[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 78 (Friday, April 21, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21363-21365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9925]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL-6582-3]


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Source Categories

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interpretative rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action clarifies that all stationary combustion turbines 
are subject to the provisions of Subpart B--Requirements for Control 
Technology Determinations for Major Sources in Accordance with Clean 
Air Act Sections 112(g) and 112(j) (i.e., case-by-case maximum 
achievable control technology (MACT) determinations).

DATES:  Effective April 21, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  For further information, contact Mr. 
Sims Roy, Combustion Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711, telephone number: (919) 541-5263, facsimile:(919) 541-5450, 
electronic mail address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#087a6771267b61657b486d7869266f677e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8bf9e4f2a5f8e2e6f8cbeefbeaa5ece4fd">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated entities. All new stationary 
combustion turbines, which meet the criteria for major sources, are the 
regulated entities addressed by this interpretative rule. However, this 
interpretative rule does not subject these entities to new or 
additional rule requirements; it merely resolves confusion which 
appears to exist in some cases over whether such sources are covered 
under 40 CFR part 63, Subpart B--Requirements for Control Technology 
Determinations for Major Sources in Accordance with Clean Air Act 
Sections 112(g) and 112(j).

I. What Is the Background for This Interpretative Rule

    Subpart B requires ``case-by-case'' determinations of MACT for 
major sources constructed after June 29, 1998. It appears that there is 
confusion regarding the applicability of subpart B to new stationary 
combustion turbines in some situations. This interpretative rule 
resolves this confusion by clarifying that all new stationary 
combustion turbines, regardless of configuration, end use, or location, 
are subject to subpart B, provided they also meet the definition of a 
major source.
    Stationary combustion turbines were included on the list of source 
categories under section 112(c)(5) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 
development of emission standards, thus, EPA is currently developing 
national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for 
this source category. Proposal of the NESHAP is anticipated in late 
2000, with promulgation in early 2002.
    Electric utility steam generating units, on the other hand, are 
excluded from subpart B and the development of emission standards under 
section 112, unless or until such time as they are added to the source 
category list under section 112(c)(5) of the CAA. Since, among other 
uses, stationary gas turbines may be used to generate electricity, 
confusion has arisen whether stationary combustion turbines used to 
generate electricity are considered ``electric utility steam generating 
units.''
    An ``electric utility steam generating unit'' is defined in subpart 
B as follows:

    Electric utility steam generating unit means any fossil fuel 
fired combustion unit of more than 25 megawatts that serves a 
generator that produces electricity for sale. A unit that co-
generates steam and electricity and supplies more than one-third of 
its potential electric output capacity and more than 25 megawatts 
electric output to any utility power distribution system for sale 
shall be considered an electric utility steam generating unit.

    The phrase ``steam generating unit'' in the term ``electric utility 
steam generating unit'' is critical to understanding which types of 
combustion units are covered by this definition and which types are 
not. For example, this definition clearly covers a conventional fossil 
fuel fired steam generating unit (e.g., coal-fired boiler) which 
extracts heat from the combustion of fuel and generates steam for use 
in a steam turbine which, in turn, provides shaft power to spin an 
electric generator and generate electricity.
    This definition does not cover a stationary combustion turbine 
which extracts shaft power from the combustion of fuel and spins an 
electric generator to generate electricity. The combustion turbine does 
not extract heat to generate steam; in fact, there is no steam 
generating unit at all in this example. Hence, the definition 
``electric utility steam generating unit'' does not include stationary 
combustion turbines, and such turbines are subject to case-by-case MACT 
determinations.
    The confusion surrounds combined cycle systems. A combined cycle 
system, consistent with the meaning of the word ``combined,'' is a 
combination of a stationary combustion turbine and a waste heat 
recovery unit.
    In a combined cycle system, a combustion turbine extracts shaft 
power from the combustion of fuel and spins an electric generator to 
generate electricity. The hot exhaust gases from the combustion turbine 
are then routed to a separate ``waste heat recovery unit.'' The waste 
heat recovery unit extracts heat from the gases and generates steam for 
use in a steam turbine which, in turn, provides shaft power to spin an 
electric generator and generate electricity.
    The combustion turbine in a combined cycle system does not extract 
heat to generate steam. It is not a ``steam generating unit,'' and it 
is not an ``electric utility steam generating unit.'' New combustion 
turbines in combined cycle systems, therefore, must undergo case-by-
case MACT determinations.
    The waste heat recovery unit in a combined cycle system, however, 
does generate steam. It is an electric utility steam generating unit. 
New waste heat recovery units in combined cycle systems, therefore, are 
excluded from subpart B (i.e., case-by-case MACT determination).
    While new waste heat recovery units in combined cycle systems are 
excluded from case-by-case MACT, in many cases this is a moot point 
since they are not an emission source. The sole emission source, in the 
type of combined cycle system outlined above, is the combustion 
turbine. The emissions from the combustion turbine pass through the 
waste heat recovery unit, but the waste heat recovery unit is not a 
source of additional emissions.
    There is another type of combined cycle system, however, in which 
the waste heat recovery unit does contribute additional emissions. In 
these types of combined cycle systems, fuel is burned in the duct, 
through the use of ``duct

[[Page 21364]]

burners,'' just before the gases enter the waste heat recovery unit.
    These duct burners are analogous to the burners in steam generating 
units (i.e., boilers). Their only purpose is to burn fuel to generate 
more heat for extraction by the waste heat recovery unit in order for 
it to generate more steam. As a result, duct burners (where they are 
used) are considered part of the waste heat recovery unit in a combined 
cycle system, just as the burners in a boiler are considered part of 
the boiler.
    As outlined above, the waste heat recovery unit in a combined cycle 
system is an electric utility steam generating unit. Duct burners in 
these types of systems, therefore, are also excluded from subpart B 
(i.e., case-by-case MACT determination).

II. What Additional Information Is Available?

    The EPA is developing NESHAP for combustion turbines. This effort 
has lead to a collection of information regarding the performance, as 
well as the costs, associated with the use of various technologies to 
reduce emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from stationary 
combustion turbines.
    With this clarification that new stationary combustion turbines are 
subject to subpart B, EPA is making available two memoranda, 
``Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) Emission Control Technology for New 
Stationary Combustion Turbines'' and ``Oxidation Catalyst Costs for New 
Stationary Combustion Turbines,'' which compile and summarize the 
information collected by EPA. These memoranda may be of assistance and 
as a result, help to expedite the process of case-by-case MACT 
determinations. These memoranda may be obtained by contacting EPA as 
shown under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or downloaded directly by 
logging on to the following EPA website: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/uatw/combust/turbine.

III. What Are the Impacts Associated With This Interpretative Rule?

    Subpart B applies to all new major stationary sources for which 
emission standards have not been developed except electric utility 
steam generating units. As a result, subpart B applies to new major 
source stationary combustion turbines.
    This interpretative rule merely clarifies this point, it does not 
subject new stationary combustion turbines to any new or additional 
regulatory requirements. As a result, there are no impacts associated 
with this interpretative rule.

IV. Administrative Requirements

    Section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 
553(b)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that 
notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary 
to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing 
notice and an opportunity for public comment. We have determined that 
there is good cause for issuing today's interpretative rule without 
prior proposal and opportunity for comment because we are merely 
clarifying the applicability of Subpart B--Requirements for Control 
Technology Determinations for Major Sources in Accordance With Clean 
Air Act Sections 112 (g) and 112 (j). Thus, notice and public procedure 
are unnecessary, and we find that this constitutes good cause under 5 
U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and, therefore, is 
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. Because 
we have made a ``good cause'' finding that this action is not subject 
to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative Procedure 
Act or any other statute, it is not subject to the regulatory 
flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 
et seq.), or to sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4).
    In addition, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments or impose a significant intergovernmental mandate, as 
described in sections 203 and 204 of UMRA. This interpretative rule 
also does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of 
tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 13084 (63 FR 27655, 
May 10, 1998). This interpretative rule will not have substantial 
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified 
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
    This interpretative rule also is not subject to Executive Order 
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant. This action does not involve technical standards; thus, 
the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer 
and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This 
interpretative rule also does not involve special consideration of 
environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order 
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In issuing this interpretative rule, EPA has taken the necessary 
steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential 
litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct, as 
required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 
1996). The EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, 
March 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of the 
interpretative rule in accordance with the ``Attorney General's 
Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of 
Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the Executive Order. This 
interpretative rule does not impose an information collection burden 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.). The EPA's compliance with these statutes and Executive 
Orders for the underlying rule is discussed in the March 29, 1996 
Federal Register document (61 FR 14029).
    The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), as added by 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller 
General of the United States. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to 
make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by the 
Congressional Review Act if the agency makes a good cause finding that 
notice and public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary or contrary 
to the public interest. This determination must be supported by a brief 
statement (5 U.S.C. 808(2)).
    As stated previously, we have made such a good cause finding, 
including the reasons therefor, and established an effective date of 
April 21, 2000.
    The EPA will submit a report containing this interpretative rule 
and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the interpretative rule in the Federal Register. This 
action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

[[Page 21365]]

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air emissions control, Hazardous air 
pollutants, Combustion turbines.

    Dated: April 13, 2000.
Robert Perciasepe,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 00-9925 Filed 4-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>