plan

allows for MWC units that cease

operation by December 19, 2000 and

then restart as part of their retrofit

schedule, because it may not be feasible

for the owner or operator of every MWC

unit at every MWC plant to complete

every unit’s retrofit by December 19,

2000. Some owners or operators will

wish to stagger retrofit of their units to

maintain service. For example, an MWC

plant owner or operator may complete

retrofits on two of three MWC units

before December 19, 2000 and those two

units could remain in operation. The

owner or operator could cease operation

of the third unit on December 19, 2000

and complete the unit’s retrofit prior to

restarting. (Performance testing on the

third unit would be conducted within

180 days of restarting the retrofitted

MWC unit.)

If the owner or operator of MWC units

covered by this Federal plan wishes to

include ceasing operations as part of the

retrofit schedule, the owner or operator

would be required to notify EPA at the

time the final control plan is due. The

owner or operator would also enter into

a cease operation agreement if the unit

ceases operation later than 1 year after

Federal plan promulgation as described

in section IV.D. The proposed Federal

plan specifies that when an MWC unit

restarts after December 19, 2000, it must

comply with the Federal plan emission

limits and operational requirements

upon restarting. There would be no

need to establish and meet specific

dates for the remaining increments of

progress (i.e., awarding contracts,

initiating on-site construction,

completing on-site construction, and

final compliance) because these

increments would be completed while

the unit is closed and there are no

emissions. The proposed Federal plan

specifies that the unit must achieve final

compliance with the Federal plan

emission limits and operating

requirements as soon as it is restarted.

The performance test to demonstrate

compliance would be required within

180 days after restarting.

F. Units That Plan To De-rate

The proposed Federal plan would

allow the owner or operator of an MWC

unit to de-rate the capacity of an MWC

unit to below 250 tons per day.

Therefore, the MWC unit would be no

longer be subject to the MWC Federal

plan. De-rating means a permanent

change that physically reduces the

capacity of the MWC unit to less than

250 tons per day of MSW. (De-rating

cannot be a permit provision, but must

be a permanent physical restriction).

The owner or operator that plans to derate an MWC unit would de-rate the

unit on the same schedule and

increments that the MWC unit would

have had to follow if it were to be

retrofit to meet the emission limits. For

example, the owner or operator of an

MWC unit that commenced

construction before June 1987 that is

subject to the proposed generic

compliance schedule would need to

submit a plan describing the specific

physical changes and schedule for

accomplishing the de-rating on the date

the final control plan is due. The owner

or operator would need to award a

contract for the physical changes to the

units to accomplish the de-rating by the

date MWC units are required to award

contracts for retrofit of air pollution

control equipment. The owner or

operator would need to initiate on-site

construction and complete on-site

construction to accomplish the de-rating

by the dates for these increments

specified in the proposed generic

compliance schedule. Once the MWC

unit physically is unable to combust
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3519

more than 250 tons per day, it would no

longer subject to the MWC Federal plan.

V. Summary of Federal Plan Emission

Limits and Requirements

The proposed MWC Federal plan (40

CFR part 62, subpart FFF), which will

implement the emission guidelines,

includes emission limits, operating

practice requirements, operator training

and certification requirements, and

compliance and performance testing

requirements. These emission limits and

requirements are the same as those in

the emission guidelines (40 CFR part 60,

subpart Cb), as amended. Table 4

summarizes the requirements of the

Federal plan rule (40 CFR part 62,

subpart FFF).

TABLE 4.—SUMMARY OF FEDERAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR EXISTING MWCSa

Applicability:

The Federal plan would apply to existing MWC units with capacities to combust greater than 250 tons per day of municipal solid waste unless the unit is subject to a section 111(d)/129 State plan that has been approved by EPA.

Unit size (MSW combustion capacity) Requirement

> 250 tons per day (referred to as a large MWC unit) .............................................................................. Subject to provisions listed below.

Good Combustion Practices:

• A site-specific operator training manual would be required to be developed and made available for MWC personnel.

• The EPA or a State MWC operator training course would be required to be completed by the MWC chief facility operator, shift supervisors, and control room operators.

• The ASME (or State-equivalent) provisional and full operator certification would be required to be obtained by the MWC chief facility operator (mandatory), shift supervisors (mandatory), and control room operators (optional).

• The MWC load level would be required to be measured and not to exceed 110 percent of the maximum load level measured during the

most recent dioxin/furan performance test.

• The maximum PM control device inlet flue gas temperature would be required to be measured and not to exceed the temperature 17°C

above the maximum temperature measured during the most recent dioxin/furan performance test.

• The CO level would be required to be measured using a CEMS, and the concentration in the flue gas would be required not to exceed

the following:

MWC type CO level Averaging

time

Modular starved-air and excess-air .................................................................................................................... 50 ppmv .................... 4-hour.

Mass burn waterwall and refractory ................................................................................................................... 100 ppmv .................. 4-hour.

Mass burn rotary refractory ................................................................................................................................ 100 ppmv .................. 24-hour.

Fluidized-bed combustion .................................................................................................................................. 100 ppmv .................. 4-hour.

Pulverized coal/RDF mixed fuel-fired ................................................................................................................. 150 ppmv .................. 4-hour.

Spreader stoker coal/RDF mixed fuel-fired ........................................................................................................ 200 ppmv .................. 24-hour.

RDF stoker ......................................................................................................................................................... 200 ppmv .................. 24-hour.

Mass burn rotary waterwall ................................................................................................................................ 250 ppmv .................. 24-hour.

MWC Organic Emissions (measured as total mass dioxins/furans):

• Dioxins/furans (performance test by EPA Reference Method 23)

MWC units utilizing an ESP-based air pollution control system .............. 60 ng/dscm total mass (mandatory) or 15 ng/dscm total mass (optional

to qualify for less frequent testing).b

MWC units utilizing a nonESP-based air pollution control system .......... 30 ng/dscm total mass (mandatory) or 15 ng/dscm total mass (optional

to qualify for less frequent testing).b

• Basis for dioxin/furan limits GCP and SD/ESP or GCP and SD/FF, as specified above.

MWC Metal Emissions:

• PM (performance test by EPA Reference Method 5)

27 mg/dscm (0.012 gr/dscf).

• Opacity (performance test by EPA Reference Method 9).

10 percent (6-minute average).

• Cd (performance test by EPA Reference Method 29).

0.040 mg/dscm (18 gr/million dscf).

• Pb (performance test by EPA Reference Method 29).

0.44 mg/dscm (200 gr/million dscf).

• Hg (performance test by EPA Reference Method 29).

0.080 mg/dscm (35 gr/million dscf) or 85-percent reduction in Hg emissions.

• Basis for PM, opacity, Cd, Pb, and Hg limits GCP and SD/ESP/CI or GCP and SD/FF/CI.

MWC Acid Gas Emissions:

• SO2 (performance test by CEMS).

29 ppmv or 80-percent reduction in SO2 emissions.

• HCl (performance test by EPA Reference Method 26).

29 ppmv or 95-percent reduction in HCl emissions.

• Basis for SO2 and HCl limits.

See basis for MWC metals.

Nitrogen Oxides Emissions:

• NOX (performance test by CEMS):

Mass burn waterwall ................................................................................................................................ 205 ppmv.

Mass burn rotary waterwall ..................................................................................................................... 250 ppmv.

Refuse-derived fuel combustor ................................................................................................................ 250 ppmv.

Fluidized bed combustor ......................................................................................................................... 180 ppmv.

Mass burn refractory ................................................................................................................................ No NOX control requirement.
3520 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

• Basis for NOX limits:

MWC units except refractory ................................................................................................................... SNCR.

Refractory MWC units ............................................................................................................................. No NOX control requirement.

Fugitive Ash Emissions:

• Fugitive Emissions (performance test by EPA Reference Method 22).

Visible emissions 5 percent of the time from ash transfer systems except for maintenance and repair activities.

• Basis for fugitive emission limit ...................................................... Wet ash handling or enclosed ash handling.

Performance Testing and Monitoring Requirements:

• Reporting frequency ....................................................................... Annual (semiannual if violation).

• Load, flue gas temperature ............................................................ Continuous monitoring, 4-hour block arithmetic average.

• CO .................................................................................................. CEMS, 4-hour block or 24-hour daily arithmetic average, as applicable.

• Dioxins/furans, PM, Cd, Pb, HCl, and Hg ..................................... Annual stack test.

• Opacity ........................................................................................... COMS (6-minute average) and annual stack test.

• SO2 ................................................................................................. CEMS, 24-hour daily geometric mean.

Fugitive ash emissions Annual test

• NOX ................................................................................................ CEMS, 24-hour daily arithmetic average.

Compliance Schedule:

See Section II.E of this preamble.

aAll concentration levels in the table are converted to 7 percent O2, dry basis. bAlthough not part of the dioxin/furan limit, the dioxin/furan total mass limits of 30 ng/dscm and 60 ng/dscm are equal to about 0.3 to 0.8 ng/

dscm TEQ and 0.7 to 1.4 ng/dscm TEQ, respectively. The optional reduced testing limit of 15 ng/dscm total mass is equal to about 0.1 to 0.3 ng/

dscm TEQ.

VI. Implementation of Federal Plan and

Delegation

The EPA is required to promulgate

emission guidelines that are applicable

to existing solid waste incineration

sources under sections 111(d) and 129

of the Act. However, the emission

guidelines are not enforceable until EPA

approves a State plan or promulgates a

Federal Plan. In cases where a State has

not submitted an approvable plan, the

EPA must promulgate a MWC Federal

plan for sources in the State as a ‘‘stopgap’’ measure to implement the

emission guidelines.

Congress has determined that the

primary responsibility for air pollution

control rests with State and local

agencies. See the Act 101(a)(3). Sections

111 and 129 of the Act also intend for

the States to take the primary

responsibility for ensuring that emission

reduction targets are met. The daily

administration of a comprehensive air

pollution control initiative, such as this

MWC Federal plan, cannot be easily

accomplished by EPA. Unnecessary

Federal intrusion would inevitably

result if EPA were to assume the

primary burden of enforcing the MWC

Federal plan. Accordingly, the EPA has

designed the MWC Federal plan to

facilitate the transfer of authority from

EPA to State and local agencies. For

example, the EPA has encouraged States

to help determine compliance schedules

and to provide operator training and

certification requirements for this MWC

Federal plan. The EPA has encouraged

States to participate in the development

of the MWC Federal plan to facilitate

the transfer of implementation

responsibility.

There are four mechanisms for

transferring implementation

responsibility to State and local

agencies: (1) If EPA approves a State

plan submitted to EPA after the Federal

plan is promulgated, the State would

automatically have authority to enforce

and implement the State plan upon EPA

approval; (2) if a State does not submit

a State plan and does not have a State

rule, EPA can use general delegation

authority to delegate to State agencies

authority to perform certain

implementation responsibilities for this

Federal plan to the extent allowed by

State law; (3) if a State does not submit

a State plan but adopts a State rule that

is identical to, or as protective as, this

Federal plan, then EPA can delegate

implementation responsibilities to the

State, and (4) if a State plan is modified

such that it is no longer as protective as

the emission guidelines, then EPA may

delegate a portion of the Federal plan.

Each of these different options is

described in more detail below.

A. State Submits a State Plan After

Large MWC Units Located in the State

Are Subject to the Federal Plan—Full

Transfer of Authority Through State

Plan Approval

Even after an MWC unit in a

particular State becomes subject to the

Federal plan, the State or a local agency

may still adopt and submit to EPA for

approval a State plan (i.e., a State plan

containing a State rule or other

enforceable mechanism, inventories,

records of public hearings, and all other

required elements of a State plan). The

EPA will determine if the State plan is

as protective as the emission guidelines.

If EPA determines that the State plan is

as protective as the emission guidelines,

EPA will approve the State plan. Upon

approval of the State plan, the Federal

plan will no longer apply to MWC units

covered by the State plan and the State

will implement and enforce the State

plan in lieu of the Federal plan. (The

EPA will periodically amend the

Federal plan to identify MWC units that

are covered in the approved State plan

and, therefore, are not subject to the

Federal plan.) Making the State plan

effective immediately upon approval

expedites a State’s assumption of

responsibility for implementing the

1995 emission guidelines through the

State plan mechanism as intended by

Congress. However, if EPA determines

that the State plan is not as protective

as the guidelines, EPA cannot approve

the State plan.

B. State Takes Delegation of the Federal

Plan (No State Plan or State Rule)—

Partial Transfer of Authority Through

Delegation

The State may assume

implementation responsibilities even if

there is no State plan or State rule in

effect. To the extent authorized by State

law, the EPA believes it is advantageous

for State agencies to agree to undertake,

on the EPA’s behalf, administrative and

substantive roles in implementing the

Federal plan. These roles could include:

procedural and engineering review of

certain permit applications,

administration and oversight of

compliance reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, conduct of source

inspections, and preparation of draft

notices of violation. The EPA would
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3521

retain responsibility for bringing

enforcement actions against sources

violating Federal plan provisions, as

well as the authority to terminate,

modify, or revoke permits. A

Memorandum of Agreement between

the appropriate EPA Regional Office and

the air pollution control officer or

executive officer of the responsible State

agency would be used to transfer partial

authority. The EPA would announce the

terms of the partial delegation in a

Federal Register notice, and would

inform affected sources.

C. State Adopts a State Rule and Does

Not Submit a State Plan—Full Transfer

of Authority Through Delegation

A State may adopt a State rule that is

identical to, or as protective as, the

MWC Federal plan. The State can then

be delegated authority to enforce the

State rule, which serves to implement

the Federal plan. Such a State can be

delegated authority without submitting

a full State plan (i.e., without a plan

containing an inventory of emissions,

public hearings, and all of the other

State plan elements) because these

elements would be included in the

Federal plan that is being delegated to

the State. The EPA would evaluate the

State rule and, if it is identical to or as

protective as the Federal plan, EPA will

delegate authority to the State to

implement the Federal plan by

implementing and enforcing the

approved State rule.

To assure timely transfer of

implementation authority to States, it is

desirable that each State (in which

MWC units subject to the MWC Federal

plan are located) quickly adopt a State

rule that is identical to, or as protective

as, the MWC Federal plan. If a State

adopts an essentially indistinguishable

rule, the EPA intends to delegate full

implementation responsibilities to that

State immediately following State

adoption. The EPA would publish a

notice of this delegation of the MWC

Federal plan in the Federal Register and

would, in conjunction with the State,

make efforts to ensure that affected

sources are aware that a State has

assumed responsibility for

implementing the MWC Federal plan.

In the event that the State fails to

implement its own State rule or

subsequently amends the State rule so

that it is not as protective as the MWC

Federal plan, the EPA will resume

direct enforcement of the affected

provisions of the MWC Federal plan and

withdraw the delegation in whole or in

part, as appropriate.

D. An Approved State Plan Is No Longer

as Protective as the Emission

Guidelines—Partial Transfer of

Authority Through Delegation

The EPA could also delegate portions

of the Federal Plan to a State under

certain circumstances. An example

would be a State with an approved State

Plan that contains the 1995 emission

limits. A State plan must incorporate

the revised emission limits by 1 year

after promulgation of the amendments.

If a State plan does not incorporate the

amended emission limits by August 25,

1998 (1 year after the promulgation of

the amendments to the emission

guidelines), then the State plan would

no longer be as protective as the

emission guidelines. Rather than

withdrawing its approval of the entire

State plan, the EPA could (to the extent

authorized by State law) delegate that

portion of the Federal Plan containing

the revised emission limits (from the

August 25, 1997 amendments) to the

State. The State would retain

responsibilities for all implementation

and enforcement.

VII. Title V Operating Permits

All MWC sources subject to this MWC

Federal plan must obtain a title V

permit. Title V permits issued to sources

subject to this MWC Federal plan must

include all applicable requirements of

this plan. Permitting authorities will

enforce these requirements.

VIII. Units Subject to This Federal Plan

and New Source Performance

Standards

This section describes the

relationship between the Federal plan

and the three NSPS in terms of

applicability and emission limits. The

MWC emission guidelines apply and

this proposed Federal plan would apply

to MWC units larger than 250 tons per

day in combustion capacity that

commenced construction before

September 20, 1994. There are also three

new source performance standards

(NSPS) that apply to MWC units.

The first NSPS for MWC units, 40

CFR part 60 subpart E, was promulgated

in 1971. It applies to incinerators

charging more than 45 Mg per day (50

tons per day) of MSW that were

constructed or modified after August 17,

1971. Subpart E units that combust

greater than 225 mg per day (250 tons

per day) could also be subject to the

Federal plan. The only pollutant

regulated by subpart E is PM, and the

PM limit is higher than the limit in the

proposed Federal plan. Thus, MWC

units complying with the Federal plan

PM limit would also comply with the

subpart E NSPS emission limit for PM.

The second NSPS, subpart Ea, was

promulgated on February 11, 1991 and

revised on December 19, 1995. This

NSPS applies to MWC units with

capacities to combust greater than 250

tons per day, that:

• Commenced construction after December

20, 1989 and on or before September 20,

1994; or

• Commenced modification or

reconstruction after December 20, 1989 and

on or before June 19, 1996. (‘‘Modification’’

and ‘‘reconstruction’’ are defined in 40 CFR

part 60, subpart A.)

MWC units that started construction

between December 20, 1989 and

September 20, 1994 could be subject to

both this proposed Federal plan (or an

approved State plan) and the subpart Ea

NSPS. MWC units must comply with

the more stringent emission limit. The

emission limits in the subpart Ea NSPS

are as stringent or more stringent than

the Federal plan (limits for the same

pollutants) except for the PM and SO2

limits. The PM and SO2 limits in this

Federal plan are slightly more stringent,

but could be met using the same

controls. Also this Federal plan has

limits for three metals and fugitive ash

that are not regulated by subpart Ea.

Units already complying with subpart

Ea also should be meeting the Federal

plan emission limits, but will need to

verify that they are indeed in

compliance with the slightly more

stringent PM, SO2, and metals limits

contained in the Federal plan.

The third NSPS, subpart Eb, applies

to MWC units that:

(1) Commence construction after

September 20, 1994, or

(2) Commence modification or

reconstruction after June 19,1996. There

is no overlap between the proposed

Federal plan and the subpart Eb NSPS

sources would not be subject to both

rules. The emission limits in subpart Eb

are as stringent or more stringent than

the proposed Federal plan.

IX. Administrative Requirements

This section addresses the following

administrative requirements: Docket,

Paperwork Reduction Act, Executive

Order 12866, Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act, and Regulatory Flexibility

Act. Many of these administrative

requirements were addressed in the

preamble to the 1995 emission

guidelines (60 FR 65404–65413). Since

today’s proposed rule merely would

implement the emission guidelines

promulgated on December 19, 1995 (40

CFR part 60, subpart Cb) as they apply

to large MWC units and does not impose

any new requirements, many of the
3522 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

following administrative requirements

refer to the administrative requirements

in the preamble to the 1995 rule.

A. Docket

As discussed above, a docket has been

prepared for this action pursuant to the

procedural requirements of section

307(d) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7607(d).

Docket numbers A–89–08 and A–90–45

contain the supporting information for

the December 19, 1995 promulgated

emission guidelines. Because this

proposed rule implements the emission

guidelines, these same dockets also

contain the supporting information for

this proposed rule. Additional

supporting information for this

proposed rule is contained in docket

number A–97–45.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection

requirements in this proposed rule will

be submitted for approval to the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB)

under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information

Collection Request (ICR) document has

been prepared by EPA (ICR No. 1847.01)

and a copy may be obtained from Sandy

Farmer, OPPE Regulatory Information

Division; U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (2137), 401 M St., S.W.,

Washington, DC 20460 or by calling

(202) 260–2740.

The information required by the

Federal plan would be used by the

Agency to ensure that the MWC Federal

plan requirements are implemented and

are complied with on a continuous

basis. Required records and reports are

necessary for EPA to identify MWC

units that may not be in compliance

with the MWC Federal plan

requirements. Based on reported

information, EPA would decide which

units should be inspected and what

records or processes should be

inspected. The records that owners and

operators of units maintain would

indicate to EPA whether MWC

personnel are operating and maintaining

control equipment properly.

Because the MWC Federal plan is an

interim action, EPA is presenting a

range of estimated burden. The

maximum burden reflects a worst-case

scenario in which no additional State

plans are approved within 3 years of the

Federal plan promulgation. The

minimum estimate reflects a more likely

scenario in which all remaining State

plans are in place at some point within

3 years following promulgation of the

MWC Federal plan.

Based on a 1995 MWC inventory and

recent information from EPA Regional

Offices, this Federal plan is projected to

affect a maximum of 143 MWC units at

59 plants in 23 States. A number of

additional State plans will be approved

by the time the Federal plan is

promulgated, or within the year

following promulgation. When a State

plan is approved, the Federal plan no

longer applies to MWC units covered in

that State plan. Thus, the rule will more

likely affect about 53 units at 21 plants

as of June 1998 and 13 units at 4 plants

as of June 1999. The burden has been

estimated under both scenarios and is

presented as a range.

The maximum estimated average

annual burden for industry for the first

3 years after the implementation of the

Federal plan would be 40,132 hours

annually at a cost of $15,463,317

(including $1,561,654 in labor costs) per

year to meet the monitoring,

recordkeeping, and reporting

requirements. The maximum estimated

average annual burden, over the first 3

years, for the Agency would be 7,254

hours at a cost of $327,844 (including

travel expenses) per year.

The minimum estimated average

annual burden for industry for the first

3 years after the implementation of the

Federal plan would be 2,677 hours

annually at a cost of $1,285,000

(including $104,185 in labor costs) per

year to meet the monitoring,

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements. The minimum estimated

average annual burden for the first 3

years for the Agency would be 827

hours at a cost of $36,000 (including

travel expenses) per year. The minimum

burden is calculated for affected

facilities in 5 States for the first year.

The minimum burden is reduced to

affected facilities in two States for the

second year and no states are affected in

the third year.

Burden means total time, effort, or

financial resources expended by persons

to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or

provide information to or for a Federal

agency. This includes the time needed

to review instructions; develop, acquire,

install, and utilize technology and

systems for the purposes of collecting,

validating, and verifying information,

processing and maintaining

information, and disclosing and

providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information. An agency

may not conduct or sponsor, and a

person is not required to respond to, a

collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid OMB control

number. The OMB control numbers for

EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 CFR

part 9 and 48 CFR part 15.

C. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), EPA must

determine whether the regulatory action

is ‘‘significant’’ and, therefore, subject to

OMB review and the requirements of

the Executive Order. The EPA and OMB

determined that this regulatory action is

‘‘not significant’’ under Executive Order

12866. The proposed Federal plan

would simply implement the 1995

guidelines and does not result in any

additional control requirements or

impose any additional costs above those

previously considered during

promulgation of the 1995 emission

guidelines. The EPA considered the

1995 emission guidelines and standards

to be significant and the rules were

reviewed by OMB in 1995 (see 60 FR

65405).

D. Unfunded Mandates Act

Under section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Act of 1995 (‘‘Unfunded

Mandates Act’’), signed into law on

March 22, 1995, EPA must prepare a

statement to accompany any rule where

the estimated costs to State, local, or

tribal governments, or to the private

sector will be $100 million or more in

any 1 year. Section 203 requires EPA to

establish a plan for informing and

advising any small governments that

may be significantly impacted by the

rule. An unfunded mandates statement

was prepared and published in the 1995

promulgation notice (see 60 FR 65405 to

65412).

The EPA has determined that the

proposed Federal plan does not include

any new Federal mandates or additional

requirements above those previously

considered during promulgation of the

1995 emission guidelines. Therefore, the

requirements of the Unfunded Mandates

Act do not apply to this proposed rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

Section 605 of the RFA requires

Federal agencies to give special

consideration to the impacts of

regulations on small entities, which are

defined as small businesses, small

organizations, and small governments.

During the 1995 rulemaking, EPA

estimated that few, if any, small entities

would be affected by the promulgated

guidelines and standards, and therefore,

a regulatory flexibility analysis was not

required (see 60 FR 65413). This

proposed Federal plan would not

establish any new requirements;

therefore, pursuant to the provisions of
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3523

5 U.S.C. 605(b), EPA certifies that this

Federal plan will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities, and a regulatory flexibility

analysis is not required.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements,

Incorporation by reference.

Dated: January 14, 1997.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

For reasons set out in the preamble,

title 40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal

Regulations is proposed to be amended

as follows:

PART 62—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 62

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7642.

2. Amend § 62.02 by revising

paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (g)

to read as follows:

§ 62.02 Introduction.

(a) This part sets forth the

Administrator’s approval and

disapproval of State plans for the

control of pollutants and facilities under

section 111(d), and section 129 as

applicable, of the Act, and the

Administrator’s promulgation of such

plans or portions of plans thereof.

Approval of a plan or any portion of a

plan is based on a determination by the

Administrator that it meets the

requirements of section 111(d), and

section 129 as applicable, of the Act and

provisions of part 60 of this chapter.

* * * * *

(g) Substitute plans promulgated by

the Administrator for States that do not

have approved plans are contained in

separate subparts that appear after the

subparts for States. These Federal plans

include sections identifying the

applicability of the plan, emission

limits, compliance schedules,

recordkeeping and reporting,

performance testing, and monitoring

requirements.

3. Amend subpart A by adding

§ 62.13.

§ 62.13 Federal plans.

The Federal plans apply to owners

and operators of affected facilities that

are not covered by an approved State

plan, are located in any State for which

a State plan has not been approved, or

are located in any State whose State

plan has been vacated in whole or in

part. Affected facilities are defined in

each Federal plan.

(a) The Federal plan for municipal

waste combustors is contained in

subpart FFF of this part.

(b) Landfills Federal plan. [Reserved]

(c) Medical waste incinerator Federal

plan. [Reserved]

4. Amend part 62 by adding and by

reserving subparts DDD and EEE as

follows:

Subpart DDD—[Reserved]

Subpart EEE—[Reserved]

5. Amend part 62 by adding subpart

FFF consisting of §§ 62.14100 through

62.14109 to read as follows:

Subpart FFF—Federal Plan Requirements

for Large Municipal Waste Combustors

Constructed on or Before September 20,

1994

Sec.

62.14100 Scope.

62.14101 Definitions.

62.14102 Affected facilities.

62.14103 Emission limits for municipal

waste combustor metals, acid gases,

organics, and nitrogen oxides.

62.14104 Requirements for municipal waste

combustor operating practices.

62.14105 Requirements for municipal waste

combustor operator training and

certification.

62.14106 Emission limits for municipal

waste combustor fugitive ash emissions.

62.14107 Emission limits for air curtain

incinerators.

62.14108 Compliance schedules.

62.14109 Reporting and recordkeeping, and

compliance and performance testing.

Table 1 of Subpart FFF—Units Excluded

From Subpart FFF

Table 2 of Subpart FFF—Nitrogen Oxides

Requirements for Affected Facilities

Table 3 of Subpart FFF—Municipal Waste

Combustor Operating Requirements

Table 4 of Subpart FFF—Generic Compliance

Schedules and Increments of Progress

(Pre-1987)

Table 5 of Subpart FFF—Generic Compliance

Schedules and Increments of Progress

(Post-1987)

Table 6 of Subpart FFF—Site-specific

Compliance Schedules and Increments

of Progress

Subpart FFF—Federal Plan

Requirements for Large Municipal

Waste Combustors Constructed on or

Before September 20, 1994

§ 62.14100 Scope.

This subpart contains emission

requirements and compliance schedules

for the control of pollutants from certain

municipal waste combustors in

accordance with section 111(d) and

section 129 of the Clean Air Act and 40

CFR part 60, subpart B. This municipal

waste combustor Federal plan applies to

each affected facility as defined in

§ 62.14102 that is not covered by a

currently approved State plan.

§ 62.14101 Definitions.

Terms used but not defined in this

subpart have the meaning given to them

in the Clean Air Act and 40 CFR part 60,

subparts A, B, and Eb.

Contract means a legally binding

agreement or obligation that cannot be

canceled or modified without

substantial financial loss.

De-rate means to make a permanent

physical change to the municipal waste

combustor unit that reduces the

maximum combustion capacity of the

unit to less than or equal to 250 tons per

day of municipal solid waste. A permit

restriction or a change in operation does

not qualify as de-rating. (See the

procedures specified in 40 CFR 60.58b(j)

of subpart Eb for calculating municipal

waste combustor unit capacity.)

Municipal waste combustor plant

means one or more affected facilities (as

defined in § 62.14102) at the same

location.

Protectorate means American Samoa,

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the

District of Columbia, Guam, the

Northern Mariana Islands, and the

Virgin Islands.

State means any of the 50 United

States and the protectorates of the

United States.

State plan means a plan submitted

pursuant to section 111(d) and section

129(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act and 40

CFR part 60, subpart B that implements

and enforces 40 CFR part 60, subpart

Cb.

§ 62.14102 Affected facilities.

(a) The affected facility to which this

subpart applies is each municipal waste

combustor unit with a capacity to

combust greater than 250 tons per day

of municipal solid waste for which

construction was commenced on or

before September 20, 1994, in all States

and protectorates except for the affected

facilities listed in table 1 of this subpart.

Notwithstanding the exclusions in table

1 of this subpart applies to affected

facilities in any State that does not have

a State plan currently approved.

(b) A municipal waste combustor unit

regulated by an EPA approved State

plan is not regulated by this subpart.

(c) Any municipal waste combustor

unit that has the capacity to combust

more than 250 tons per day of

municipal solid waste and is subject to

a Federally enforceable permit limiting

the maximum amount of municipal

solid waste that may be combusted in

the unit to less than or equal to 11 tons

per day is not subject to this subpart if

the owner or operator:

(1) Notifies the EPA Administrator of

an exemption claim;
3524 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

(2) Provides a copy of the Federally

enforceable permit that limits the firing

of municipal solid waste to less than 11

tons per day; and

(3) Keeps records of the amount of

municipal solid waste fired on a daily

basis.

(d) Physical or operational changes

made to an existing municipal waste

combustor unit primarily for the

purpose of complying with the emission

requirements of this subpart are not

considered in determining whether the

unit is a modified or reconstructed

facility under 40 CFR part 60, subpart

Ea or subpart Eb.

(e) A qualifying small power

production facility, as defined in section

3(17)(C) of the Federal Power Act (16

U.S.C. 796(17)(C)), that burns

homogeneous waste (such as automotive

tires or used oil, but not including

refuse-derived fuel) for the production

of electric energy is not subject to this

subpart if the owner or operator of the

facility notifies the EPA Administrator

of this exemption and provides data

documenting that the facility qualifies

for this exemption.

(f) A qualifying cogeneration facility,

as defined in section 3(18)(B) of the

Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C.

796(18)(B)), that burns homogeneous

waste (such as automotive tires or used

oil, but not including refuse-derived

fuel) for the production of electric

energy and steam or forms of useful

energy (such as heat) that are used for

industrial, commercial, heating, or

cooling purposes, is not subject to this

subpart if the owner or operator of the

facility notifies the EPA Administrator

of this exemption and provides data

documenting that the facility qualifies

for this exemption.

(g) Any unit combusting a single-item

waste stream of tires is not subject to

this subpart if the owner or operator of

the unit:

(1) Notifies the EPA Administrator of

an exemption claim; and

(2) Provides data documenting that

the unit qualifies for this exemption.

(h) Any unit required to have a permit

under section 3005 of the Solid Waste

Disposal Act is not subject to this

subpart.

(i) Any materials recovery facility

(including primary or secondary

smelters) that combusts waste for the

primary purpose of recovering metals is

not subject to this subpart.

(j) Any cofired combustor, as defined

under 40 CFR 60.51b of subpart Eb that

meets the capacity specifications in

paragraph (a) of this section is not

subject to this subpart if the owner or

operator of the cofired combustor:

(1) Notifies the EPA Administrator of

an exemption claim;

(2) Provides a copy of the Federally

enforceable permit (specified in the

definition of cofired combustor in this

section); and

(3) Keeps a record on a calendar

quarter basis of the weight of municipal

solid waste combusted at the cofired

combustor and the weight of all other

fuels combusted at the cofired

combustor.

(k) Air curtain incinerators, as defined

under 40 CFR 60.51b of subpart Eb, that

meet the capacity specifications in

paragraph (a) of this section, and that

combust a fuel stream composed of 100

percent yard waste are exempt from all

provisions of this subpart except the

opacity standard under § 62.14107, and

the testing procedures and the reporting

and recordkeeping provisions under

§ 62.14109.

(l) Air curtain incinerators that meet

the capacity specifications in paragraph

(a) of this section and that combust

municipal solid waste other than yard

waste are subject to all provisions of this

subpart.

(m) Pyrolysis/combustion units that

are an integrated part of a plastics/

rubber recycling unit (as defined in 40

CFR 60.51b of subpart Eb) are not

subject to this subpart if the owner or

operator of the plastics/rubber recycling

unit keeps records of the weight of

plastics, rubber, and/or rubber tires

processed on a calendar quarter basis;

the weight of chemical plant feedstocks

and petroleum refinery feedstocks

produced and marketed on a calendar

quarter basis; and the name and address

of the purchaser of the feedstocks. The

combustion of gasoline, diesel fuel, jet

fuel, fuel oils, residual oil, refinery gas,

petroleum coke, liquified petroleum gas,

propane, or butane produced by

chemical plants or petroleum refineries

that use feedstocks produced by

plastics/rubber recycling units are not

subject to this subpart.

(n) Cement kilns firing municipal

solid waste are not subject to this

subpart.

§ 62.14103 Emission limits for municipal

waste combustor metals, acid gases,

organics, and nitrogen oxides.

(a) The emission limits for municipal

waste combustor metals are specified in

paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) of this

section.

(1) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must not cause to be

discharged into the atmosphere from

that affected facility any gases that

contain: particulate matter in excess of

27 milligrams per dry standard cubic

meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen;

and opacity in excess of 10 percent (6-

minute average).

(2) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must not cause to be

discharged into the atmosphere from

that affected facility any gases that

contain: cadmium in excess of 0.040

milligrams per dry standard cubic

meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen;

and lead in excess of 0.44 milligrams

per dry standard cubic meter, corrected

to 7 percent oxygen.

(3) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must not cause to be

discharged into the atmosphere from

that affected facility any gases that

contain mercury in excess of 0.080

milligrams per dry standard cubic meter

or 15 percent of the potential mercury

emission concentration (85-percent

reduction by weight), corrected to 7

percent oxygen, whichever is less

stringent.

(b) The emission limits for municipal

waste combustor acid gases, expressed

as sulfur dioxide and hydrogen

chloride, are specified in paragraphs

(b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.

(1) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must not cause to be

discharged into the atmosphere from

that affected facility any gases that

contain sulfur dioxide in excess of 29

parts per million by volume or 25

percent of the potential sulfur dioxide

emission concentration (75-percent

reduction by weight or volume),

corrected to 7 percent oxygen (dry

basis), whichever is less stringent.

Compliance with this emission limit is

based on a 24-hour daily geometric

mean.

(2) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must not cause to be

discharged into the atmosphere from

that affected facility any gases that

contain hydrogen chloride in excess of

29 parts per million by volume or 5

percent of the potential hydrogen

chloride emission concentration (95-

percent reduction by weight or volume),

corrected to 7 percent oxygen (dry

basis), whichever is less stringent.

(c) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must not cause to be

discharged into the atmosphere from

that affected facility any gases that

contain municipal waste combustor

organics, expressed as total mass

dioxins/furans, in excess of the

emission limits specified in either

paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section,

as applicable.

(1) The emission limit for affected

facilities that employ an electrostatic

precipitator-based emission control

system is 60 nanograms per dry

standard cubic meter (total mass),

corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3525

(2) The emission limit for affected

facilities that do not employ an

electrostatic precipitator-based emission

control system is 30 nanograms per dry

standard cubic meter (total mass),

corrected to 7 percent oxygen.

(d) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must not cause to be

discharged into the atmosphere from

that affected facility any gases that

contain nitrogen oxides in excess of the

emission limits listed in table 2 of this

subpart for affected facilities. Table 2 of

this subpart provides emission limits for

the nitrogen oxides concentration level

for each type of affected facility.

§ 62.14104 Requirements for municipal

waste combustor operating practices.

(a) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must not cause to be

discharged into the atmosphere from

that affected facility any gases that

contain carbon monoxide in excess of

the emission limits listed in table 3 of

this subpart. Table 3 provides emission

limits for the carbon monoxide

concentration level for each type of

affected facility.

(b) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must comply with the

municipal waste combustor operating

practice requirements listed in 40 CFR

60.53b (b) and (c).

§ 62.14105 Requirements for municipal

waste combustor operator training and

certification.

The owner or operator of an affected

facility must comply with the municipal

waste combustor operator training and

certification requirements listed in

paragraphs (a) through (g) of this

section. For affected facilities,

compliance with the municipal waste

combustor operator training and

certification requirements specified

under paragraphs (a) through (d), and (g)

of this section must be no later than 12

months after the effective date of this

subpart.

(a) Each chief facility operator and

shift supervisor must obtain and

maintain a current provisional operator

certification from either the American

Society of Mechanical Engineers [QRO–

1–1994 (incorporated by reference—see

40 CFR 60.17(h)(1) of subpart A)] or a

State certification program in

Connecticut and Maryland (if the

affected facility is located in the

respective State).

(b) Each chief facility operator and

shift supervisor must have completed

full certification or must have scheduled

a full certification exam with either the

American Society of Mechanical

Engineers [QRO–1–1994 (incorporated

by reference—see 40 CFR 60.17(h)(1) of

subpart A)] or a State certification

program in Connecticut and Maryland

(if the affected facility is located in the

respective State).

(c) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must not allow the

facility to be operated at any time unless

one of the following persons is on duty

at the affected facility: A fully certified

chief facility operator; a provisionally

certified chief facility operator who is

scheduled to take the full certification

exam no later than 12 months after the

effective date of this subpart; a fully

certified shift supervisor; or a

provisionally certified shift supervisor

who is scheduled to take the full

certification exam no later than 12

months after the effective date of this

subpart. If one of the persons listed in

this paragraph must leave the affected

facility during their operating shift, a

provisionally certified control room

operator who is onsite at the affected

facility may fulfill the requirement in

this paragraph.

(d)(1) Each chief facility operator,

shift supervisor, and control room

operator at an affected facility must

complete the EPA municipal waste

combustor operator training course or

the State municipal waste combustor

operator training course in Connecticut

(if the affected facility is located in

Connecticut).

(2) The requirement specified in this

paragraph does not apply to chief

facility operators, shift supervisors, and

control room operators who have

obtained full certification from the

American Society of Mechanical

Engineers on or before the effective date

of this subpart. The owner or operator

of an affected facility may request that

the EPA Administrator waive the

requirement specified in this paragraph

for chief facility operators, shift

supervisors, and control room operators

who have obtained provisional

certification from the American Society

of Mechanical Engineers on or before

the effective date of this subpart.

(e) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must develop and

update on a yearly basis a site-specific

operating manual that must, at a

minimum, address the elements of

municipal waste combustor unit

operation specified in paragraphs (e)(1)

through (e)(11) of this section.

(1) A summary of the applicable

standards under this subpart;

(2) A description of basic combustion

theory applicable to a municipal waste

combustor unit;

(3) Procedures for receiving, handling,

and feeding municipal solid waste;

(4) Procedures for municipal waste

combustor unit startup, shutdown, and

malfunction;

(5) Procedures for maintaining proper

combustion air supply levels;

(6) Procedures for operating the

municipal waste combustor unit within

the standards established under this

subpart;

(7) Procedures for responding to

periodic upset or off-specification

conditions;

(8) Procedures for minimizing

particulate matter carryover;

(9) Procedures for handling ash;

(10) Procedures for monitoring

municipal waste combustor unit

emissions; and

(11) Reporting and recordkeeping

procedures.

(f) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must establish a training

program to review the operating manual

according to the schedule specified in

paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this

section with each person who has

responsibilities affecting the operation

of an affected facility including, but not

limited to, chief facility operators, shift

supervisors, control room operators, ash

handlers, maintenance personnel, and

crane/load handlers.

(1) Each person specified in paragraph

(f) of this section must undergo initial

training no later than the date specified

in paragraph (f)(1)(i) or (f)(1)(ii) of this

section, whichever is later.

(i) The date prior to the day the

person assumes responsibilities

affecting municipal waste combustor

unit operation; or

(ii) The date 12 months after the

effective date of this subpart.

(2) Annually, following the initial

review required by paragraph (f)(1) of

this section.

(g) The operating manual required by

paragraph (e) of this section must be

kept in a readily accessible location for

each person required to undergo

training under paragraph (f) of this

section. The operating manual and

records of training must be available for

inspection by the EPA or its delegated

enforcement agency upon request.

§ 62.14106 Emission limits for municipal

waste combustor fugitive ash emissions.

(a) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must not cause to be

discharged to the atmosphere from that

affected facility visible emissions of

combustion ash from an ash conveying

system (including conveyor transfer

points) in excess of 5 percent of the

observation period (i.e., 9 minutes per 3-

hour period), as determined by EPA

Reference Method 22 observations as

specified in 40 CFR 60.58b(k) of subpart
3526 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

Eb, except as provided in paragraphs (b)

and (c) of this section.

(b) The emission limit specified in

paragraph (a) of this section does not

cover visible emissions discharged

inside buildings or enclosures of ash

conveying systems; however, the

emission limit specified in paragraph (a)

of this section does cover visible

emissions discharged to the atmosphere

from buildings or enclosures of ash

conveying systems.

(c) The provisions specified in

paragraph (a) of this section do not

apply during maintenance and repair of

ash conveying systems.

§ 62.14107 Emission limits for air curtain

incinerators.

The owner or operator of an air

curtain incinerator with the capacity to

combust greater than 250 tons per day

of municipal solid waste and that

combusts a fuel feed stream composed

of 100 percent yard waste and no other

municipal solid waste materials must

not (at any time) cause to be discharged

into the atmosphere from that

incinerator any gases that exhibit greater

than 10-percent opacity (6-minute

average), except that an opacity level of

up to 35 percent (6-minute average) is

permitted during startup periods during

the first 30 minutes of operation of the

unit.

§ 62.14108 Compliance schedules.

(a) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must achieve the

increments of progress specified in

paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) to

retrofit air pollution control devices to

meet the emission limits of this subpart.

As specified in 40 CFR part 60, subpart

B, the compliance schedules and

increments of progress apply to each

owner or operator of an affected facility

who is taking longer than 1 year after

[date of publication of the final rule] to

comply with the emission limits

specified in this subpart.

(1) Submit a final control plan

according to the requirements of

§ 62.14109(g).

(2) Award contract(s): Award

contract(s) to initiate on-site

construction, initiate on-site installation

of emission control equipment, or

incorporate process changes. The owner

or operator must submit a signed copy

of the contract(s) awarded according to

the requirements of § 62.14109(h).

(3) Initiate on-site construction:

Initiate on-site construction, initiate onsite installation of emission control

equipment, or initiate process changes

needed to meet the emission limits as

outlined in the final control plan.

(4) Complete on-site construction:

Complete on-site construction and

installation of emission control

equipment or complete process changes. (5) Achieve final compliance:

Incorporate all process changes or

complete retrofit construction as

designed in the final control plan and

connect the air pollution control

equipment or process changes with the

affected facility identified in the final

control plan such that if the affected

facility is brought on line, all necessary

process changes or air pollution control

equipment are operating fully. Within

180 days after the date the affected

facility is required to achieve final

compliance, the initial performance test

must be conducted. On and after the

date the initial performance test is

completed or is required to be

completed, whichever is earlier, no

pollutant may be discharged into the

atmosphere from the affected facility in

excess of the emission limits of this

subpart. (b) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must achieve the

increments of progress specified in

paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) of this

section according to the schedule

specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through

(b)(4) of this section, except as provided

in paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of this

section.

(1) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that commenced

construction, modification, or

reconstruction on or before June 26,

1987 and will take longer than 1 year

after [date of publication of final rule]

(or 1 year after a revised construction

permit or a revised operating permit is

issued, if a permit modification is

required) to comply with the emission

limits of this subpart must achieve the

increments of progress according to the

schedule in table 4 of this subpart,

except for those affected facilities

specified in paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4)

of this section.

(2) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that began construction,

modification, or reconstruction after

June 26, 1987 must achieve the

increments of progress according to the

schedule in table 5 of this subpart to

comply with the emission limits of this

subpart, except for those affected

facilities specified in paragraphs (b)(3)

and (b)(4) of this section.

(3) The owner or operator of each

specified affected facility in table 6 of

this subpart must achieve the

increments of progress according to the

schedule in table 6 of this subpart. (4) For affected facilities that are

subject to the schedule requirements of

paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section,

the owner or operator (or the State air

pollution control authority) may submit

for approval alternative dates for

achieving increments 2, 3, and 4. The

owner or operator that is submitting

these alternative dates must meet the

reporting requirements of § 62.14109(l).

(c) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that has ceased

operation but will reopen prior to the

applicable final compliance date

specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through

(b)(4) of this section must meet the same

compliance dates and increments of

progress specified in paragraphs (b)(1)

through (b)(4) of this section.

(d) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that has ceased or

ceases operation of an affected facility

and restarts the affected facility after the

compliance dates specified in

paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this

section must comply with the emission

limits, requirements for combustor

operating practices, and operator

training and certification requirements

of this subpart upon the date the

affected facility restarts. The initial

performance tests required by

§ 62.14109(c) must be conducted within

180 days after the date the unit restarts.

(e) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that will be de-rated

prior to the applicable final compliance

date instead of complying with the

emission limits of this subpart must

meet the same increments of progress

and achieve the de-rating by the final

compliance date (specified in

paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this

section) that would be applicable to the

affected facility if it did not de-rate. The

owner or operator of an affected facility

that will be de-rated must meet the

reporting requirements of § 62.14109(j).

After de-rating is accomplished, the

municipal waste combustor affected

facility is no longer subject to this

subpart.

§ 62.14109 Reporting and recordkeeping

and compliance and performance testing.

(a) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must comply with the

reporting and recordkeeping provisions

listed in 40 CFR 60.59b, except as

provided in paragraphs (a)(1) through

(a)(3) of this section.

(1) The siting requirements under 40

CFR 60.59b(a), (b)(5), and (d)(11) and

the notification of construction

requirements under 40 CFR 60.59b (b)

and (c) do not apply.

(2) 40 CFR 60.54b and 60.56b of

Subpart Eb do not apply to this subpart

(see §§ 62.14105 and 62.14107 of this

subpart).

(b) The owner or operator of an

affected facility must comply with the

compliance and performance testing
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3527

methods and procedures listed in 40

CFR 60.58b of Subpart Eb, except as

provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of

this section.

(c) The initial performance test must

be completed within 180 days after the

date of final compliance specified in

§ 62.14108, rather than the date for the

initial performance test specified in 40

CFR 60.58b of Subpart Eb.

(d) The owner or operator of an

affected facility may follow the

alternative performance testing schedule

for dioxin/furan emissions specified in

40 CFR 60.58b(g)(5)(iii) if all

performance tests for all affected

facilities at the MWC plant over a 2-year

period indicate that dioxin/furan

emissions are less than or equal to 15

nanograms per dry standard cubic meter

total mass, corrected to 7 percent

oxygen (instead of 7 nanograms

specified in § 60.58b(g)(5)(iii) of Subpart

Eb).

(e) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that is taking longer

than 1 year after [date of publication of

the final rule] to comply with the

emission limits of this subpart must

submit notification to the EPA Regional

Office within 10 business days of

completing each increment. Each

notification must indicate which

increment of progress specified in

§ 62.14108 (a)(1) through (a)(5) has been

achieved. The notification must be

signed by the owner or operator of the

affected facility.

(f) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that is taking longer

than 1 year after [date of publication of

the final rule] to comply with the

emission limits of this subpart who fails

to meet any increment of progress

specified in § 62.14108 (a)(1) through

(a)(5) according to the applicable

schedule in § 62.14108 must submit

notification to the EPA Regional Office

within 10 business days of the

applicable date in § 62.14108 that the

owner or operator failed to meet the

increment.

(g) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that is taking longer

than 1 year after [date of publication of

the final rule] to comply with the

emission limits of this subpart must

submit a final control plan by the date

specified in § 62.14108(b) with the

notification required by § 62.14109(e).

The final control plan must, at a

minimum, include the items in

paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) of this

section.

(1) A complete analysis of the

applicable regulatory requirements and

methods of compliance and selected

control technology options available to

meet the requirements.

(2) A description of the air pollution

control devices or process changes that

will be employed for each unit to

comply with the emission limits and

other requirements of this subpart.

(3) Engineering specifications and

drawings of the air pollution control

equipment and/or process changes that

will be employed to comply with the

emission limits and other requirements

of this subpart.

(4) The same information that will be

used to solicit bids to install the air

pollution control devices or initiate the

process changes.

(h) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that is taking longer

than 1 year after [date of publication of

the final rule] to comply with the

emission limits of this subpart must

submit a signed copy of the contract or

contracts awarded according to the

requirements of § 62.14108(a)(2) with

the notification required by

§ 62.14109(e).

(i) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that plans to cease

operation of an affected facility on or

before December 19, 2000 rather than

comply with the emission limits of this

subpart by the applicable compliance

date specified in § 62.14108 must

submit a notification by the date

specified for the final control plan

according to the schedule specified in

paragraphs § 62.14108 (b)(1) through

(b)(4), as applicable. (Affected facilities

that cease operation on or before

December 19, 2000 rather than comply

with the emission limits of this subpart

by the compliance date specified in

§ 62.14108 are not required to submit a

final control plan.) The notification

must state the date by which the

affected facility will cease operation. If

the cease operation date is later than 1

year after [date of publication of the

final rule], the owner or operator must

enter into a legally binding closure

agreement with EPA by the date the

final control plan is due. The agreement

must specify the date by which

operation will cease.

(j) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that plans to de-rate the

affected facility on or before December

19, 2000 rather than comply with the

emission limits of this subpart by the

compliance date specified in § 62.14108

must submit a final control plan as

required by paragraph (g) of this section

and submit notification of increments of

progress as required by paragraphs (e)

and (f) of this section and § 62.14108(e)

of this subpart.

(1) The final control plan must

contain the information in paragraphs

(j)(1)(i) through (j)(1)(iv) of this section

rather than the information in paragraph

(g)(1) through (g)(4) of this section.

(i) A description of the physical

changes that will be made to accomplish

the de-rating.

(ii) Calculations of the current

maximum combustion capacity and the

planned maximum combustion capacity

after the de-rating. (See the procedures

specified in 40 CFR 60.58b(j) of Subpart

Eb for calculating municipal waste

combustor unit capacity.)

(iii) Engineering specifications and

drawings of the physical changes that

will be made to accomplish the derating.

(iv) The same information that will be

used to solicit bids to initiate the

physical changes.

(2) The owner or operator must

submit a signed copy of the contract or

contracts awarded to initiate the derating with the notification required by

paragraph (e) of this section.

(k) The owner or operator of an

affected facility that is ceasing operation

more than 1 year following [date of

publication of the final rule] must

submit performance test results by the

date 1 year after the [date of publication

of the final rule] for dioxin/furan

emissions conducted during or after

1990 for each affected facility. The

performance test shall be conducted

according to the procedure in paragraph

(b) of this section.

(l) The owner or operator (or the State

air pollution control authority) that is

submitting alternative dates for

increments 2, 3, and 4 according to

§ 62.14108(b)(4) must submit the

alternative dates by the date specified

for the final control plan according to

the schedule specified in paragraphs

§ 62.14108 (b)(1) and (b)(2), as

applicable. The owner or operator must

also submit the alternative dates to the

State.

Tables to Subpart FFF

TABLE 1 OF SUBPART FFF—MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTOR UNITS

(MWC UNITS) EXCLUDED FROM

SUBPART FFF

State MWC units

Oregon ......... MWC units at the following

MWC sites:

(a) Ogden Martin Systems,

Marion County Oregon.

(b) Coos County, Coos

Bay, Oregon.

Florida .......... All affected facilities, as defined in § 62.14102, located

in Florida.
3528 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 2 OF SUBPART FFF—NITROGEN OXIDES REQUIREMENTS FOR AFFECTED FACILITIES

Municipal waste combustor

technology

Nitrogen oxides emission limit (parts per million by volume) a

Mass burn waterwall ............................................................................................................................................................ 205.

Mass burn rotary waterwall .................................................................................................................................................. 250.

Refuse-derived fuel combustor ............................................................................................................................................ 250.

Fluidized bed combustor ...................................................................................................................................................... 180.

Mass burn refractory combustors ........................................................................................................................................ No limit.

a Corrected to 7 percent oxygen, dry basis.

TABLE 3 OF SUBPART FFF—MUNICIPAL WASTE COMBUSTOR OPERATING REQUIREMENTS

Municipal waste combustor technology

Carbon monoxide

emissions level

(parts per million by

volume) a

Averaging time

(hrs) b

Mass burn waterwall ................................................................................................................................ 100 4

Mass burn refractory ................................................................................................................................ 100 4

Mass burn rotary refractory ...................................................................................................................... 100 24

Mass burn rotary waterwall ...................................................................................................................... 250 24

Modular starved air .................................................................................................................................. 50 4

Modular excess air ................................................................................................................................... 50 4

Refuse-derived fuel stoker ....................................................................................................................... 200 24

Bubbling fluidized bed combustor ............................................................................................................ 100 4

Circulating fluidized bed combustor ......................................................................................................... 100 4

Pulverized coal/refuse-derived fuel mixed fuel-fired combustor .............................................................. 150 4

Spreader stoker coal/refuse-derived fuel mixed fuel-fired combustor ..................................................... 200 24

a Measured at the combustor outlet in conjunction with a measurement of oxygen concentration, corrected to 7 percent oxygen, dry basis. Calculated as an arithmetic average. bAveraging times are 4-hour or 24-hour block averages.

TABLE 4 OF SUBPART FFF—GENERIC COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE AND INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS (PRE-1987) a, b

Affected facilities Submit final control plan Award contracts Begin on-site construction

Complete onsite construction

Final compliance

Increment 1 Increment 2 Increment 3 Increment 4 Increment 5

Affected facilities that

commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction on or before June 26, 1987 (All

pollutants).

[Insert date 240 days

after publication in the

Federal Register].

[Insert date 480 days

after publication in the

Federal Register].

[Insert date 660 days

after publication in the

Federal Register].

11/19/00 12/19/00

aTable 4 or 5 of this subpart applies to MWC units subject to the Federal plan except those with site-specific compliance schedules shown in

Table 6 of this subpart. bAs an alternative to this schedule, the owner or operator may close the affected facility by December 19, 2000, complete the retrofit while the

affected facility is closed, and achieve final compliance upon restarting. See §§ 62.14108(c), 62.14108(d), and 62.14109(i) of this subpart.

TABLE 5 OF SUBPART FFF—GENERIC COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES AND INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS (POST-1987)a, b

Affected facilities Submit final control

plan Award contracts Begin on-site construction

Complete on-site construction Final compliance

Increment 1 Increment 2 Increment 3 Increment 4 Increment 5

Affected facilities that

commenced construction modification, or reconstruction after June 26,

1987:

1. Emission limits for

Hg, dioxin/furan.

NAc ............................ NAc ............................ NAc ............................ NAc ............................ 1 year after promulgation of this subpart or 1 year after

permit issuance.d
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules 3529

TABLE 5 OF SUBPART FFF—GENERIC COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES AND INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS (POST-1987)a, b—

Continued

Affected facilities Submit final control

plan Award contracts Begin on-site construction

Complete on-site construction Final compliance

Increment 1 Increment 2 Increment 3 Increment 4 Increment 5

2. Emission limits for

SO2, HCl, PM, Pb,

Cd, opacity CO,

NOX.

[Insert date 240 days

after publication in

the FEDERAL REGISTER].

[Insert date 480 days

after publication in

the FEDERAL REGISTER].

[Insert date 660 days

after publication in

the FEDERAL REGISTER].

11/19/00 .................... 12/19/00.

aTable 4 or 5 of this subpart applies to MWC units subject to the Federal plan except those with site-specific compliance schedules shown in

Table 6 of this subpart. bAs an alternative to this schedule, the unit may close by December 19, 2000, complete retrofit while closed, and achieve final compliance

upon restarting. See §§ 62.14108(c), 62.14108(d), and 62.14109(i) of this subpart. cBecause final compliance is achieved in 1 year, no increments of progress are required.

dPermit issuance is issuance of a revised construction permit or revised operating permit, if a permit modification is required to retrofit controls.

TABLE 6 OF SUBPART FFF—SITE-SPECIFIC COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES AND INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS

Affected facilities

at the following

MWC sites

City, State Submit final control plan Award contracts Begin construction Complete on-site

compliance Final compliance

Increment 1 Increment 2 Increment 3 Increment 4 Increment 5

Group A

Savannah Energy

Systems Co.

Savannah, Georgia.NA ....................... NA ....................... NA ....................... 12/31/97 .............. 02/28/98.

Nashville Thermal

Transfer Corp.

Nashville, Tennessee.NA ....................... NA ....................... NA ....................... 05/01/99 .............. 07/01/99.

Group Ba

All large MWC

units.

Maine ................... 10/01/98 .............. 01/01/99 .............. 07/01/99 .............. 09/01/00 .............. 12/19/00.

Baltimore Resco ... Baltimore, Maryland.NA ....................... NA ....................... 04/01/98 .............. 09/01/00 .............. 12/19/00.

Hennepin Energy

Resource Corp.

Minneapolis, Minnesota.NA ....................... NA ....................... NA ....................... NA ....................... 04/30/98.

United Power Association.Elk River, Minnesota.NA ....................... NA ....................... 12/30/99 .............. 06/30/99 .............. 12/19/00.

Northern States

Power—

Wilmarth.

Mankato, Minnesota.10/30/98 .............. 03/01/99 .............. 09/01/99 .............. 11/19/00 .............. 12/19/00.

Northern States

Power—Red

Wing.

Red Wing, Minnesota.01/30/99 .............. 07/30/99 .............. 04/30/00 .............. 11/19/00 .............. 12/19/00.

All large MWC

units.

Michigan .............. 03/01/99 .............. 09/01/99 .............. 12/01/99 .............. 11/19/00 .............. 12/19/00 b.

Any facility complying by use of

NOX trading c.

New Jersey ......... 12/15/99 .............. 01/15/00 .............. 03/15/00 .............. 07/15/00 .............. 12/19/00.

Westchester

RESCO.

Westchester

County, New

York.

NA ....................... NA ....................... 01/01/98 .............. 12/19/00 .............. 12/19/00.

Adirondack Resource Recovery

Facility.

Hudson Falls,

New York.

10/16/98 .............. 01/15/00 .............. 04/08/00 .............. 11/14/00 .............. 12/19/00.

Onandaga County

Resource Recovery Facility.

Onandaga County, New York.No date required d No date required d No date required d No date required d Within 1 year after

State plan approval [or Federal plan promulgation].

Niagra Resource

Recovery Facility.

Niagra Falls, New

York.

No date required d No date required d No date required d No date required d Within 1 year after

State plan approval [or Federal plan promulgation].

Huntington Resource Recovery

Facility.

East Northport,

New York.

10/01/99 .............. 10/15/99 .............. 03/15/00 .............. 07/15/00 .............. 08/01/00.

Babylon Resource

Recovery Facility.

West Babylon,

New York.

09/15/99 .............. 10/15/99 .............. 2/15/00 ................ 07/01/00 .............. 07/19/00.
3530 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 15 / Friday, January 23, 1998 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 6 OF SUBPART FFF—SITE-SPECIFIC COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES AND INCREMENTS OF PROGRESS—Continued

Affected facilities

at the following

MWC sites

City, State Submit final control plan Award contracts Begin construction Complete on-site

compliance Final compliance

Increment 1 Increment 2 Increment 3 Increment 4 Increment 5

Hempstead Resource Recovery

Facility.

Westbury, New

York.

05/09/98 .............. TBD e ................... TBD e ................... TBD e ................... 12/19/00.

Whellabrator Falls;

Harrisburg Authority; American

Ref-Fuel; Lancaster Resource

Energy;

Monteney Energy Resource

of Montgomery

County; York

County Solid

Waste and

Refuse Authority.

Pennsylvania ....... 3 months after issuance of

FESOPf [or

Federal plan

promulgation].

3 months after issuance of

FESOPf [or

Federal plan

promulgation].

18 months after

issuance of

FESOPf [or

Federal plan

promulgation].

30 months after

issuance of

FESOPf [or

Federal plan

promulgation].

12/19/00.g

I–95 Energy/Resource Recovery

Facility.

Lorton, Virginia .... 06/01/98 .............. 08/01/98 .............. 12/01/98 .............. 10/01/99 .............. 11/01/99.

Alexandria/ Arlington Resource

Recovery Facility.

Alexandria, Virginia.06/01/98 .............. 08/01/98 .............. 12/01/98 .............. 10/01/99 .............. 11/01/99.

NA=not applicable; increment already met.

TBD=to be determined.

aThe schedules from Group B have not been reviewed by EPA due to their recent arrival. They will be examined for acceptability at the same

time as those received during the comment period of this proposal. All schedules contained in the final Federal plan will be reviewed and approved by EPA. bFor mercury and dioxins, combustors that commenced construction after June 26, 1987, must comply by 09/01/99 or within 12 months of issuance of permit to install, whichever is later.

[Note: 09/01/99 date may be modified to 1 year after Federal plan promulgation]. cApplies only to NOX emission limits. Other pollutants would follow Federal plan generic schedule. dBecause final compliance is achieved in 1 year, no increments of progress are required.

eThe facility will propose these increments in the control plan to be submitted on 05/09/98.

fPennsylvania is implementing their State plan through Federally Enforceable State Operating Permits (FESOP).

gPennsylvania proposes 08/26/02 final compliance date for supplemental emission limits in 40 CFR 60, subpart Cb promulgated August 25,

1997. For mercury and dioxins, 1 year after State plan approval [or Federal plan promulgation] or 1 year after issuance of a revised permit if a

permit modification is required.

[FR Doc. 98–1521 Filed 1–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM

PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR

SEVERELY DISABLED

41 CFR Parts 51–5, 51–6, 51–8, 51–9,

and 51–10

Miscellaneous Amendments to

Committee Regulations

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From

People Who Are Blind or Severely

Disabled.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing

to make changes to its regulations to

clarify them and improve the efficiency

of operation of the Committee’s JavitsWagner-O’Day (JWOD) Program. The

Committee is also proposing to make

changes in its regulations to correct its

mailing address after a recent office

move.

DATES: Submit comments on or before

March 24, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase

From People Who Are Blind or Severely

Disabled, Crystal Gateway 3, Suite 310,

1215 Jefferson Davis Highway,

Arlington, Virginia 22202–4302.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: G.

John Heyer (703) 603–0665. Copies of

this notice will be made available on

request in computer diskette format.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Committee is proposing to amend 41

CFR 51–5.2 to add a new paragraph (e)

to its mandatory source requirement.

The new paragraph will require

Government contracting activities

which have bundled JWOD services into

larger contract requirements to require

their prime contractors to contract with

the JWOD nonprofit agencies for

performance of those services. The

provision would place the same

obligation on Government contracting

activities and their prime contractors if

the Committee added a bundled service

to the Procurement List after the

bundling occurred. A similar regulatory

provision for JWOD commodities

appears at 41 CFR 51–5.2(c).

The Committee is also proposing a set

of regulatory revisions to create a

provision (new 41 CFR 51–6.14) for

addition of replacement services to the

Procurement List, similar to the

provision at 41 CFR 51–6.13 on

replacement commodities. This new

provision is a response to service

relocations which are part of current

Government downsizing initiatives.

Lastly, the Committee is proposing to

amend those provisions of its

regulations which state its mailing

address, as the address changed in

November 1997. The provisions appear

in the Committee’s Freedom of

Information Act, Privacy Act, and

nondiscrimination regulations at 41 CFR