Document ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0183-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Approval of AL Plan for Control of Emissions From Commercial and Industrial Solid  Waste Incineration Units
Posted Date: 2018-06-05T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 5, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25983-25986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12064]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0183; FRL-9978-91-Region 4]

Approval of AL 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 Alabama, through the 
Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) on May 19, 2017, 
and supplemented on October 24, 2017, 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.

[[Page 25984]]

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

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. [EPA-R04-
OAR-2018-0183] 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: Mark Bloeth, 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. Bloeth can 
be reached via telephone at 404-562-9013 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 Alabama's CISWI State Plan Submittal

    Alabama submitted a state plan to implement and enforce the EG for 
existing CISWI units in the state \1\ on March 14, 2014. On May 19, 
2017, Alabama submitted a revised plan, which was supplemented on 
October 24, 2017. 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 submittals, 
Alabama cites the following State law provisions for its authority to 
implement and enforce the plan: Code of Alabama Section 22-28-11 (adopt 
emission requirements); Code of Alabama 22-28-14 (adopt regulations to 
prescribe emissions standards and adopt compliance schedules); Code of 
Alabama Section 22-22A-5(10) (authority to issue orders, citations, 
notices of violation, licenses, certifications, and permits); Code of 
Alabama Section 22-22A-5(20) (authority to perform any other necessary 
duty); Code of Alabama Section 22-28-18 (authority to require use of 
pollution control equipment); Code of Alabama Section 22-28-19A 
(authority to conduct inspections and sample air contaminants); Code of 
Alabama Section 22-28-20 (authority to require recordkeeping); and Code 
of Alabama Section 22-28-22 (proceedings upon violation; penalties; 
subpoenas; injunctions). In addition to the foregoing statutory 
provisions, Alabama also notes that it has adopted rules into the 
Alabama 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 Alabama.

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 
atmosphere, or prescribing equipment specifications for control of air 
pollution emissions.'' See also 40 CFR 60.2515(a)(8). Alabama has 
adopted enforceable emission standards for affected CISWI units at Rule 
335-3-3.05(6). 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. Alabama has identified 
affected units at four facilities: National Cement, Argos, Holcim, and 
CEMEX. 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 Alabama 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

[[Page 25985]]

CISWI units may contain cadmium, carbon monoxide, dioxins/furans, 
hydrogen chloride, lead, mercury, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, 
and sulfur dioxide. Alabama submitted an emissions inventory for CISWI 
units as part of its state plan. This emissions inventory contains 
CISWI unit emissions rates for each regulated pollutant. EPA has 
preliminarily concluded that Alabama has met the emissions 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(c) and 60.2515(a)(4), the state plan must 
include emission standards that are no less stringent than the EG. 
Alabama has incorporated the emission standards from the EG by 
reference into its regulations at Rule 335-3-3-.05, with one exception: 
For units in the waste-burning kiln subcategory, Alabama'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 40 CFR 60, Subpart DDDD, Table 8. See Alabama Rule 
335-3-3-.05, Table 7.
    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 Alabama'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 Alabama's CISWI plan 
satisfies the emission 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. Alabama's 
state plan submittal includes: Operator training and qualification 
requirements at Rule 335-3-3-.05(5); a waste management plan at Rule 
335-3-3-.05(4); and, operating limits that are at least as protective 
as the EG at Rule 335-3-3-.05(6)(b) and Rule 335-3-3-.05, Table 2. 
Thus, we have preliminarily concluded that Alabama'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 requirements 
are at least as protective as the EG. See 40 CFR 60.2515(b).
    In the state plan at Rule 335-3-3-.05(8), Alabama 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 emission limit, Alabama'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 Alabama Rule 335-3-3-.05(8)(g).
    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 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 Alabama'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. Alabama's state plan 
incorporates the model rule provisions of the EG: For testing at Rule 
335-3-3-.05(7); for monitoring at Rule 335-3-3-.05(10); and, for 
recordkeeping and reporting at Rule 335-3-3-.05(11). In addition to 
these requirements, Alabama imposes further monitoring, recordkeeping, 
and reporting requirements for waste-burning kilns operating under a 
production-based mercury emission limit. EPA has thus preliminarily 
concluded that Alabama's state 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 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.
    In its submittal, Alabama submitted records, including transcripts, 
of two public hearings. First, a hearing was held on March 8, 2017, for 
the May 19, 2017 state plan submittal. Alabama held a second hearing on 
September 6, 2017, for the October 24, 2017, supplement. Alabama 
provided notice and made all relevant plan materials available prior to 
each hearing. Additionally, Alabama certifies in its state plan 
submittal that a hearing was held, and that the State received no 
written or oral comments on the plan. Thus, EPA has preliminarily 
concluded that Alabama's CISWI plan satisfies the requirements of 40 
CFR 60.23 and 60.2515(a)(6).

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, Alabama 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 Alabama's CISWI plan satisfies the requirements of

[[Page 25986]]

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 Alabama's state 
plan for regulation of CISWI units as submitted on May 19, 2017 and 
supplemented on October 24, 2017. In addition, EPA is proposing to 
amend 40 CFR part 62, subpart B 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. 2018-12064 Filed 6-4-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P