Document ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0184-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Florida; Control of Emissions From Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units
Posted Date: 2018-06-04T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 107 (Monday, June 4, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25633-25635]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11929]

[[Page 25633]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0184; FRL-9978-88--Region 4]

Florida; Approval of Plan for Control of Emissions From 
Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a state plan submitted by the State of Florida, through the 
Florida Department of Environmental Protection on May 31, 2017, and 
supplemented on December 19, 2017, and February 2, 2018, for 
implementing and enforcing the Emissions Guidelines (EG) applicable to 
existing Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) 
units. The state plan provides for implementation and enforcement of 
the EG, as finalized by EPA on June 23, 2016, applicable to existing 
CISWI units for which construction commenced on or before June 4, 2010, 
or for which modification or reconstruction commenced after June 4, 
2010, but no later than August 7, 2013. The state plan establishes 
emission limits, monitoring, operating, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements for affected CISWI units.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 5, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. [EPA-R04-
OAR-2018-0184] at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be confidential business information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment 
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason Dressler, South Air Enforcement 
and Toxics Section, Air Enforcement and Toxics Branch, Air, Pesticides 
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Mr. Dressler 
can be reached via telephone at 404-562-9208 and via email at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    Section 129 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) directs the 
Administrator to develop regulations under section 111(d) of the Act 
limiting emissions of nine air pollutants (particulate matter, carbon 
monoxide, dioxins/furans, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, hydrogen 
chloride, lead, mercury, and cadmium) from four categories of solid 
waste incineration units: Municipal solid waste; hospital, medical, and 
infectious solid waste; commercial and industrial solid waste; and 
other solid waste.
    On December 1, 2000, EPA promulgated new source performance 
standards (NSPS) and EG to reduce air pollution from CISWI units, which 
are codified at 40 CFR part 60, subparts CCCC and DDDD, respectively. 
See 65 FR 75338. EPA revised the NSPS and EG for CISWI units on March 
21, 2011. See 76 FR 15704. Following promulgation of the 2011 CISWI 
rule, EPA received petitions for reconsideration requesting that EPA 
reconsider numerous provisions in the rule. EPA granted reconsideration 
on certain issues and promulgated a CISWI reconsideration rule on 
February 7, 2013. See 78 FR 9112. Subsequently, EPA received petitions 
to further reconsider certain provisions of the 2013 NSPS and EG for 
CISWI units. On January 21, 2015, EPA granted reconsideration on four 
specific issues and finalized reconsideration of the CISWI NSPS and EG 
on June 23, 2016. See 81 FR 40956.
    Section 129(b)(2) of the CAA requires states to submit to EPA for 
approval state plans and revisions that implement and enforce the EG--
in this case, 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD. State plans and revisions 
must be at least as protective as the EG, and become federally 
enforceable upon approval by EPA. The procedures for adoption and 
submittal of state plans and revisions are codified in 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart B.

II. Review of Florida's CISWI State Plan Submittal

    Florida submitted a state plan to implement and enforce the EG for 
existing CISWI units in the state \1\ on February 6, 2014. On May 31, 
2017, Florida submitted a revised plan, which was supplemented on 
December 19, 2017, and February 2, 2018. EPA has reviewed the revised 
plan for existing CISWI units in the context of the requirements of 40 
CFR part 60, subparts B and DDDD. State plans must include the 
following nine essential elements: Identification of legal authority; 
identification of mechanism for implementation; inventory of affected 
facilities; emissions inventory; emission limits; compliance schedules; 
testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting; public hearing 
records; and, annual state progress reports on plan enforcement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The submitted state plan does not apply in Indian country 
located in the state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Identification of Legal Authority

    Under 40 CFR 60.26 and 60.2515(a)(9), an approvable state plan must 
demonstrate that the State has legal authority to adopt and implement 
the EG's emission standards and compliance schedule. In its submittal, 
Florida cites the following State law provisions for its authority to 
implement and enforce the plan: Florida Statutes (F.S.) Sec. 403.031 
(definitions); F.S. Sec. 403.061 (promulgate air quality plans, adopt 
rules, take enforcement action, set standards, monitor air quality, 
require reporting, permitting, and implement the CAA); F.S. Sec. 
403.087 and 403.0872 (permitting); F.S. Sec. 403.121 (judicial and 
administrative remedies), 403.131 injunctive relief), 403.141 (civil 
liability), and 403.161 (civil and criminal penalties); F.S. Sec. 
403.201 (variances); F.S. Sec. 403.716 (operator training); and, F.S. 
Sec. 403.8055 (incorporation by reference of Federal standards). 
Florida also notes that it has adopted rules into the Florida 
Administrative Code to implement and enforce its air quality program. 
EPA has reviewed the cited authorities and has preliminarily concluded 
that the State has adequately demonstrated legal authority to implement 
and enforce the CISWI state plan in Florida.

B. Identification of Enforceable State Mechanisms for Implementing the 
Plan

    Under 40 CFR 60.24(a), a state plan must include emission 
standards, defined at 40 CFR 60.21(f) as ``a legally enforceable 
regulation setting forth an allowable rate of emissions into the

[[Page 25634]]

atmosphere, or prescribing equipment specifications for control of air 
pollution emissions.'' See also 40 CFR 60.2515(a)(8). Florida has 
adopted enforceable emission standards for affected CISWI units at Rule 
62-204.800(9)(f). EPA has preliminarily concluded that the rule meets 
the emission standard requirement under 40 CFR 60.24(a).

C. Inventory of Affected Units

    Under 40 CFR 60.25(a) and 60.2515(a)(1), a state plan must include 
a complete source inventory of all CISWI units. Florida has identified 
affected units at five facilities: Titan Pennsuco, Argos Cement Newbery 
Kiln 1, Argos Cement Newberry Kiln 2, Suwannee American Cement, and 
American Cement Company LLC. Omission from this inventory of CISWI 
units does not exempt an affected facility from the applicable section 
111(d)/129 requirements. EPA has preliminarily concluded that Florida 
has met the affected unit inventory requirements under 40 CFR 60.25(a) 
and 60.2515(a)(1).

D. Inventory of Emissions From Affected CISWI Units

    Under 40 CFR 60.25(a) and 60.2515(a)(2), a state plan must include 
an emissions inventory of the pollutants regulated by the EG. Emissions 
from CISWI units may contain cadmium, carbon monoxide, dioxins/furans, 
hydrogen chloride, lead, mercury, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, 
and sulfur dioxide. Florida submitted an emissions inventory for CISWI 
units as part of its state plan, which was supplemented on February 2, 
2018. This emissions inventory contains CISWI unit emissions rates for 
each regulated pollutant. EPA has preliminarily concluded that Florida 
has met the emission inventory requirements of 40 CFR 60.25(a) and 
60.2515(a)(2).

E. Emission Limitations, Operator Training and Qualification, Waste 
Management Plan, and Operating Limits for CISWI Units

    Under 40 CFR 60.24(a), 60.24(c), and 60.2515(a)(4), the state plan 
must include emission standards that are no less stringent than the EG. 
Florida has incorporated the emission standards from the EG by 
reference into its regulations at Rule 62-204.800(9)(f), F.A.C., with 
one exception: For units in the waste-burning kiln subcategory, 
Florida's state plan provides an equivalent production-based mercury 
emission limit of 58 pounds of mercury per million tons of clinker, 
rather than the concentration-based standard of 0.011 milligrams per 
dry standard cubic meter contained in Table 8 to subpart DDDD of part 
60. See Rule 62-204.800(9)(f)(5), F.A.C.
    Under 40 CFR 60.2515(b), EPA has the authority to approve plan 
requirements that deviate from the content of the EG, so long as the 
state demonstrates that the requirements are at least as protective. In 
the February 7, 2013 rule adopting the EG for existing CISWI units, EPA 
discussed its methodology for developing emission limits for the 
subcategories of sources subject to the rule. See 78 FR 9112 (February 
7, 2013). Though we noted that the Agency was retaining an ``emissions 
concentration basis for the standards,'' we also expressed the standard 
for waste-burning kiln emission limits on a production basis. See id. 
at 9122-23. For those kilns, we noted that an equivalent production-
based standard for mercury would be 58 pounds of mercury per million 
tons of clinker. See id. at 9122.
    In other words, EPA has previously explained that the equivalent 
production-based emission limit of 58 pounds of mercury per million 
tons of clinker for waste-burning kilns is at least as protective as 
the standard contained in the EG. Because Florida's state plan imposes 
either this equivalent standard or the applicable EG on waste-burning 
kilns--and imposes the applicable EG on all other affected CISWI 
units--we have preliminarily concluded that Florida's CISWI plan 
satisfies the emissions limitations requirements of 40 CFR 60.24(c).
    40 CFR 60.2515(a)(4) also requires a state plan to include operator 
training and qualification requirements, a waste management plan, and 
operating limits that are at least as protective as the EG. Florida's 
state plan incorporates these requirements from the EG at Rule 62-
204.800(9)(f)(3)-(5). Thus, we have preliminarily concluded that 
Florida's state plan satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 60.24(c) and 
60.2515(a)(4).

F. Compliance Schedules

    Under 40 CFR 60.24(a), (c), and (e) and 40 CFR 60.2515(a)(3), each 
state plan must include a compliance schedule, which requires affected 
CISWI units to expeditiously comply with the state plan requirements. 
EPA has the authority to approve compliance schedule requirements that 
deviate from those imposed under the EG, so long as those are at least 
as protective as the EG. See 40 CFR 60.2515(b).
    In the state plan at Rule 62-204.800(9)(f)(7), F.A.C., Florida 
generally requires that affected sources comply with the EG initial 
compliance requirements for CISWI units, which EPA has codified at 40 
CFR 60.2700 through 40 CFR 60.2706. However, for waste-burning kilns 
complying with the production-based mercury emission limit, Florida's 
state plan requires compliance with the requirements applicable to 
Portland Cement Manufacturing Kilns, which are codified at 40 CFR part 
63, subpart LLL. See Rule 62-204.800(9)(f)(7).
    As noted above, EPA has authority to approve requirements that are 
at least as stringent as the EG. Here, we have preliminarily concluded 
that the state plan's compliance schedule requirements for waste-
burning kilns contain all relevant elements of the EG, and also impose 
additional recordkeeping requirements that are necessary for the 
effective implementation and enforcement of the equivalent limit. For 
these reasons, we have preliminarily concluded that Florida's state 
plan satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 60.24(a), (c), and (e) and 40 
CFR 60.2515(a)(3).

G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements

    Under 40 CFR 60.24(b)(2), 60.25(b), and 60.2515(a)(5), an 
approvable state plan must require that sources conduct testing, 
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. Florida's state plan 
incorporates by reference the model rule provisions of the EG: For 
performance testing at Rule 62-204.800(9)(f)(6), F.A.C.; for monitoring 
at Rule 62-204.800(9)(f)(9), F.A.C.; and, for recordkeeping and 
reporting at Rule 62-204.800(9)(f)(10), F.A.C. In addition to these 
requirements, Florida imposes further monitoring, recordkeeping, and 
reporting requirements for waste-burning kilns operating under a 
production-based mercury emission limit. Because Florida's state plan 
imposes requirements that are at least as stringent as those imposed 
under Federal law for testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and 
reporting, we have preliminarily concluded that Florida's CISWI plan 
satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 60.24(b)(2), 60.25(b), and 
60.2515(a)(5).

H. A Record of Public Hearing on the State Plan Revision

    40 CFR 60.23 sets forth the public participation requirements for 
each state plan. The State must conduct a public hearing; make all 
relevant plan materials available to the public prior to the hearing; 
and provide notice of such hearing to the public, the Administrator of 
EPA, each local air pollution control agency, and, in the case of an 
interstate region, each state within the region. 40

[[Page 25635]]

CFR 60.2515(a)(6) requires each state plan include certification that 
the hearing was held, a list of witnesses and their organizational 
affiliations, if any, appearing at the hearing, and a brief written 
summary of each presentation or written submission. However, under 40 
CFR 60.23(g), the Administrator may also approve alternative public 
participation procedures, so long as the procedures ``in fact provide 
for adequate notice to and participation of the public.''
    In its state plan submittal, as supplemented by its December 19, 
2017 letter, Florida has requested approval of alternative public 
participation requirements for this and future state plan submittals. 
If approved, Florida intends to apply these modified public 
participation procedures to future state plans and state plan 
revisions. As Florida notes, the State published notice of the proposed 
revisions to the state plan in the Florida Administrative Register. In 
the notice, the State provided the public with an opportunity to submit 
comments and to request a public hearing, which would be held on 
February 21, 2017. Because Florida did not receive any comments or 
requests for hearing, however, the hearing was not held.
    In these circumstances, we believe that Florida's procedures, 
although different from the procedures required under 40 CFR 60.23(c) 
and (d), provide for adequate notice to and participation of the 
public. We also note that the State's alternative procedures comply 
with the notice requirements for State Implementation Plan submittals 
under CAA section 110 and 40 CFR part 51. Thus, EPA is proposing in 
this action to approve Florida's alternative public participation 
procedures for this and future CAA section 111(d)/129 state plan 
submissions.

I. Annual State Progress Reports to EPA

    Under 40 CFR 60.25(e) and (f) and 40 CFR 60.2515(a)(7), the State 
must provide in its state plan for annual reports to EPA on progress in 
enforcement of the plan. Accordingly, Florida provides in its plan that 
it will submit reports on progress in plan enforcement to EPA on an 
annual (calendar year) basis, commencing with the first full reporting 
period after plan revision approval. EPA has preliminarily concluded 
that Florida's CISWI plan satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 60.25(e) 
and (f) and 40 CFR 60.2515(a)(7).

III. Proposed Action

    Pursuant to CAA section 111(d), CAA section 129, and 40 CFR part 
60, subparts B and DDDD, EPA is proposing to approve Florida's state 
plan for regulation of CISWI units as submitted on May 31, 2017, and 
supplemented on December 19, 2017, and February 2, 2018. In addition, 
EPA is proposing to amend 40 CFR part 62, subpart K to reflect this 
action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a 111(d)/
129 plan submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and 
applicable Federal regulations. In reviewing 111(d)/129 plan 
submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided they meet 
the criteria and objectives of the CAA and EPA's implementing 
regulations. Accordingly, this action merely proposes to approve state 
law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this 
proposed action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
    In addition, this rule is not subject to requirements of Section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be 
inconsistent with the CAA. It also does not provide EPA with the 
discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate 
human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally 
permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 
16, 1994). And it does not have Tribal implications as specified by 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because EPA is 
not proposing to approve the submitted plan to apply in Indian country 
located in the state, and because the submitted plan will not impose 
substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, 
Aluminum, Fertilizers, Fluoride, Intergovernmental relations, 
Manufacturing, Phosphate, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Sulfur oxides, Waste treatment and disposal.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7411.

    Dated: May 15, 2018.
Onis ``Trey'' Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2018-11929 Filed 6-1-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P