Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559-0148
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Sewage Sludge Incineration Units
Posted Date: 2011-03-21T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 54 (Monday, March 21, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15372-15454]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4491]

[[Page 15371]]

Vol. 76

Monday,

No. 54

March 21, 2011

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

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

40 CFR Part 60

Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission 
Guidelines for Existing Sources: Sewage Sludge Incineration Units; 
Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 76 , No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 15372]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559; FRL-9272-9]
RIN 2060-AP90

Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission 
Guidelines for Existing Sources: Sewage Sludge Incineration Units

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action promulgates EPA's new source performance standards 
and emission guidelines for sewage sludge incineration units located at 
wastewater treatment facilities designed to treat domestic sewage 
sludge. This final rule sets limits for nine pollutants under section 
129 of the Clean Air Act: Cadmium, carbon monoxide, hydrogen chloride, 
lead, mercury, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, polychlorinated 
dibenzo-p-dioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans, and sulfur 
dioxide.

DATES: The final rule is effective on May 20, 2011. The incorporation 
by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by 
the Director of the Federal Register as of May 20, 2011.

ADDRESSES: EPA established a single docket under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2009-0559 for this action. This docket includes previous actions 
including the standards proposed on October 14, 2010 (75 FR 63260) and 
a supplemental notice issued on November 5, 2010 (75 FR 68296). All 
documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov 
Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not 
publicly available, e.g., confidential business information or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically through 
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at EPA's Docket Center, 
Public Reading Room, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004. This Docket Facility is open from 
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal 
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 
566-1744, and the telephone number for the EPA Docket Center is (202) 
566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Amy Hambrick, Natural Resource and 
Commerce Group, Sector Policies and Programs Division (E143-03), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-0964; fax number: (919) 541-3470; e-
mail address: hambrick.amy@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Acronyms and Abbreviations. The following acronyms and 
abbreviations are used in this document.

7-PAH 7-Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
ANSI American National Standards Institute
As Arsenic
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
ASTM American Society of Testing and Materials
CAA Clean Air Act
CASS Continuous Automated Sampling System
CBI Confidential Business Information
Cd Cadmium
CDX Central Data Exchange
CEMS Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems
COMS Continuous Opacity Monitoring System
The Court U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
CPMS Continuous Parametric Monitoring System
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CISWI Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration
CO Carbon Monoxide
Cr Chromium
CWA Clean Water Act
EG Emission Guidelines
EJ Environmental Justice
ERT Electronic Reporting Tool
ESP Electrostatic Precipitators
FF Fabric Filter
FB Fluidized Bed
FGR Flue Gas Recirculation
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutants
HCl Hydrogen Chloride
Hg Mercury
HMIWI Hospital, Medical and Infectious Waste Incineration
ICR Information Collection Request
ISTDMS Integrated Sorbent Trap Dioxin Monitoring System
ISTMMS Integrated Sorbent Trap Mercury Monitoring System
LML Lowest Measured Level
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology
Mg/dscm Milligrams per Dry Standard Cubic Meter
MH Multiple Hearth
Mn Manganese
MWC Municipal Waste Combustion
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAICS North American Industrial Classification System
Ng/dscm Nanograms per Dry Standard Cubic Meter
Ni Nickel
NOX Nitrogen Oxides
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NSPS New Source Performance Standards
NTAA National Tribal Air Association
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
O&M Operation and Maintenance
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OP Office of Policy
OSWI Other Solid Waste Incineration
OTM Other Test Method
OW Office of Water
Pb Lead
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls
PCDD/PCDF Polychlorinated Dibenzo-P-Dioxins and Polychlorinated 
Dibenzofurans
PM Particulate Matter
POM Polycyclic Organic Matter
POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works
PPM Parts per Million
PPMV Parts per Million by Volume
PPMVD Parts per Million of Dry Volume
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
PS Performance Specifications
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
RTO Regenerative Thermal Oxidizer
SBA Small Business Administration
SCR Selective Catalytic Reduction
SNCR Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
SO2 Sulfur Dioxide
SSI Sewage Sludge Incineration
SSM Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction
TEF Toxic Equivalency Factor
TEQ Toxic Equivalency
THC Total Hydrocarbons
TMB Total Mass Basis
TPD Tons per Day
TPY Tons per Year
TTN Technology Transfer Network
UL Upper Limit
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
UPL Upper Prediction Limit
VCS Voluntary Consensus Standards
WWW Worldwide Web

    Organization of This Document. The following outline is provided to 
aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. General Information
    A. Does the action apply to me?
    B. Where can I get a copy of this document?
    C. Judicial Review
II. Background
    A. What is the statutory background for this final rule?
    B. What are the primary sources of emissions and what are the 
emissions?
    C. What is the relationship of the final standards to other 
standards for the use or disposal of sewage sludge and associated 
air emissions?
III. Summary of the Final Standards
    A. What units are affected by the final standards?
    B. What are the emission limits in the emission guidelines for 
existing sources?
    C. What are the emission limits in the new source performance 
standards for new sources?

[[Page 15373]]

    D. What are the testing and monitoring requirements?
    E. What are the other requirements for new and existing SSI 
units?
    F. What are the recordkeeping and reporting requirements?
    G. What are the SSM provisions?
    H. What are the Title V permit requirements?
    I. What are the applicability dates of the standards?
    J. What are the requirements for submission of emissions test 
results to EPA?
IV. Summary of Significant Changes Following Proposal
    A. Applicability
    B. Subcategories
    C. MACT Floor UPL Calculation and EG and NSPS Emission Limits
    D. Baseline Emissions, Costs, and Impacts Estimation
    E. Compliance Requirements
    F. Definitions
V. Significant Public Comments and Rationale for Changes to the 
Proposed Rule
    A. Legal and Applicability Issues Regulating SSI Under Section 
112 vs. Section 129
    B. Subcategories
    C. MACT Floor Analysis
    D. Baseline Emissions
    E. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis
    F. Cost and Economic Impacts
    G. Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction
    H. Compliance Requirements
VI. Impacts of the Final Action
    A. Impacts of the Final Action for Existing Units
    B. Impacts of the Final Action for New Units
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Planning and 
Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Categories and entities potentially affected by the final action 
are those that operate sewage sludge incinerators (SSI). Although there 
is no specific NAICS code for SSI, these units may be operated by 
wastewater treatment facilities designed to treat domestic sewage 
sludge. The following NAICS codes could apply:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Examples of
             Category                 NAICS code         potentially
                                                     regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solid waste combustors and                  562213  Municipalities with
 incinerators.                                       SSI units.
Sewage treatment facilities.......          221320  ....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
general guide for identifying entities likely to be affected by the 
final action. To determine whether your facility would be affected by 
the final action, you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 
CFR 60.4770 of subpart LLLL and proposed 40 CFR 60.5005 of subpart 
MMMM. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of the 
final action to a particular entity, contact the person listed in the 
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. Where can I get a copy of this document?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
the final action will also be available on the WWW through the TTN. 
Following signature, a copy of the final action will be posted on the 
TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules 
at the following address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN 
provides information and technology exchange in various areas of air 
pollution control.

C. Judicial Review

    Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of this final rule is 
available only by filing a petition for review in the Court by May 20, 
2011. Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that ``only an 
objection to this final rule that was raised with reasonable 
specificity during the period for public comment can be raised during 
judicial review.'' This section also provides a mechanism for EPA to 
convene a proceeding for reconsideration, ``[i]f the person raising an 
objection can demonstrate to EPA that it was impracticable to raise 
such objection within [the period for public comment] or if the grounds 
for such objection arose after the period for public comment (but 
within the time specified for judicial review) and if such objection is 
of central relevance to the outcome of this rule.'' Any person seeking 
to make such a demonstration to EPA should submit a Petition for 
Reconsideration to the Office of the Administrator, Environmental 
Protection Agency, Room 3000, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania 
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004, with a copy to both of the contacts 
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and 
the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation Law Office, 
Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), Environmental Protection 
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. Note, under 
CAA section 307(b)(2), the requirements established by this final rule 
may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal proceedings 
brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.

II. Background

A. What is the statutory background for this final rule?

    Section 129 of the CAA, entitled, ``Solid Waste Combustion,'' 
requires EPA to develop and adopt standards for solid waste 
incineration units pursuant to CAA sections 111 and 129. Section 
129(a)(1)(A) of the CAA requires EPA to establish performance 
standards, including emission limitations, for ``solid waste 
incineration units.'' Section 129 of the CAA defines ``solid waste 
incineration unit'' as ``a distinct operating unit of any facility 
which combusts any solid waste material from commercial or industrial 
establishments or the general public'' (section 129(g)(1)). Section 129 
of the CAA also provides that ``solid waste'' shall have the meaning 
established by EPA pursuant to its authority under the RCRA (section 
129(g)(6)). Sections 111(b) and 129(a) of the CAA address emissions 
from new units (i.e., NSPS), and CAA sections 111(d) and 129(b) address 
emissions from existing units (i.e., EG). The NSPS are directly 
enforceable Federal regulations, and under CAA section 129(f)(1), 
become effective 6 months after promulgation. Unlike the NSPS, the EG 
are not themselves directly enforceable. Rather, the EG are implemented 
and enforced through either an EPA-approved state plan or a promulgated 
Federal plan.

[[Page 15374]]

States are required to submit a plan to implement and enforce the EG to 
EPA for approval not later than 1 year after EPA promulgates the EG 
(CAA section 129(b)(2)). The state plan must be ``at least as 
protective as'' the EG and must ensure compliance with all applicable 
requirements not later than 3 years after the state plan is approved by 
EPA, or 5 years after promulgation of the relevant EG, whichever is 
sooner. EPA's procedures for submitting and approving state plans are 
set forth in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. When a state plan is approved 
by EPA, the plan requirements become federally enforceable, but the 
state has primary responsibility for implementing and enforcing the 
plan. However, EPA is required to develop, implement, and enforce a 
Federal plan for solid waste incineration units located in any state 
which has not submitted an approvable state plan within 2o years after 
the date of promulgation of the relevant EG (CAA section 129(b)(3)). 
The Federal plan must assure that each solid waste incineration unit 
subject to the Federal plan is in compliance with all provisions of the 
EG not later than 5 years after the date the relevant guidelines are 
promulgated. EPA views the Federal plan as a ``place-holder'' that 
remains in effect only until such time as a state without an approved 
plan submits and receives EPA approval of its state plan. Once an 
applicable state plan has been approved, the requirements of the 
Federal plan no longer apply to solid waste incineration units covered 
by that state plan.
    The CAA sets forth a two-stage approach to regulating emissions 
from solid waste incinerator units. The statute also provides EPA with 
substantial discretion to distinguish among classes, types, and sizes 
of incineration units within a category while setting standards. In the 
first stage of setting standards, CAA section 129(a)(2) requires EPA to 
establish technology-based emission standards that reflect levels of 
control EPA determines are achievable for new and existing units, after 
considering costs, nonair quality health and environmental impacts and 
energy requirements associated with the implementation of the 
standards. Section 129(a)(5) of the CAA then directs EPA to review 
those standards and revise them as necessary every 5 years. In the 
second stage, CAA section 129(h)(3) requires EPA to determine whether 
further revisions of the standards are necessary in order to provide an 
ample margin of safety to protect public health.
    In setting forth the methodology EPA must use to establish the 
first-stage technology-based standards for the standards, CAA section 
129(a)(2) provides that standards ``applicable to solid waste 
incineration units promulgated under section 111 and this section shall 
reflect the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of [certain listed 
air pollutants] that the Administrator, taking into consideration the 
cost of achieving such emission reduction and any nonair quality health 
and environmental impacts and energy requirements, determines is 
achievable for new and existing units in each category.'' This level of 
control is referred to as a MACT standard.
    In promulgating a MACT standard, EPA must first calculate the 
minimum stringency levels for new and existing solid waste incineration 
units in a category, generally based on levels of emissions control 
achieved or required to be achieved by the subject units. The minimum 
level of stringency is called the MACT ``floor,'' and CAA section 
129(a)(2) sets forth differing levels of minimum stringency that EPA's 
standards must achieve, based on whether they regulate new and 
reconstructed sources, or existing sources. For new and reconstructed 
sources, CAA section 129(a)(2) provides that the ``degree of reduction 
in emissions that is deemed achievable * * * shall not be less 
stringent than the emissions control that is achieved in practice by 
the best controlled similar unit, as determined by the Administrator.'' 
Emissions standards for existing units may be less stringent than 
standards for new units, but ``shall not be less stringent than the 
average emissions limitation achieved by the best performing 12 percent 
of units in the category.''
    Maximum Achievable Control Technology analyses involve an 
assessment of the emissions from the best performing unit or units in a 
source category. The assessment can be based on actual emissions data, 
knowledge of the air pollution control in place in combination with 
actual emissions data, state regulatory requirements that may enable 
EPA to estimate the actual performance of the regulated units, or other 
emissions information. For each source category, the assessment 
involves a review of actual emissions data with an appropriate 
accounting for emissions variability. Other methods of estimating 
emissions can also be used, if the methods can be shown to provide 
reasonable estimates of the actual emissions performance of a source or 
sources. In addition to the MACT floor limit, EPA must examine whether 
more stringent ``beyond-the-floor'' standards should be adopted. In 
considering whether such standards are appropriate, EPA must consider 
the cost of achieving such emission reduction, and any non-air quality 
health and environmental impacts and energy requirements. The CAA 
requires that the MACT floor for new sources be no less stringent than 
the emissions control achieved in practice by the best-controlled 
similar unit. EPA is also required to consider beyond-the-floor 
standards for new sources, consistent with the factors described above. 
Clean Air Act section 129(a)(1) identifies five categories of solid 
waste incineration units:
     Units that combust municipal waste at a capacity greater 
than 250 tpd.
     Units that combust municipal waste at a capacity equal to 
or less than 250 tpd.
     Units that combust hospital, medical, and infectious 
waste.
     Units that combust commercial or industrial waste.
     Units that combust waste and which are not specifically 
identified in section 129(a)(1)(A) through (D) are referred to in 
section 129(a)(1)(E) as ``other categories'' of solid waste 
incineration units.
    A SSI unit is an incinerator located at a wastewater treatment 
facility designed to treat domestic sewage sludge that combusts sewage 
sludge for the purpose of reducing the volume of the sewage sludge by 
removing combustible matter. Sewage sludge incinerators, by virtue of 
having not been specifically identified in section 129(a)(1)(A) through 
(D), have been interpreted to be part of the broader category of 
``other categories'' of solid waste. EPA has issued emission standards 
for large and small MWC, HMIWI, CISWI, and OSWI units; however, as 
explained further below, none of those emission standards apply to SSI 
units.
    EPA issued emission standards for OSWI units on December 16, 2005 
(70 FR 74870). Based on EPA's interpretation of the CAA at that time, 
the OSWI standards did not include emission standards for SSI units. 
EPA received a petition for reconsideration of the OSWI standards on 
February 14, 2006, regarding the exclusion of certain categories, 
including SSI.\1\ While EPA granted the petition for reconsideration on 
June 28, 2006, EPA's final review, which became effective January 22, 
2007, concluded that no additional changes were necessary to the 2005 
OSWI rule (71 FR 36726). That litigation is currently being held in 
abeyance. EPA currently intends to revise the emission standards for 
OSWI units in the future,

[[Page 15375]]

and that rulemaking will address all OSWI units except SSI units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Sierra Club v. EPA; DC Cir. Nos. 06-1066, 07-1063.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the OSWI rule issued on December 16, 2005, EPA stated that it 
had decided not to regulate SSI units under CAA section 129 (70 FR 
74870), but rather to regulate SSI units under CAA section 112, 
pointing to a statement in EPA's 2000 Unified Regulatory Agenda stating 
that sewage sludge incinerators do not combust waste from a commercial 
or industrial establishment or the general public. We declined to 
revise that decision to regulate SSI units under 112 in the response to 
the petition for reconsideration on this issue for five reasons, 
including our position that section 129(a)(1)(E) did not require 
regulation of all ``other'' solid waste incineration units and that 
section 129(g)(1)'s enumerated exemptions to the definition of ``solid 
waste incineration unit'' were not exclusive, and that section 
129(h)(2) gave EPA the discretion to choose whether to regulate 
incinerators under section 112 or section 129 of the Act. (72 FR 2620). 
In June 2007, in a separate decision related to EPA's December 1, 2000, 
emission standards for CISWI units, the Court held that any unit 
combusting any solid waste must be regulated under section 129 of the 
CAA. The impact of this decision on EPA's regulation of SSI is 
explained in detail in the NPRM.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ NRDC v. EPA; 489 F. 3d. at 1257-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA considers SSI units to be ``other solid waste incineration 
units,'' since that category is intended to encompass all solid waste 
incineration units that are not included in the first four categories 
identified in CAA section 129(a) through (d). EPA plans to re-issue 
emission standards for the remaining OSWI units at a later time. EPA is 
taking final action on emission standards for SSI units at this time 
because these emission standards are needed as part of EPA's 
fulfillment of its obligations under CAA sections 112(c)(3) and 
(k)(3)(B)(ii) and section 112(c)(6). Clean Air Act section 
112(k)(3)(B)(ii) calls for EPA to identify at least 30 HAP which, as 
the result of emissions from area sources, pose the greatest threat to 
public health in the largest number of urban areas. EPA must then 
ensure that sources representing 90 percent of the aggregate area 
source emissions of each of the 30 identified HAP are subject to 
standards pursuant to section 112(d).\3\ Sewage sludge incineration 
units are one of the source categories identified for regulation to 
meet the 90 percent requirement for Cd, Cr, Pb, Mn, Hg, Ni and PCB. EPA 
is ordered by the Court to satisfy its obligation under CAA section 
112(c)(3) and (k)(3)(B)(ii) by January 16, 2011.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ CAA section 112(c)(3) and section 112(k)(3)(B)(ii).
    \4\ Sierra Club v. Jackson; D.DC No. 1:01CV01537.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a notice on April 10, 1998, EPA provided a list of source 
categories for regulation under CAA section 112(d)(2) or 112(d)(4). 
Section 112(c)(6) of the CAA requires EPA to identify categories of 
sources of seven specified pollutants to assure that sources counting 
for not less than 90 percent of the aggregate emissions of each such 
pollutant are subject to standards under CAA section 112(d)(2) or 
112(d)(4) (63 FR 17838). Sewage sludge incineration units are one of 
the identified source categories for regulation to meet the 90 percent 
requirement for Hg. Further information can be found in the Memorandum 
titled, ``Emission Standards for Meeting the Ninety Percent Requirement 
under Section 112(c)(6) of the Clean Air Act'' in the SSI docket (EPA-
HQ-OAR-2009-0559).Therefore, EPA is finalizing the SSI standards prior 
to taking action on the remaining source categories that will be 
regulated under CAA section 129(a)(1)(E) as OSWI units.

B. What are the primary sources of emissions and what are the 
emissions?

    Sewage sludge incineration units may be operated by municipalities 
or other entities. Incineration continues to be used to dispose of 
sewage sludge. Combustion of solid waste, and specifically sewage 
sludge, causes the release of a wide array of air pollutants, some of 
which exist in the waste feed material and are released unchanged 
during combustion, and some of which are generated as a result of the 
combustion process itself. The pollutants for which numerical limits 
must be established, as specified in section 129 of the CAA, include 
Cd, CO, HCl, Hg, NOX, PCDD/PCDF, PM, Pb, and SO2; 
and, where appropriate, numerical limits for opacity must also be 
established. These emissions come from the SSI unit's stack and 
fugitive PM emissions, as indicated by the associated visible 
emissions, also occur from ash handling.

C. What is the relationship of the final standards to other standards 
for the use or disposal of sewage sludge and associated air emissions?

    Under authority of section 405(d) and (e) of the CWA, as amended 33 
U.S.C.A. 1251, (et seq.), EPA promulgated regulations on February 19, 
1993, at 40 CFR part 503 designed to protect public health and the 
environment from any reasonably anticipated adverse effects of certain 
pollutants that may be present in sewage sludge. The part 503 
regulations establish requirements for the final use and disposal of 
sewage sludge when: (1) The sludge is applied to the land for a 
beneficial use (e.g., for use in home gardens); (2) the sludge is 
disposed on land by placing it on surface disposal sites; and (3) the 
sewage sludge is incinerated. The standards apply to POTW that generate 
or treat domestic sewage sludge, as well as to any person who uses or 
disposes of sewage sludge from such treatment works.
    The part 503 requirements for firing sewage sludge in a SSI are in 
subpart E of the regulations. Subpart E includes general requirements; 
pollutant limits; operational standards; management practices; and 
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.
    These part 503 regulations require that SSI meet the National 
Emission Standards for Beryllium and Hg in subparts C and E, 
respectively, of 40 CFR part 61. The regulations also require that the 
allowable concentration of five other inorganic pollutants be 
calculated using equations in the regulation. The inorganic pollutants 
included are Pb, As, Cd, Cr, and Ni. The terms in the equations must be 
determined on a case-by-case basis, except for the risk-specific 
concentration for the inhalation exposure pathway to protect 
individuals when these pollutants are inhaled. The site-specific 
variables for the equations (incinerator type, dispersion factor, 
control efficiency, feed rate, and stack height) must be used to 
calculate allowable daily concentrations of As, Cd, Cr, Pb and Ni in 
the sewage sludge fed to the incinerator.
    Also included in subpart E of part 503 is an operational standard 
for THC. The value for THC in the final part 503 regulation cannot be 
exceeded in the exit gas from the SSI stack. Management practices and 
frequency of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements are 
also included in this subpart.
    Under today's final standards, EPA is establishing limits for three 
of the inorganic pollutants covered by the current part 503 regulations 
(Cd, Pb and Hg) and the following six additional pollutants: HCl, CO, 
NOX, SO2, PM, and total PCDD/PCDF. Besides the 
pollutants covered here, there are other differences between the part 
503 regulations and these final standards. The emission limits for 
inorganic pollutants under part 503 are risk-based numbers rather than 
technology-based. Also, part 503 does not distinguish between new and 
existing units or between incinerator types (i.e., MH or

[[Page 15376]]

FB incinerator) for setting emission limits since emission limits are 
based on risks to a highly exposed individual.
    Because both part 503 and these final standards cover the same 
universe of facilities, there are certain issues that arise in terms of 
potential impacts to current SSI facilities. First, the regulation of 
sewage sludge under CAA section 129 will result in stricter emission 
standards than under the current CWA rule. Additional pollution 
controls will increase costs for facilities that continue to use the 
incineration disposal method. If the additional costs are high enough, 
many entities may choose to adopt alternative disposal methods (e.g., 
surface disposal in landfills or other beneficial land applications). 
Consequently, a potential impact of this rule is that some of the 
estimated 110 facilities that operate SSI as the primary means of 
disposal could discontinue this practice and would instead landfill or 
land apply their sewage sludge. Second, one must consider the available 
capacity of surface disposal sites to receive additional sewage sludge 
and the potential for added costs if the use of SSI is discontinued. 
Third, SSI will be subject to two different sets of requirements 
(numeric standards, operational standards, monitoring, recordkeeping, 
and reporting) under the two different statutes, creating an additional 
burden to these facilities unless alternative regulatory approaches are 
implemented. EPA plans to evaluate the requirements under both statutes 
to determine what changes, if any, should be made to the part 503 
regulations.

III. Summary of the Final Standards

    This preamble discusses the final standards as they apply to the 
owner or operator of a new or existing SSI unit. This preamble also 
describes the major requirements of the SSI regulations. For a full 
description of the final requirements and compliance times, see the SSI 
standards in subparts LLLL and MMMM.

A. What units are affected by the final standards?

    The final standards and guidelines apply to owners or operators of 
SSI units (as defined in 40 CFR 60.4780 and 40 CFR 60.5065) located at 
wastewater treatment facilities designed to treat domestic sewage 
sludge. A SSI unit is an enclosed device or devices using controlled 
flame combustion that burns sewage sludge for the purpose of reducing 
the volume of the sewage sludge by removing combustible matter. A SSI 
unit also includes, but is not limited to, the sewage sludge feed 
system, auxiliary fuel feed system, grate system, flue gas system, 
waste heat recovery equipment, if any, and bottom ash system. The SSI 
unit includes all ash handling systems connected to the bottom ash 
handling system. The combustion unit bottom ash system ends at the 
truck loading station or similar equipment that transfers the ash to 
final disposal. The SSI unit does not include air pollution control 
equipment or the stack. The affected facility is each individual SSI 
unit. The SSI standards in subparts LLLL and MMMM apply to new and 
existing SSI units that burn sewage sludge as defined in the subparts. 
The final standards define two subcategories for new and existing SSI 
units: MH incinerators and FB incinerators.
    The combustion of sewage sludge that is not burned in a SSI unit 
located at a wastewater treatment facility designed to treat domestic 
sewage sludge is subject to other section 129 standards, such as the 
CISWI standards (40 CFR part 60, subparts CCCC and DDDD of this part), 
the OSWI standards (40 CFR part 60, subparts EEEE and FFFF), the MWC 
standards (40 CFR part 60, subparts Ea, Eb, Cb, AAAA, and BBBB of this 
part) or the Hazardous Waste Combustor rule (40 CFR part 63 subpart 
EEE).

B. What are the emission limits in the emission guidelines for existing 
sources?

    The final emission limits for existing sources in the MH 
incinerator subcategory and FB incinerator subcategory are presented in 
Table 1 of this preamble. Existing sources may comply with either the 
PCDD/PCDF TEQ or TMB emission limits.
    These standards apply at all times.

                                 Table 1--Emission Limits for Existing SSI Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Emission limit    Emission limit
                  Pollutant                                Units                   for MH            for FB
                                                                                incinerators      incinerators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............             0.095            0.0016
CO..........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................             3,800                64
HCl.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................               1.2              0.51
Hg..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............              0.28             0.037
NOX.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................               220               150
Pb..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............              0.30            0.0074
PCDD/PCDF, TEQ..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............              0.32              0.10
PCDD/PCDF, TMB..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............               5.0               1.2
PM..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............                80                18
SO2.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................                26                15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What are the emission limits in the new source performance standards 
for new sources?

    The final emission limits for new sources in the MH incinerator 
subcategory and FB incinerator subcategory are presented in Table 2 of 
this preamble. Existing sources may comply with either the PCDD/PCDF 
TEQ or TMB emission limits.
    These standards apply at all times.

                                   Table 2--Emission Limits for New SSI Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Emission limit    Emission limit
                  Pollutant                                Units                   for MH            for FB
                                                                                incinerators      incinerators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............            0.0024            0.0011
CO..........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................                52                27
HCl.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................               1.2              0.24

[[Page 15377]]

 
Hg..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............              0.15            0.0010
NOX.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................               210                30
Pb..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............            0.0035           0.00062
PCDD/PCDF, TMB..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............             0.045             0.013
PCDD/PCDF, TEQ..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............            0.0022            0.0044
PM..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............                60               9.6
SO2.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................                26               5.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. What are the testing and monitoring requirements?

    These final standards require all new and existing SSI units to 
demonstrate initial and annual compliance with the emission limits 
using EPA-approved emission test methods. The final standards also 
provide an option for less frequent testing if sources demonstrate that 
their emissions of regulated pollutants are below thresholds of the 
emission limits.
    For existing SSI units, the EG requires initial and annual 
emissions performance tests (or continuous emissions monitoring or 
continuous sampling as an alternative), bag leak detection systems for 
FF controlled units, continuous parameter monitoring, and annual 
inspections of air pollution control devices, if they are used to meet 
the emission limits. Additionally, existing units are required to 
conduct Method 22 (see 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7) visible emissions 
test of the ash handling operations during each compliance test.
    For new SSI units, the NSPS requires initial and annual emissions 
performance tests (or continuous emissions monitoring or continuous 
sampling as an alternative), bag leak detection systems for FF 
controlled units, as well as continuous parameter monitoring and annual 
inspections of air pollution control devices that may be used to meet 
the emission limits. The final rule requires all new SSI units to 
install a CO CEMS. Operators of new units are also required to conduct 
Method 22 visible emissions testing of the ash handling operations 
during each compliance test.
    For existing SSI units, use of Cd, CO, HCl, NOX, PM, Pb 
or SO2 CEMS; ISTMMS; and ISTDMS (continuous sampling with 
periodic sample analysis) are approved alternatives to parametric 
monitoring and annual compliance testing. For new SSI units, CO CEMS 
are required, and use of Cd, HCl, NOX, PM, Pb or 
SO2 CEMS; ISTMMS; and ISTDMS (continuous sampling, with 
periodic sample analysis) are approved alternatives to parametric 
monitoring and annual compliance testing.

E. What are the other requirements for new and existing SSI units?

    Owners or operators of new or existing SSI units are required to 
meet operator training and qualification requirements, which include: 
Ensuring that at least one operator or supervisor per facility complete 
the operator training course, that qualified operator(s) or 
supervisor(s) complete an annual review or refresher course specified 
in the regulation, and that they maintain plant-specific information, 
updated annually, regarding training.
    Owners or operators of new SSI units are required to conduct a 
siting analysis, which includes submitting a report that evaluates 
site-specific air pollution control alternatives that minimize 
potential risks to public health or the environment, considering costs, 
energy impacts, non-air environmental impacts and any other factors 
related to the practicability of the alternatives.
    Owners or operators of new or existing SSI units are required to 
submit a monitoring plan for any continuous monitoring system or bag 
leak detection system used to comply with the rule. They must also 
submit a monitoring plan for their ash handling system that specifies 
the operating procedures they will follow to ensure that they meet the 
fugitive emission limit.

F. What are the recordkeeping and reporting requirements?

    Records of the initial and all subsequent stack or PS tests, 
deviation reports, operating parameter data, continuous monitoring 
data, maintenance and inspections of the air pollution control devices, 
the siting analysis (for new units only), monitoring plan and operator 
training and qualification must be maintained for 5 years. The results 
of the stack tests and PS tests and values for operating parameters are 
required to be included in initial and subsequent compliance reports.

G. What are the SSM provisions?

    The Court vacated portions of two provisions in EPA's CAA section 
112 regulations governing the emissions of HAP during periods of SSM. 
Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 130 
S. Ct. 1735 (U.S. 2010). Specifically, the Court vacated the SSM 
exemption contained in 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) and 40 CFR 63.6(h)(1), (the 
``General Provisions Rule,'') that EPA promulgated under section 112 of 
the CAA. When incorporated into CAA section 112(d) regulations for 
specific source categories, these two provisions exempt sources from 
the requirement to comply with the otherwise applicable CAA section 
112(d) emission standard during periods of SSM.
    While the Court's ruling in Sierra Club v. EPA directly affects 
only the subset of CAA section 112(d) rules that incorporate 40 CFR 
63.6(f)(1) and (h)(1) by reference and that contain no other regulatory 
text exempting or excusing compliance during SSM events, the legality 
of source category-specific SSM provisions is questionable.
    Consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA, EPA is requiring that emission 
limitations in these final standards apply at all times the unit is 
operating. In establishing these standards, EPA has taken into account 
startup and shutdown periods and, for the reasons explained below, has 
not established different standards for those periods.
    We are not promulgating a separate emission standard for the source 
category that applies during periods of startup and shutdown. Based on 
the information available at this time, we believe that SSI units will 
be able to meet the emission limits during periods of startup. Units we 
have information on use natural gas, landfill gas, or distillate oil to 
start the unit and add waste once the unit has reached combustion 
temperatures. Emissions from burning natural gas, landfill gas or 
distillate fuel oil are expected to generally be lower than from 
burning solid wastes. Emissions during periods of shutdown are also 
generally lower than emissions during normal operations because the

[[Page 15378]]

materials in the incinerator would be almost fully combusted before 
shutdown occurs. Furthermore, the approach for establishing MACT floors 
for SSI units ranked individual SSI units based on actual performance 
for each pollutant and subcategory, with an appropriate accounting of 
emissions variability. Because we accounted for emissions variability, 
we believe we have adequately addressed any minor variability that may 
potentially occur during startup or shutdown.
    Periods of startup, normal operations, and shutdown are predictable 
and routine aspects of a source's operations. However, by contrast, 
malfunction is defined as a ``sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably 
preventable failure of air pollution control and monitoring equipment, 
process equipment or a process to operate in a normal or usual manner * 
* * '' (40 CFR 60.2). EPA has determined that malfunctions should not 
be viewed as a distinct operating mode and, therefore, any emissions 
that occur at such times do not need to be factored into development of 
CAA section 129 standards, which, once promulgated, apply at all times. 
Nothing in CAA section 129 or in case law requires that EPA anticipate 
and account for the innumerable types of potential malfunction events 
in setting emission standards.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, Weyerhaeuser v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, 1058 (DC Cir. 
1978) (``In the nature of things, no general limit, individual 
permit, or even any upset provision can anticipate all upset 
situations. After a certain point, the transgression of regulatory 
limits caused by `uncontrollable acts of third parties,' such as 
strikes, sabotage, operator intoxication or insanity, and a variety 
of other eventualities, must be a matter for the administrative 
exercise of case-by-case enforcement discretion, not for 
specification in advance by regulation.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, it is reasonable to interpret CAA section 129 as not 
requiring EPA to account for malfunctions in setting emissions 
standards. For example, we note that CAA section 129 uses the concept 
of ``best controlled'' or ``best performing'' sources in defining MACT, 
the level of stringency that major source standards must meet. Applying 
the concept of ``best controlled'' or ``best performing'' to a source 
that is malfunctioning presents significant difficulties. The goal of 
best controlled or best performing sources is to operate in such a way 
as to avoid malfunctions of their units.
    Moreover, even if malfunctions were considered a distinct operating 
mode, we believe it would be impracticable to take malfunctions into 
account in setting CAA section 129 standards for SSI. As noted above, 
by definition, malfunctions are sudden and unexpected events, and it 
would be difficult to set a standard that takes into account the myriad 
different types of malfunctions that can occur across all sources in 
the category. Moreover, malfunctions can vary in frequency, degree, and 
duration, further complicating standard setting.
    For the SSI standards, malfunctions are required to be reported in 
deviation reports. We will then review the deviation reports to 
determine if the deviation is a violation of the standards.
    In the event that a source fails to comply with the applicable CAA 
section 129 standards as a result of a malfunction event, EPA would 
determine an appropriate response based on, among other things, the 
good faith efforts of the source to minimize emissions during 
malfunction periods, including preventative and corrective actions, as 
well as root cause analyses to ascertain and rectify excess emissions. 
EPA would also consider whether the source's failure to comply with the 
CAA section 129 standard was, in fact, ``sudden, infrequent, not 
reasonably preventable'' and was not instead ``caused in part by poor 
maintenance or careless operation.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 40 CFR 60.2 (definition of malfunction).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, EPA recognizes that even equipment that is properly 
designed and maintained can fail and that such failure can sometimes 
cause an exceedance of the relevant emission standard.\7\ EPA is 
therefore finalizing the proposed affirmative defense to civil 
penalties for exceedances of emissions limits that are caused by 
malfunctions, with some revisions to the proposed regulatory 
provision.\8\ Under this provision, the source must prove by a 
preponderance of the evidence that it has met all of the elements set 
forth in 40 CFR 60.4860 and in 40 CFR 60.5180. The criteria ensure that 
the affirmative defense is available only where the event that causes 
an exceedance of the emission limit meets the narrow definition of 
malfunction in 40 CFR 60.2 (sudden, infrequent, not reasonable 
preventable and not caused by poor maintenance and or careless 
operation). For example, to successfully assert the affirmative 
defense, the source must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that 
excess emissions ``[w]ere caused by a sudden, infrequent, and 
unavoidable failure of air pollution control and monitoring equipment, 
process equipment, or a process to operate in a normal or usual manner 
* * *.'' The criteria also are designed to ensure that steps are taken 
to correct the malfunction, to minimize emissions in accordance with 40 
CFR part 60, subpart LLLL and 40 CFR part 60, subpart MMMM and to 
prevent future malfunctions. For example, the source must prove by a 
preponderance of the evidence that ``[r]epairs were made as 
expeditiously as possible when the applicable emission limitations were 
being exceeded * * *'' and that ``[a]ll possible steps were taken to 
minimize the impact of the excess emissions on ambient air quality, the 
environment and human health * * *.'' In any judicial or administrative 
proceeding, the Administrator may challenge the assertion of the 
affirmative defense and, if the respondent has not met its burden of 
proving all of the requirements in the affirmative defense, appropriate 
penalties may be assessed in accordance with section 113 of the CAA 
(see also 40 CFR 22.77).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See, e.g., State Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding 
Excessive Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown 
(Sept. 20, 1999); Policy on Excess Emissions During Startup, 
Shutdown, Maintenance, and Malfunctions (Feb. 15, 1983).
    \8\ See proposed definition 40 CFR 60.4930 and 40 CFR 60.5250 
(defining ``affirmative defense'' to mean, in the context of an 
enforcement proceeding, a response or defense put forward by a 
defendant, regarding which the defendant has the burden of proof, 
and the merits of which are independently and objectively evaluated 
in a judicial or administrative proceeding).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. What are the Title V permit requirements?

    All new and existing SSI units regulated by the final SSI rule are 
required to apply for and obtain a Title V permit. These Title V 
operating permits assure compliance with all applicable requirements 
for regulated SSI units, including all applicable CAA section 129 
requirements.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 40 CFR 70.6(a)(1), 70.2, 71.6(a)(1) and 71.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The permit application deadline for a CAA section 129 source 
applying for a Title V operating permit depends on when the source 
first becomes subject to the relevant Title V permits program. If a 
regulated SSI unit is a new unit and is not subject to an earlier 
permit application deadline, a complete Title V permit application must 
be submitted on or before the relevant date below.
     For a SSI unit that commenced operation as a new source on 
or before the promulgation date of 40 CFR part 60, subpart LLLL, the 
source must submit a complete Title V permit application no later than 
12 months after the promulgation date of 40 CFR part 60, subpart LLLL; 
or
     For a SSI unit that commences operation as a new source 
after the promulgation of 40 CFR part 60, subpart LLLL, the source must 
submit a complete Title V permit application no

[[Page 15379]]

later than 12 months after the date the SSI unit commences operation as 
a new source.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ CAA section 503(c) and 40 CFR 70.5(a)(1)(i) and 
71.5(a)(1)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the SSI unit is an existing unit and is not subject to an 
earlier permit application deadline, then the source must submit a 
complete Title V permit application by the earlier of the following 
dates:
     Twelve months after the effective date of any applicable 
EPA-approved CAA section 111(d)/129 plan (i.e., an EPA approved state 
or tribal plan that implements the SSI EG); or
     Twelve months after the effective date of any applicable 
Federal plan; or
     Thirty-six months after promulgation of 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart MMMM.
    For any existing SSI unit not subject to an earlier permit 
application deadline, the application deadline of 36 months after the 
promulgation of 40 CFR part 60, subpart MMMM, applies regardless of 
whether or when any applicable Federal plan is effective, or whether or 
when any applicable state or tribal CAA section 111(d)/129 plan is 
approved by EPA and becomes effective. (See CAA sections 129(e), 
503(c), 503(d), and 502(a) and 40 CFR 70.5(a)(1)(i) and 71.5(a)(1)(i).)
    If the SSI unit is subject to Title V as a result of some 
triggering requirement(s) other than those mentioned above, for 
example, a SSI unit may be a major source (or part of a major source), 
then you may be required to apply for a Title V permit prior to the 
deadlines specified above. If more than one requirement triggers a 
source's obligation to apply for a Title V permit, the 12-month time 
frame for filing a Title V permit application is triggered by the 
requirement which first causes the source to be subject to Title V.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ CAA section 503(c) and 40 CFR 70.3(a) and (b), 
70.5(a)(1)(i), 71.3(a) and (b) and 71.5(a)(1)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For additional background information on the interface between CAA 
section 129 and Title V, including EPA's interpretation of section 
129(e), information on updating existing Title V permit applications 
and reopening existing Title V permits, see the final ``Federal Plan 
for Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration,'' October 3, 
2003 (68 FR 57518), as well as the ``Summary of Public Comments and 
Responses'' document in the OSWI docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0156).

I. What are the applicability dates of the standards?

    New SSI units that commence construction after October 14, 2010, or 
that are modified 6 months or more after the date of promulgation, must 
meet the NSPS emission limits of 40 CFR part 60, subpart LLLL within 6 
months after the promulgation date of the standards or upon startup, 
whichever is later.
    Under the final EG, and consistent with CAA section 129 (b)(2) and 
40 CFR 60, subpart B, states are required to submit state plans 
containing the existing source emission limits of subpart MMMM of this 
part, and other requirements to implement and enforce the EG within 1 
year after promulgation of the EG. States must submit state plans to 
EPA by March 21, 2012. State plans apply to existing SSI in the state 
(including SSI that are modified prior to and including the date 6 
months after promulgation) and must be at least as protective as the 
EG.
    The final EG requires existing SSI to demonstrate compliance with 
the standards as expeditiously as practicable after approval of a state 
plan, but no later than 3 years from the date of approval of a state 
plan or 5 years after promulgation of the EG, whichever is earlier. 
Consistent with CAA section 129, EPA expects states to require 
compliance as expeditiously as practicable. However, because we believe 
that many SSI units will find it necessary to retrofit existing 
emissions control equipment and/or install additional emissions control 
equipment in order to meet the final limits, EPA anticipates that 
states may choose to provide the 3-year compliance period allowed by 
CAA section 129(f)(2). If EPA does not approve a state plan or issue a 
Federal plan, then the compliance date is 5 years from the date of the 
final rule.
    EPA intends to develop a Federal plan that will apply to existing 
SSI units in any state that has not submitted an approved state plan 
within 2 years after promulgation of the EG. The final EG allows 
existing SSI units subject to the Federal plan up to 5 years after 
promulgation of the EG to demonstrate compliance with the standards, as 
allowed by CAA section 129(b)(3).

J. What are the requirements for submission of emissions test results 
to EPA?

    EPA must have performance test data to conduct effective reviews of 
CAA sections 112 and 129 standards, as well as for many other purposes 
including compliance determinations, emission factor development, and 
annual emission rate determinations. In conducting these required 
reviews, EPA has found it ineffective and time consuming, not only for 
us, but also for regulatory agencies and source owners and operators to 
locate, collect, and submit emissions test data because of varied 
locations for data storage and varied data storage methods. One 
improvement that has occurred in recent years is the availability of 
stack test reports in electronic format as a replacement for cumbersome 
paper copies.
    In this final rule, EPA is taking a step to improve data 
accessibility and increase the ease and efficiency of reporting for 
sources. Owners and operators of SSI facilities are required to submit, 
to EPA's ERT database, electronic copies of reports of certain 
performance tests required under the SSI EG and NSPS. Data entry will 
be through an electronic emissions test report structure called the 
Emissions Reporting Tool (ERT) whenever conducting performance tests. 
The ERT was developed with input from stack testing companies who 
generally collect and compile performance test data electronically and 
offices within state and local agencies that perform field test 
assessments. The ERT is currently available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html, and access to direct data submittal to EPA's 
electronic emissions database (WebFIRE) will become available by 
December 31, 2011.
    The requirement to submit source test data electronically to EPA 
would not require any additional performance testing and would apply to 
those performance tests conducted using test methods that are supported 
by the ERT. The ERT contains a specific electronic data entry form for 
most of the commonly used EPA reference methods. The Web site listed 
below contains a listing of the pollutants and test methods supported 
by the ERT. In addition, when a facility submits performance test data 
to WebFIRE, there will be no additional requirements for emissions test 
data compilation. Moreover, we believe industry will benefit from 
development of improved emission factors, fewer follow-up information 
requests, and better regulation development as discussed below. The 
information to be reported is already required for the existing test 
methods and is necessary to evaluate the conformance to the test 
method.
    One major advantage of submitting source test data through the ERT 
is a standardized method to compile and store much of the documentation 
required to be reported by this rule that also clearly states what 
testing information would be required. Another important benefit of 
submitting these data to EPA at the time the source test is conducted 
is that it should substantially reduce the effort involved

[[Page 15380]]

in data collection activities in the future. When EPA has source 
category performance test data in hand, there will likely be fewer or 
less substantial data collection requests in conjunction with 
prospective required residual risk assessments or technology reviews. 
This results in a reduced burden on both affected facilities (in terms 
of reduced manpower to respond to data collection requests) and EPA (in 
terms of preparing and distributing data collection requests and 
assessing the results).
    State/local/tribal agencies may also benefit in that their review 
may be more streamlined and accurate because they would not have to re-
enter the data to assess the calculations and verify the data entry. 
Finally, another benefit of submitting these data to WebFIRE 
electronically is that these data will greatly improve the overall 
quality of the existing and new emission factors by supplementing the 
pool of emissions test data upon which the emission factor is based and 
by ensuring that data are more representative of current industry 
operational procedures. A common complaint heard from industry and 
regulators is that emissions factors are outdated or not representative 
of a particular source category. Receiving and incorporating data for 
most performance tests will ensure that emissions factors, when 
updated, represent accurately the most current range of operational 
practices. In summary, in addition to supporting regulation 
development, control strategy development, and other air pollution 
control activities, receiving test data already collected and using 
them in the emissions factors development program will save industry, 
state/local/tribal agencies, and EPA significant time, money, and 
effort while improving the quality of emission inventories and related 
regulatory decisions.
    As mentioned earlier, the electronic database that will be used is 
EPA's WebFIRE, which is a Web site accessible through EPA's TTN Web. 
The WebFIRE Web site was constructed to store emissions test data for 
use in developing emission factors. A description of the WebFIRE 
database can be found at http://cfpub.epa.gov/oarweb/index.cfm?action=fire.main. The ERT will be able to transmit the 
electronic report through EPA's CDX network for storage in the WebFIRE 
database. Although ERT is not the only electronic interface that can be 
used to submit source test data to the CDX for entry into WebFIRE, it 
makes submittal of data very straightforward and easy. A description of 
the ERT can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html.

IV. Summary of Significant Changes Following Proposal

    EPA received over 90 public comments on the proposed rulemaking. 
Furthermore, we conducted one public hearing to allow the public to 
comment on the proposed rulemaking. After consideration of public 
comments received, EPA is making several changes to the standards. 
Following are the major changes to the standards since the proposal. 
The rationale for these and any other significant changes can be found 
in section V of this preamble or in the ``Sewage Sludge Incineration 
(SSI) Rule: Summary of Public Comments and Responses'' in the SSI 
docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).

A. Applicability

    The final rule clarifies that, if any amount of sewage sludge is 
burned in an incinerator at a wastewater treatment facility designed to 
treat domestic sewage sludge, the incinerator is subject to the SSI 
standards in subparts LLLL and MMMM of this part while burning sewage 
sludge. The final rule also clarifies that sewage sludge that is not 
burned in a SSI located at a wastewater treatment facility designed to 
treat domestic sewage sludge is subject to other section 129 standards, 
such as the CISWI standards (40 CFR part 60, subparts CCCC and DDDD of 
this part), the OSWI standards (40 CFR part 60, subparts EEEE and 
FFFF), the MWC standards (40 CFR part 60, subparts Ea, Eb, Cb, AAAA, 
and BBBB of this part) or the Hazardous Waste Combustor rule (40 CFR 
part 63 subpart EEE).

B. Subcategories

    The proposed NSPS did not subcategorize new sources. In the final 
NSPS, SSI units at new sources are subcategorized into two 
subcategories: MH and FB.

C. MACT Floor UPL Calculation and EG and NSPS Emission Limits

    At proposal, we used a 99 percent UPL calculation to determine 
variability. For the final rule, for existing FB units, we are using a 
weighted 99 percent UPL calculation to account for the biasing of 
emissions data from one facility. The weighted UPL was not used for MH 
units.
    In the proposed rule, two statistical measures, skewness and 
kurtosis, were examined to determine if the data used to calculate the 
MACT floor were normally or log-normally distributed. If both the 
reported values and the natural-log transformed reported values had 
skewness and kurtosis statistics that indicated neither were normally 
distributed, the reported dataset was selected as the basis of the 
floor to be conservative. If the results of the skewness and kurtosis 
hypothesis tests were mixed for the reported values and the natural 
log-transformed reported values, the analysis done on the reported data 
values was chosen to be conservative. We have modified our assumptions 
when results of the skewness and kurtosis tests do not clearly show 
whether a normal or log-normal distribution better represents the data, 
or when there are not enough data to complete the skewness and kurtosis 
tests. In these cases, we have chosen to use the log-normal results for 
the final MACT floor calculation.
    In the proposed rule, we proposed setting beyond-the-floor emission 
standards for Hg emissions from existing MH units. In the final rule, 
we are establishing MACT floor emission limits but are not setting 
beyond-the-floor standards. Also, we are not finalizing the proposed 
opacity limits. At proposal, we set emission limits for both PCDD/PCDF 
TMB and PCDD/PCDF TEQ and required SSI units to meet both limits. In 
the final standards, we are allowing affected sources to comply with 
either the PCDD/PCDF TMB or TEQ emission limits.
    In the proposed rule, we did not compare the CO span of the test to 
the measured CO values to determine if the values were consistent. For 
the final rule, we reviewed the CO values obtained from emission test 
reports to determine whether the span of the test used was capable of 
accurately reading the reported value. If the span was inconsistent 
with the reported value, the CO levels were adjusted to provide a value 
that was more consistent with the span. We revised the CO limits based 
on the results of this analysis.
    The final emission limits resulting from the revised MACT floor 
calculations are presented in Tables 3 through 6 of this preamble, and 
compared to the proposed emission limits.

[[Page 15381]]

                      Table 3--Final and Proposed Emission Limits for Existing FB SSI Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Proposed       Final emission
                  Pollutant                                Units               emission limit         limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............            0.0019            0.0016
CO..........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................                56                64
HCl.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................              0.49              0.51
Hg..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............            0.0033             0.037
NOX.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................                63               150
Pb..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............            0.0098            0.0074
PCDD/PCDF, TEQ..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............             0.056              0.10
PCDD/PCDF, TMB..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............              0.61               1.2
PM..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............                12                18
SO2.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................                22                15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Table 4--Final and Proposed Emission Limits for Existing MH SSI Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Proposed       Final emission
                  Pollutant                                Units               emission limit         limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............             0.095             0.095
CO..........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................             3,900             3,800
HCl.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................               1.0               1.2
Hg..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............              0.02              0.28
NOX.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................               210               220
Pb..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............              0.30              0.30
PCDD/PCDF, TEQ..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............              0.32              0.32
PCDD/PCDF, TMB..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............               5.0               5.0
PM..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............                80                80
SO2.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................                26                26
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Table 5--Final and Proposed Emission Limits for New FB SSI Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Proposed       Final emission
                  Pollutant                                Units               emission limit         limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............           0.00051            0.0011
CO..........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................               7.4                27
HCl.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................              0.12              0.24
Hg..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............            0.0010            0.0010
NOX.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................                26                30
Pb..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............           0.00053           0.00062
PCDD/PCDF, TEQ..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............            0.0022            0.0044
PCDD/PCDF, TMB..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............             0.024             0.013
PM..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............               4.1               9.6
SO2.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................               2.0               5.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Table 6--Final and Proposed Emission Limits for New MH SSI Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Proposed       Final emission
                  Pollutant                                Units               emission limit         limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............           0.00051            0.0024
CO..........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................               7.4                52
HCl.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................              0.12               1.2
Hg..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............            0.0010              0.15
NOX.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................                26               210
Pb..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............           0.00053            0.0035
PCDD/PCDF, TEQ..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............            0.0022            0.0022
PCDD/PCDF, TMB..............................  ng/dscm @ 7% O2...............             0.024             0.045
PM..........................................  mg/dscm @ 7% O2...............               4.1                60
SO2.........................................  ppmvd @ 7% O2.................               2.0                26
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Baseline Emissions, Costs and Impacts Estimation

    For the final rule, we have revised the baseline emissions, costs, 
and impacts to incorporate information provided by commenters. A 
discussion of the changes is presented in section V of this preamble. 
The results of these analyses are summarized in section VI of this 
preamble.

E. Compliance Requirements

    For both the standards, the following changes have been made:
     SSI units must submit (at least 60 days before their 
initial compliance test date) a monitoring plan to establish that

[[Page 15382]]

their ash handling system will meet the visible emissions limit on a 
continuous basis.
     The alternative to test less frequently (every third year) 
is being revised to be the following:
    [cir] If SSI units demonstrate emissions below a specified 
threshold during two consecutive performance tests, they may test every 
3 years instead of annually. Any year that the emission threshold is 
not met, the SSI must test annually until the threshold is met over a 
consecutive 2 year period. The alternative in the standards no longer 
requires that SSI units establish that they meet the lower thresholds 
for three consecutive years.
    [cir] For all pollutants, less frequent testing is allowed if 
emissions are no greater than an emissions threshold of 75 percent of 
the emission limit.
    [cir] For fugitive emissions from ash handling, less frequent 
testing is allowed as long as visible emissions of combustion ash occur 
less than or equal to two percent of each hourly observation period 
(the standard is five percent of each of three hourly observation 
periods).
     The final rule removes the requirements in the standards 
to maintain sludge feed rate and moisture content within specified 
parameters. However, sludge feed rate and sludge moisture content are 
still required to be monitored during performance test runs, and daily 
records of sludge feed rate and sludge moisture content are required to 
be kept.
     At proposal, operating limits were calculated based on a 
specified percentage of the average parameter value recorded during 
pollutant performance tests. In the final standards, operating 
parameter limits are determined on a site-specific basis as the minimum 
or maximum operating parameter value for the parameter, as applicable, 
recorded during pollutant performance tests.
     The proposed standards schedule for conducting annual 
performance tests was each 10-12 months. This has been changed to 
specify that performance tests must be conducted on a calendar year 
basis (no less than nine calendar months and no more than 15 calendar 
months following the previous performance test); and you must complete 
five performance tests for each such pollutant in each 5-year calendar 
period.
     The averaging time for demonstrating compliance with the 
CO CEMS operating parameters has been changed from a 4-hour rolling 
averaging period to a 24-hr block averaging period. The averaging times 
for all other operating parameters, except scrubber liquid pH, has been 
changed from a 4-hour rolling averaging period to a 12-hour block 
averaging period.
     During each compliance test run, SSI units must be 
operated at a minimum of 85 percent of their maximum permitted 
capacity.

F. Definitions

    The following definitions have been revised:
     Process change means a significant permit revision, but 
only with respect to those pollutant-specific emission units for which 
the proposed permit revision is applicable, including but not limited 
to:
    (1) A change in the process employed at the wastewater treatment 
facility associated with the affected SSI unit (e.g., the addition of 
tertiary treatment at the facility, which changes the method used for 
disposing of process solids and processing of the sludge prior to 
incineration).
    (2) A change in the air pollution control devices used to comply 
with the emission limits for the affected SSI unit (e.g., change in the 
sorbent used for activated carbon injection).
     Sewage sludge incineration (SSI) unit means an 
incineration unit combusting sewage sludge for the purpose of reducing 
the volume of the sewage sludge by removing combustible matter. Sewage 
sludge incineration unit designs include fluidized bed and multiple 
hearth. A SSI unit also includes, but is not limited to, the sewage 
sludge feed system, auxiliary fuel feed system, grate system, flue gas 
system, waste heat recovery equipment, if any, and bottom ash system. 
The SSI unit includes all ash handling systems connected to the bottom 
ash handling system. The combustion unit bottom ash system ends at the 
truck loading station or similar equipment that transfers the ash to 
final disposal. The SSI unit does not include air pollution control 
equipment or the stack.

V. Significant Public Comments and Rationale for Changes to the 
Proposed Rule

    This section contains a brief summary of major comments and 
responses. EPA received many comments on this subpart covering numerous 
topics. EPA's responses to all comments, including those below, can be 
found in the comment response document for SSI units in the docket.

A. Legal and Applicability Issues Regulating SSI Under Section 112 vs. 
Section 129

    Comment: Many commenters contended that SSI are within the CWA 
definition of POTW; therefore, according to CAA section 112(e)(5), EPA 
must regulate SSI units under CAA section 112(d), and not CAA section 
129. The commenters emphasized that SSI units are located within each 
respective POTW and are wholly integrated into the solids handling and 
treatment processes at each POTW.
    Other commenters stated that SSI units cannot be regulated under 
CAA section 129 because they are combusting material that is generated 
by the POTW, which is neither a commercial or industrial establishment 
nor the general public as required in CAA section 129(g)(1). The 
commenters added that, based on the proposed definition of solid waste, 
even if they had a new point of generation within the POTW where they 
were generating solid waste, the POTW sewage sludge is from a municipal 
source and does not pass the broad applicability for solid waste 
incineration under CAA section 129. Another commenter added that CAA 
section 129(a)(1)(B)-(C) also directs EPA to set standards for solid 
waste incineration units combusting municipal waste, but to qualify as 
a unit combusting municipal waste, the unit must first be a solid waste 
incineration unit. The commenters concluded that this would not include 
SSI units.
    Several commenters stated that EPA's determination to regulate SSI 
units under CAA section 129 contradicts previous decisions where EPA 
has stated that regulations were being developed for SSI under CAA 
section 112. Another commenter stated that EPA's revision to the list 
of source categories under CAA section 112 to delete SSI units was 
because there were no major sources in the source category. One 
commenter added that EPA's decision to regulate SSI units under CAA 
section 129 is based on an overly broad reading of the NRDC case. The 
commenter also claimed that SSI units are not within the scope of the 
definition of ``solid waste incineration unit'' in section 129 because 
sewage sludge is not generated by a commercial or industrial 
establishment or by the general public.
    Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter's assertion that 
regulation of SSI units under section 129 is inconsistent with past EPA 
statements. As explained in the NPRM, EPA issued emissions standards 
for POTW in 1999 pursuant to section 112(d), and those emissions 
standards did not include standards for SSI units. In the proposed POTW 
emissions standards, EPA stated that ``[s]ewage sludge incineration 
will be regulated under section 129 of the CAA[.]'' See 63 FR 66087 
(December 1,

[[Page 15383]]

1998). EPA also explained in the NPRM for today's action that the EPA's 
statements regarding SSI units during its promulgation of emissions 
standards for OSWI units are squarely in conflict with the Court's 
decision in NRDC v. EPA, 489 F.3d 1250 (D.C. Cir. 2007), which states 
in pertinent part that any unit that combusts any solid waste at all is 
subject to CAA section 129. The commenter does not appear to disagree 
with that conclusion, but instead simply argues that EPA cannot 
regulate SSI units under section 129 because it previously stated that 
it would regulate them under section 112. However, the NRDC decision 
precludes EPA from doing so. Additionally, section 112(c)(6) requires 
that EPA promulgate emission standards assuring that sources accounting 
for not less than 90 percent of the aggregate emissions of each of the 
HAP identified in section 112(c)(6) are subject to emission standards. 
EPA has determined that section 129 source categories can be included 
to meet our 90 percent obligations. Therefore, EPA has included SSI 
units in the section 112(c)(6) list of sources because SSI units are 
need to meet our 90 percent requirement for mercury. This decision is 
documented in the memorandum ``Emission Standards for Meeting the 
Ninety Percent Requirement under Section 112(c)(6) of the Clean Air 
Act'' in the SSI docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559)
    Moreover, section 112(e)(5) does not require EPA to issue emissions 
standards for SSI units under section 112(d). Rather, it simply governs 
the schedule for the issuance of section 112(d) emissions standards for 
POTW. Section 112(e), titled ``Schedule for Standards and Review,'' 
generally requires EPA to establish emissions standards for initially 
listed source categories as expeditiously as practicable, with certain 
specific deadlines in section 112(e)(1). Section 112(e) further 
describes how EPA shall prioritize source categories for regulation, 
and requires EPA to establish a schedule for issuance of emissions 
standards for section 112 listed source categories. Finally, Congress 
specified a different schedule for POTW in section 112(e)(5), stating 
that emissions standards shall be issued no later than November 15, 
1995. Thus, section 112(e)(5) does not require EPA to regulate SSI 
units under section 112(d), but rather simply identifies the date by 
which EPA must issue emissions standards for POTW.
    Additionally, the commenter's interpretation of section 112(e)(5) 
would conflict with section 129(g) and with the DC Circuit's 
interpretation of section 129(g) as explained in NRDC v. EPA. Section 
129(g) defines ``solid waste incineration unit'' to include any unit 
combusting any solid waste, and the Court in NRDC v. EPA rejected EPA's 
position that it could choose to regulate certain units, combusting 
solid waste, under section 112 instead of under section 129. Since SSI 
units do combust solid waste, EPA does not have the discretion under 
section 129 to create an exemption for SSI units from the statutory 
definition of solid waste. The court noted that section 129(g) itself 
specifies certain units that combust solid waste but are exempt from 
the definition, and noted that where Congress created such enumerated 
exemptions, the EPA lacks discretion to create additional ones.
    EPA also disagrees with the commenter that SSI units do not combust 
waste from the general public. Sewage sludge clearly originates from 
the general public, including residential and commercial facilities. 
Simply because the waste is treated at a POTW prior to combustion does 
not change the original source of the sewage sludge. The commenter 
refers to a statement in EPA's 2000 Unified Regulatory Agenda to 
support its argument. However, the Regulatory Agenda did not represent 
an Agency interpretation following a notice and comment process. 
Moreover, as explained above, EPA's position regarding the section of 
the Act under which SSI units must be regulated has changed since 2000, 
in light of the DC Circuit's decision in NRDC v. EPA. Finally, EPA 
notes that its final action on reconsideration of the OSWI rule did not 
refer to the source of sewage sludge as a basis for concluding that 
regulation under section 129 was not required. Instead, as explained 
above, it referred to discretion the Agency believed it had at the time 
to choose to regulate certain solid waste incinerators under section 
112--discretion the Agency no longer believes it has.
    The commenter's reference to statements made in other Federal 
Register notices that pre-date the NRDC decision similarly fail to 
support its argument that EPA must regulate SSI units under section 
112. Specifically, commenters refer to EPA's inclusion of SSI on the 
list of area source categories listed under section 112(c)(3) and 
(k)(3)(B)(ii) of the Act. See 67 FR 70427 (Nov. 22, 2002). However, 
that listing does not lead to the conclusion that SSI must be regulated 
under section 112. First, as explained above, EPA's interpretation of 
its authority to regulate SSI has changed following the issuance of the 
DC Circuit's decision in NRDC v. EPA, which occurred after the 2002 
listing referred to by the commenter. Additionally, that listing 
included source categories that would clearly be regulated under 
section 129, such as medical waste incinerators and municipal waste 
combustors, Id. at 70428, because EPA's regulation of incinerator 
source categories under section 129 serves towards meeting its 
statutory obligations under section 112(c)(3) and (k)(3)(B)(ii). 
Therefore, the inclusion of SSI on that list does not indicate that 
such units must be regulated under section 112.
    EPA further disagrees that regulation of SSI units under section 
129 is unnecessary because SSI units are already regulated under 
section 405 of the CWA and that section 129 regulation will therefore 
provide no public health or environmental benefit. As explained in 
section VI of this preamble, today's action will benefit public health 
and the environment by achieving reductions of the section 129 
pollutants from SSI units beyond those required by regulations issued 
pursuant to the CWA. Today's action must be undertaken to comply with 
the Clean Air Act and the court decision in NRDC v. EPA. EPA further 
notes that section 405 of the CWA expressly provides that nothing in 
that section is intended to waive more stringent requirements of any 
other law. Therefore, Congress clearly did not intend for regulation of 
SSI units under the CWA to preclude any other regulations, including 
regulation under CAA section 129. Overlap with Other Standards
    Comment: Several commenters expressed concern that other types of 
solid waste incineration units could be considered SSI units and 
subject to the SSI standards if they combust any amount of sewage 
sludge. Some commenters added that the definition of a SSI does not 
have a de minimis level of sewage sludge burned. Other commenters 
requested clarification on whether SSI units burning non-sludge 
industrial waste would be subject to both SSI and CISWI. Some 
commenters suggested that SSI units be consistent with the MWC 
standards and provide an exemption for co-fired combustors firing 30 
percent or less by weight of sewage sludge.
    Commenters suggested that the SSI standards provide exclusions for 
all solid waste incineration units that meet the applicability 
requirements of other CAA section 129 standards, including MWCs 
regulated under Subparts Ea, Eb, Cb, AAAA, and BBBB. The commenters 
noted that the CISWI standards specifically exempted MWC units and 
other units subject to CAA section 129 standards.

[[Page 15384]]

    Several commenters contended that EPA should exempt incineration 
units subject to hazardous waste combustor regulations and/or hazardous 
waste management permits under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. The 
commenters added that CAA section 129(g)(1) states that a solid waste 
incineration unit does not include incinerators or other units required 
to have a permit under section 3005 of the SWDA. Other commenters 
requested EPA include an exemption for hazardous waste combustion units 
that are affected sources under 40 CFR part 63 subpart EEE.
    Response: Section 129 defines solid waste incineration unit to 
include any unit combusting any solid waste. Therefore, EPA is not 
setting de minimus levels for solid waste burned in incinerators. An 
incinerator located at a wastewater treatment facility designed to 
treat domestic sewage sludge that combusts any amount of sewage sludge 
is subject to the final SSI standards. We have clarified that the final 
standards and guidelines do not apply to sewage sludge that is not 
burned in a SSI located at a wastewater treatment facility designed to 
treat domestic sewage sludge. Sewage sludge that is not burned in a SSI 
located at a wastewater treatment facility designed to treat domestic 
sewage sludge is subject to other section 129 standards, such as the 
CISWI standards (40 CFR part 60, subparts CCCC and DDDD of this part), 
the OSWI standards (40 CFR part 60, subparts EEEE and FFFF), the MWC 
standards (40 CFR part 60, subparts Ea, Eb, Cb, AAAA, and BBBB of this 
part) or the Hazardous Waste Combustor rule (40 CFR part 63 subpart 
EEE).
    Hazardous waste combustion units that are required to have a permit 
under CAA section 3005 or the Solid Waste Disposal Act are exempt from 
CAA section 129 standards per CAA section 129(g)(1), therefore we do 
not believe an exemption is needed for this rule.
    Comment: Several commenters objected to EPA issuing the proposed 
SSI standards prior to making determinations regarding the definition 
of non-hazardous solid waste.
    Response: EPA is not making determination in this rule about the 
definition of non-hazardous solid waste. Section 129 of the CAA states 
that ``solid waste'' shall have meaning promulgated by the 
Administrator under RCRA. Therefore, today's action is consistent with 
using the defintion of non-hazardous secondary materials promulagted 
RCRA rule, elsewhere in today's Federal Register.
    Comment: Several commenters contended that sewage sludge is not a 
solid waste, as the CAA defines solid waste by referencing the 
definition of solid waste under RCRA. The commenters added that RCRA 
excludes sewage sludge in what is commonly referred to as the domestic 
sewage exclusion (DSE). The exclusion explicitly states that solid 
waste does not include solid or dissolved material in domestic sewage.
    Response: This comment is not relevant to EPA's establishment of 
emissions standards for SSI units. Rather, it is relevant to EPA's 
proposed Identification of Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials That Are 
Solid Waste rule, and is addressed in EPA's final action on that 
proposed rule.

B. Subcategories

    Comment: Many commenters agreed with the development of separate EG 
for existing MH and FB units. The commenters also requested adding the 
same subcategories for the NSPS. The commenters added that it was 
inappropriate to consider the best performing FB SSI as the best 
performing similar source for the MH SSI new source category. They also 
stated that, as proposed, the NSPS standards would discourage a POTW's 
ability to modify existing MH units, including modifications to improve 
combustion efficiency or boost steam output for electricity generation. 
Some commenters stated that, by using the best performing FB unit as 
the basis for the NSPS for MH units, EPA was effectively setting a 
beyond-the-floor MACT limit for SSI units without considering any 
criteria that the statute requires. Other commenters agreed with the 
decision to use the best-performing FB unit as the best similar source 
for the MH SSI source category.
    Other commenters requested further subcategorization based on size 
of the SSI unit, type of sewage sludge incinerated, limited use units, 
and distance over which the SSI would need to transport its sludge for 
disposal.
    Response: We have considered the commenters' concerns and are 
setting separate standards for FB and MH units at new sources in the 
final rule. As discussed in the NPRM, there are two types of 
incinerators currently used to combust sewage sludge: MH and FB 
incinerators. The differences between the two combustor designs result 
in significant differences in emissions, size of the flue gas stream, 
ability to handle variability in the feeds, control of temperature and 
other process variables, auxiliary fuel use and other characteristics. 
To reflect the differences in their combustion mechanisms, two 
subcategories, FB and MH, were developed in the NPRM for new and 
existing SSI sources.
    At proposal for the MH new source subcategory, we considered the 
best-performing FB incinerator to be the best-performing similar source 
because we were not aware of any new MH sources that have been 
constructed in the last 20 years, and information provided by the 
industry indicates that future units that will be constructed are 
likely to be FB incinerators.
    We have re-evaluated our decision. Although few MH units have been 
constructed over the last 20 years, there is no technical reason that 
would preclude a source from constructing a MH unit. The same design 
differences that distinguish existing FB and MH units also apply to new 
units, and provide a similar basis for subcategorizing between the two 
types of units. Therefore, we are setting separate standards for MH 
units at new and reconstructed sources. Such subcategorization is 
appropriate based on the differences between FB and MH units described 
above, and will also serve to ensure that MH units do not avoid making 
modifications that may require them to meet standards based on FB 
units. We are not subcategorizing SSI units on any other basis because 
we do not have data to support distinguishing units based on class, 
type, or size. Without such information, we do not have a basis for 
concluding that these types of units should be placed in a different 
subcategory.

C. MACT Floor Analysis

Pollutant-by-Pollutant Approach
    Comment: Many commenters objected to setting the MACT floors using 
a pollutant by pollutant approach because none of the facilities in 
EPA's database can simultaneously meet all the proposed standards. One 
commenter stated that EPA's MACT Floor methodology is supposed to 
involve ``review of actual emissions data with an appropriate 
accounting for emissions variability''. However, the commenter 
contended that EPA fails to follow this guidance in a practical manner 
in establishing MACT Floors for SSI units and that this results is 
unrealistically stringent limits that are not achievable for any SSI. 
Several commenters noted that this was especially true for the new 
source standards. Several commenters added that EPA's pollutant-by-
pollutant basis violates the statute and its own views of the statute. 
One commenter stated that if EPA cannot demonstrate that the top 
performers can simultaneously meet all standards, EPA has improperly 
circumvented the

[[Page 15385]]

section 129 for establishing ``beyond-the-floor'' standards because the 
``floor standards would force industry-wide technological upgrades 
without consideration of the factors (cost and energy in particular) 
which Congress mandated for consideration when establishing beyond-the-
floor standards.''
    Many commenters specifically mentioned that EPA's pollutant-by-
pollutant, lowest emission methodology for setting the CO and 
NOX standards is flawed because EPA did not take into 
account the inherent conflict in complying with two standards. The 
commenters noted that CO and NOX emissions are inversely 
proportional. The commenters explained that decreases in CO tend to 
elevate NOX and vice versa. The commenters added that high 
temperature combustion with long residence times and high oxygen 
concentration results in very low CO emissions, and that those same 
operating conditions favor high NOX emissions. The 
commenters added that the conditions used to minimize CO (i.e., high 
temperature afterburners) consume more fuel and produce more 
CO2 emissions.
    One commenter noted that the SSI unit with the most advanced 
control technologies, and those EPA indicated were costed in the 
impacts analysis, would not meet the emission limits for all of the 
pollutants all of the time. The commenter provided an example showing 
that of 11 of 30 test data points from the SSI unit in EPA's database 
would not comply with the Cd standard, 28 of 30 data points would not 
comply with the Pb standard, 22 of 30 would not comply with the HCl 
standard, six of six data points would not comply with the PCDD/PCDF 
TMB or TEQ, 86 of 105 would not comply with the CO standard, and eight 
of 15 would not comply with the NOX standard. The commenter 
concluded that data variability has not been appropriately accounted 
for and that EPA's method of establishing the MACT floor based on the 
best performing unit for each pollutant is not reasonable.
    Response: We disagree with the commenters who object to setting 
MACT floors on a pollutant-by pollutant basis. EPA previously has 
explained that although CAA section 129 does not unambiguously declare 
that MACT floors must be established on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis, 
applying the requirement to set MACT floors based on what has been 
achieved by the best-performing sources for each of the pollutants 
covered by CAA section 129 is a reasonable interpretation of EPA's 
obligation under that provision (62 FR 48363-64).
    EPA interprets the provision in CAA section 129(a)(2) to support 
establishing emissions standards based on the actual emissions of ``the 
best controlled similar unit'' or ``best-performing 12 percent of units 
in the category'' for each covered pollutant. Even if we were to 
conclude that the commenters' interpretation is equally reasonable 
under the statute, which we do not, the commenters' interpretation is 
certainly not compelled by the statute. We maintain that our 
interpretation is reasonable under the statute and appropriate given 
the problems associated with implementing the commenters' approach.
    The rest of CAA section 129 requires EPA to ``establish performance 
standards and other requirements pursuant to section [111] of this 
title and this section [129] for each category of solid waste 
incineration units.'' Pursuant to CAA section 129(a)(2), those 
standards ``shall reflect the maximum degree of reduction in emissions 
of air pollutants listed under section (a)(4)* * *.'' (emphasis added). 
Subsection (a)(4) then states: ``The performance standards promulgated 
under section [111] of this title and this section [129] and applicable 
to solid waste incineration units shall specify numerical emissions 
limitations for the following substances or mixtures: PM (total and 
fine), opacity (as appropriate), sulfur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, 
oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, lead, Cd, mercury, and dioxins and 
dibenzofurans.'' Thus, the statute requires EPA to set individual 
numeric performance standards based on the maximum degree of reduction 
in emissions actually achieved for each of nine listed pollutants. 
Based on this, EPA believes--and has long believed--the statute 
supports, if not requires, that MACT floors be derived for each 
pollutant based on the emission levels achieved for each pollutant. 
Moreover, although the provisions do not state whether there is to be a 
separate floor for each pollutant, the fact that Congress singled out 
these pollutants suggests that the floor level of control need not be 
limited by the performance of devices that only control some of these 
pollutants well.
    Looking at the statute as a whole, EPA declared in the 1997 
rulemaking for medical waste incinerators ``The EPA does not agree that 
the MACT floors are to be based upon one overall unit'' (62 FR 48364). 
Pointing for instance to subsection 129(a)(4), EPA explained:

    This provision certainly appears to direct maximum reduction of 
each specified pollutant. Moreover, although the provisions do not 
state whether there is to be a separate floor for each pollutant, 
the fact that Congress singled out these pollutants suggests that 
the floor level of control need not be limited by the performance of 
devices that only control some of these pollutants well.

Id.

    Since 1997, the courts have consistently repeated that EPA must set 
emission standards based on the best-performing source for each 
pollutant. See, e.g., Cement Kiln, 255 F.3d 855, 858 (DC Cir.) (``[T]he 
Agency first sets emission floors for each pollutant and source 
category * * *.''). Accordingly, EPA's pollutant-by-pollutant approach 
has, as outlined above, been in place since 1997 for medical waste 
incinerators, and even earlier for other types of incinerators 
regulated under section 129. See, e.g., 59 FR 48198 (September 20, 
1994) (municipal waste combustors). In addition, such an approach has 
been upheld in other contexts. See, e.g., Chemical Mfrs. Ass'n v. EPA, 
870 F.2d 177, 239 (5th Cir. 1989) (concluding that basing CWA best 
available technology standards on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis was a 
rational interpretation of EPA's obligations under that similar 
statute). We note that the CAA MACT provisions were fashioned on that 
CWA program. S. Rep. No. 228, 101st Cong. 2d sess. 133-34.
    Further, utilizing the single-unit theory would likely result in 
EPA setting the standards at levels that could, for some pollutants, 
actually be based on emissions limitations achieved by the worst-
performing unit, rather than the best-performing unit, as required by 
the statute. See 61 FR 173687 (April 19, 1996); 62 FR 48363-64 
(September 15, 1997). For example, if the best performing 12 percent of 
facilities for metals did not control CDD/CDF as well as a different 12 
percent of facilities, the floor for PCDD/PCDF and metals would end up 
not reflecting best performance. Moreover, a single-unit approach would 
require EPA to make value judgments as to which pollutant reductions 
are most critical in working to identify the single unit that reduces 
emissions of the nine pollutants on an overall best-performing basis. 
Such value judgments are antithetical to the command of the statute at 
the MACT floor stage. It would essentially require EPA to prioritize 
the nine pollutants based on the relative risk to human health of each 
pollutant, a criterion that has no place in the establishment of MACT 
floors. Sierra Club v. EPA (Copper Smelters), 353 F.3d 976, 979-80 (DC 
Cir. 2004).

[[Page 15386]]

    The fact that the statute does not contain the phrase ``for each 
pollutant'' does not compel any inference that Congress was sub 
silentio mandating a different result when it left the provision 
ambiguous on this issue. The argument that MACT floors set pollutant-
by-pollutant are based on the performance of a hypothetical facility, 
so that the limitations are not based on those achieved in practice, 
just re-begs the question of whether CAA section 129(a)(2) refers to 
whole facilities or individual pollutants. All of the emission 
limitations in this rule reflect actual performance and are achieved in 
practice.
    An interpretation that the floor level of control must be limited 
by the performance of devices that only control some of these 
pollutants effectively ``guts the standards'' by including worse 
performers in the averaging process, whereas EPA's interpretation 
promotes the evident Congressional objective of having the floor 
reflect the average performance of best performing sources. Since 
Congress has not spoken to the precise question at issue, and EPA's 
interpretation effectuates statutory goals and policies in a reasonable 
manner, its interpretation must be upheld. See Chevron v. NRDC, 467 
U.S. 837 (1984).
    Commenters made much of the fact that no single facility is 
presently achieving all of the nine pollutant limits proposed. However, 
the available information compared to the final standards disputes this 
assertion. For the final standards, based on the data we have, our 
estimate of baseline emissions, and the revised emission limits, we are 
estimating that 155 of 204 existing SSI units can meet standards for 
all nine pollutants, without installing additional pollution control. 
We cannot make this assessment for new sources, because none have been 
constructed. However, we are not aware of any technical reason that new 
units could not install the most advanced pollution control techniques 
or reduce the pollutant concentrations in the sludge to meet the new 
source standards.
    We recognize that the pollutant-by-pollutant approach for 
determining the MACT floor can, as it does in this case, increase the 
overall cost of the regulation compared to what would result under a 
unit-based methodology. We interpret CAA section 129 to require that 
the MACT floor be determined in this manner, and we believe that 
Congress did, in fact, intend that sources subject to regulations 
developed under CAA section 129 meet emissions limits that are achieved 
by the best controlled unit for each pollutant, as long as the control 
systems are compatible with each other. To our knowledge, there is no 
technical reason why these air pollution control systems cannot be 
combined.
    Regarding the inverse relationship between CO and NOX 
with regard to combustion control, it is incumbent upon the SSI 
facility to determine whether combustion conditions can be adjusted to 
meet both standards and, if not, install NOX controls as 
necessary (e.g., SNCR systems, SCR systems, FGR, or low NOX 
burners). In the proposed rule, we conjectured reasons why SCR and SNCR 
were not used or may not be able to be used at SSI units. While we are 
not aware of any SSI unit that currently uses SNCR or SCR, we also do 
not know of technical reason why they could not be used. Given the 
limited data available on SSI units with FGR, we could not definitely 
determine how effective the technology was on SSI units. However, we 
also do not know of a technical reason why they could not be used, if 
necessary, to meet NOX limits, and commenters did not 
provide any reasons they could not be used.
Dataset for the MACT Floor Analysis
    Comment: Many commenters urged EPA to collect more information to 
set the standards. Many commenters contended that EPA does not have 
sufficient actual emission data from enough SSI units to properly set 
the MACT floor. Some commenters contended that the floor-setting 
provision in section 129 requires them to set the existing floor 
standards ``based on the best performing 12 percent of sources in the 
category'' and not just based on the sources for which they have 
information. The commenters contended that EPA did not have emissions 
data from the best-performing 12 percent of sources or even from 12 
percent of sources. Additionally, the commenters stated that there is 
no evidence that the sources for which EPA collected data are among the 
top 12%. One commenter added that EPA is using actual data from as 
little as 4.3 percent of a subcategory (7 of 163 MH units for HCl) to 
determine how the top 12 percent perform.
    Some commenters contended that EPA chose to limit its ICR to just 
nine entities because collecting information from ten or more entities 
would have triggered the PRA obligations and a more rigorous OMB 
review. The commenters concluded that EPA's plan to circumvent the PRA 
and OMB review resulted in an inadequate dataset for this rulemaking 
that leaves EPA unable to reliably take the first necessary step in a 
section 129 rulemaking: To determine which of the SSI units are the 
best performing sources.
    Some commenters also contended that EPA targeted its ICR to the 
nine POTW expected to have the lowest emissions based on the type of 
unit and the installed air pollution controls. The commenters contended 
that EPA's targeted approach to collecting data from expected top 
performers undermines its ability to presume the data is a random 
sample representative of the entire source category or subcategory. The 
commenters stated that if the data gathered are not representative at 
the outset, then the data cannot reliably be used in a statistical 
equation to predict the emissions data across the source category or 
subcategory.
    Some commenters noted that in the past, EPA has used permit or 
other regulatory limits, emission levels, feed rate control, and other 
information to establish MACT standards. Despite this flexibility, the 
commenters stated that EPA is proposing to use an ``actual emissions'' 
method in the SSI rule, even though it does not have actual emissions 
for each of the regulated pollutants from at least 12% of the units.
    Another commenter stated that EPA used emission data from state 
databases for an additional nine MHs. The commenter stated that EPA was 
instructed by the Court to collect data from the best-performing 12% of 
existing sources, and EPA needs to justify that the emissions data from 
the state databases for the additional nine MHs were the 12% best 
performing MHs.
    Response: As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, EPA 
requested several SSI to conduct emissions testing and provide the 
results to EPA for purposes of this rulemaking. Specifically, EPA 
collected information on the best-performing sources to establish MACT 
floor standards for SSI. Therefore, EPA sent emissions tests requests 
under section 114 of the CAA to nine entities that own and operate SSI 
units. EPA identified SSI units that were expected to be the best-
controlled sources and the best performers for further emissions 
testing. The Agency acknowledges that this selection methodology 
targets identifying the best-performing sources rather than selecting a 
representative sample of sources. However, given the court-ordered 
deadline for EPA to issue the final SSI rule, it was not possible to 
undertake the time-consuming process of sending an ICR to all the 
affected SSI units consistent with the requirements of the PRA.

[[Page 15387]]

    To select the surveyed owners, EPA reviewed the inventory of SSI 
units for the control devices being operated, and identified a subset 
of units expected to have the lowest emissions based on the type of 
unit and the installed air pollution controls. These controls generally 
achieve the most reductions possible for the CAA section 129 
pollutants, and thereby allow EPA to identify for each pollutant the 
units with the lowest emissions. For example, units were selected that 
operated more than one of the following technologies: Activated carbon 
injection to reduce Hg and dioxins/furans; RTOs or afterburners to 
reduce CO and organics; wet ESP to reduce fine particulate; high 
efficiency scrubbers such as packed bed scrubbers and impingement tray 
scrubbers to reduce PM, Cd, Pb, particulate Hg, and acid gases such as 
HCl and SO2; and units with multiple control devices that 
could reduce PM, Cd, Pb, particulate Hg, such as venturi scrubber in 
combination with impingement scrubbers and wet ESPs or with another 
particulate control device. The 9 owners or operators selected were 
from different states in different regions of the country, providing a 
wide spectrum of sources for sludge generated.
    Six of the nine ICR recipients operate MH units, resulting in 13 MH 
units surveyed. Three of the nine operate FB units, resulting in 7 FB 
units surveyed. Some owners of multiple units at a facility provided 
information for less than the total number they operated, e.g. 1 unit 
instead of 2, because not all units were in operation during the test 
period. Of those 20 units from the nine surveyed municipalities, EPA 
collected data from 17 units that were in operation (11 MH units and 6 
FB units). While testing was being undertaken, the EPA also collected 
emission test information for 9 MH SSI units collected from state 
environmental agencies public databases. For some pollutants, the 
emissions from these supplemental test reports were lower than those 
from the nine ICR sources. The EPA concluded that it was appropriate to 
use all the emissions information from these test reports in the MACT 
floor analysis. The EPA also collected many test reports that were 
older than 15 years. The older reports were determined to not be 
appropriate for this rulemaking because they were unlikely to represent 
current emissions performance, due to their age and because they pre-
dated required compliance with the CWA part 503 standard. In total, 
emissions information were collected from 6 FB units and 20 MH units 
from facilities responding to the ICR and additional test reports 
provided by state environmental agencies.
    As discussed in the NPRM and background documentation, the EPA 
conducted a statistical analysis to verify the minimum number of 
observations needed to accurately characterize the distribution of the 
best-performing 12 percent of units in each subcategory. The results 
showed that the data utilized by EPA meets or exceeds the number of 
observations necessary to provide an accurate representation of that 
data distributed from the best-performing 12 percent of the source 
population. The EPA maintains that the emissions information that we 
have collected is adequate to determine the MACT floor for the best-
performing sources. The EPA disagrees with the commenters' 
recommendation to use other types of data, such as permits, other 
regulatory limits, or feed rate controls with the emissions information 
to calculate the MACT floor. The other types of data mentioned do not 
represent the actual emissions or operation of the unit but are 
potential values in their permits or limits. Most units are typically 
operating at lower than permitted levels or emission limits.
    Additionally, it would be difficult to incorporate such data into 
the EPA's UPL calculation because the UPL calculation is based on 
emission test runs of actual data, rather than limits based on permits. 
The permit or emission limits would be on a different basis and 
potentially skew the MACT floor UPL calculation.
    The EPA has also updated the inventory of sources based on 
additional data provided in the comment letters. The inventory now 
contains 204 SSI units, 60 FB units and 144 MH units. Given this change 
in population, 12 percent of each subcategory are equal to 8 FB units 
and 18 MH units. Although we do not have any more emissions information 
than at proposal, the change in inventory results in more than 12 
percent of MH units with data for PM and Hg. For these pollutants, we 
determined the MACT floor based on the best-performing 12 percent of 
emissions data, as documented in the memorandum ``Revised MACT Floor 
Analysis for the Sewage Sludge Incinerator Source Category'' in the SSI 
docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559). EPA solicited additional emission test 
reports in the NPRM. Although many commenters summarized the results of 
their most recent emission tests when comparing their site-specific 
emissions to EPA's baseline emissions, none of the commenters actually 
provided the emissions test reports. The emission test reports are 
necessary for the EPA to review the test methods and procedures to 
ensure consistency with other emissions data, and to verify the tests 
represent a valid test result that can be used in the MACT floor 
analysis. Additionally, the test reports provide information necessary 
to correct the emissions measured into the units used for the MACT 
floor analysis. Therefore, these additional test result summaries, 
without background documentation, could not be used in the MACT floor 
UPL calculation.
    Comment: One commenter stated that, to fill the data gap caused by 
the lack of actual emissions data from the required number of units in 
each subcategory, EPA applied statistical analysis to single test run 
results. Several commenters contended that, in order to enhance the 
data available for MACT development, EPA counted each test run as a 
separate data point.
    Some commenters stated that basing a MACT Analysis on test runs, 
instead of tests, is improper. The commenters noted that CAA section 
129 states that MACT standards for existing sources must be as 
stringent as the ``emissions limitation achieved by the best performing 
12 percent of units in, the category.'' The commenters added that, 
assuming that EPA equates the term ``emissions limitation'' with the 
concept of emission level (as often stated by EPA), this clause means 
that EPA must use the emission levels that have been achieved to set 
the MACT floors. The commenters contended that, under the MACT program, 
it takes a ``minimum'' of three test runs to make up a valid emissions 
level test. The commenter stated that a test run is not an accurate 
measure of the performance of the unit and should not be used as if it 
were. Commenters added that EPA should use the results of the test for 
each unit (comprised of at least three test runs) to represent what is 
being achieved by a unit.
    Several commenters contended that EPA must go back and reset the 
process based on 12% of MH and 12% of FBI sources (not individual 
incinerators). The commenters added that it is important that 
individual sources, not units, be utilized because the composition of 
the sludge varies greatly from source to source and utilizing multiple 
units at one source skews the data development process and ultimately 
provides the basis for a flawed MACT standard at best.
    Response: We disagree with the commenters. The 99 percent UPL 
values were calculated for each pollutant and for each subcategory 
using the test run

[[Page 15388]]

data for those units in the best-performing 12 percent. Consistent with 
EPA's procedures on other MACT standards, such as HMIWI, CISWI, and 
boilers, the MACT floor emission limits were calculated on a run basis 
since compliance is based on the average of a 3-run test. The 99 
percent UPL represents the value which one can expect the mean of 
future 3-run performance tests form the best-performing 12 percent of 
sources to fall below, with 99 percent confidence, based upon the 
results of the independent sample observations from the same best-
performing sources.
Variability Calculation
    For the final rule, as in the NPRM, we are incorporating 
variability in the MACT floor calculation for this source category 
using the 99 percent UPL. We are also following the same procedures for 
establishing limits and incorporating non-detect values as discussed in 
the NPRM. We have made three revisions to the variability calculation 
for the final rule. First, we revised the MACT floor variability 
calculation to incorporate weighted UPL's for existing FB units. 
Second, we selected log-normal results when it is not clear that data 
are normally distributed. Lastly, we revised the CO limits based on an 
analysis of the span of the test. The weighted UPL's and log-normal 
results are discussed in responses to comments. The revision to the CO 
limits based on reviewing the CO span was done to correct errors in the 
CO values provided in test reports and to be consistent with the 
calculation methods used in the CISWI and boilers rules.
    Carbon monoxide values obtained from emission test reports were 
reviewed to determine whether the span of the test used was capable of 
accurately reading the reported value. If the span was inconsistent 
with the reported value, the CO levels were adjusted to provide a value 
that was more consistent with the span. EPA Method 10 is structured 
such that measurement data quality relative to the calibration span of 
the instrument can be assessed. For a measurement made using an 
instrumental test method, the equivalent of the method detection level 
can be assessed using: a square root formula, the reported calibration 
span value, and the allowable data quality criteria (i.e. the allowable 
calibration error, bias, and drift values). The estimated CO 
measurement error resulting from the square root formula was adjusted 
by a factor of three to be consistent with the methodology EPA applied 
for non-detect data (where limits no less than three times the method 
detection level were established).
    In order to develop a basis for measurement error, instrument 
calibration spans in available test reports were reviewed. Where no 
span values could be found, it was assumed that if the test was 
conducted on or before May, 2008, the associated CO span would be 1000 
ppm, and tests conducted after May 2008 would have a CO span of 100 
ppm. This assumption was made because, before revisions were made to 
Method 10 in May of 2008, it was common that units were using the 
prescriptive span guidance that was listed in the old method. The 
current version of EPA Method 10 does not include these span 
requirements but instead requires the tester to choose calibration 
ranges that reflect the range of expected emission concentrations at 
the unit. In cases where the reported emission concentrations were 
lower than their corresponding measurement errors, the default 
measurement errors were used in lieu of the reported concentration.
    These revisions are further documented in the memorandum ``Revised 
MACT Floor Analysis for the Sewage Sludge Incinerator Source Category'' 
in the SSI docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559). Table 7 of this preamble 
shows the revised results of the MACT floor analysis for existing 
sources, and Table 8 of this preamble shows the results for new 
sources.

                         Table 7--Summary of MACT Floor Analysis for Existing SSI Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 MACT floor        MACT floor
                                                                               emission limit    emission limit
                  Pollutant                                Units                   for FB            for MH
                                                                               incinerators a    incinerators a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd..........................................  mg/dscm@7% O2.................            0.0016             0.095
CO..........................................  ppmvd@7% O2...................                64             3,800
HCl.........................................  ppmvd@7% O2...................            b 0.51               1.2
Hg..........................................  mg/dscm@7% O2.................             0.037            b 0.28
NOX.........................................  ppmvd@7% O2...................               150               220
Pb..........................................  mg/dscm@7% O2.................            0.0074              0.30
PCDD/PCDF TEQ...............................  ng/dscm@7% O2.................               0.1              0.32
PCDD/PCDF TMB...............................  ng/dscm@7% O2.................               1.2               5.0
PM..........................................  mg/dscm@7% O2.................                18                80
SO2.........................................  ppmvd@7% O2...................                15                26
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Limits were rounded up to two significant figures.
b Limits represent three times the detection level.

                            Table 8--Summary of MACT Floor Analysis for New SSI Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 MACT floor        MACT floor
                                                                               emission limit    emission limit
                  Pollutant                                Units                   for FB            for MH
                                                                               incinerators a    incinerators a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd..........................................  mg/dscm@7% O2.................            0.0011            0.0024
CO..........................................  ppmvd@7% O2...................                27                52
HCl.........................................  ppmvd@7% O2...................              0.24             c 1.2
Hg..........................................  mg/dscm@7% O2.................            0.0010            b 0.15
NOX.........................................  ppmvd@7% O2...................                30               210
Pb..........................................  mg/dscm@7% O2.................           0.00062            0.0035
CDD/CDF TEQ.................................  ng/dscm@7% O2.................            0.0044            0.0022
CDD/CDF TMB.................................  ng/dscm@7% O2.................             0.013             0.045

[[Page 15389]]

 
PM..........................................  mg/dscm@7% O2.................               9.6                60
SO2.........................................  ppmvd@7% O2...................               5.3               26c
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Limits were rounded up to two significant figures.
b Limits represent three times the detection level.
c Limits defaulted to EG limits since NSPS limits were less stringent than EG.

    Comment: One commenter contended that because CAA section 129 
unambiguously requires EPA to set floors reflecting the ``average'' 
emission level achieved by the best sources, setting floors that 
instead reflect a UPL for those sources is unlawful. The commenter, 
added that by claiming that it can use the UPL for all sources in the 
top twelve percent, EPA misreads its authority to consider variability 
under the CAA and relevant case law. The commenter explained that, 
although EPA may consider variability in estimating an individual 
source's actual performance over time, nothing in the CAA or the case 
law even suggests that EPA may account for differences in performance 
between sources except as section 129 provides, by averaging the 
emission levels achieved by the sources in the top twelve percent.
    Response: In assessing sources' performance, EPA may consider 
variability both in identifying which performers are ``best'' and in 
assessing their level of performance. Sierra Club v. EPA (Brick MACT), 
479 F. 3d 875, 881-82 (D.C. Cir. 2007); see also Mossville 
Environmental Action Now v. EPA, 370 F.3d 1232, 1241-42 (D.C. Cir 2004) 
(EPA must exercise its judgment, based on an evaluation of the relevant 
factors and available data, to determine the level of emissions control 
that has been achieved by the best performing sources considering these 
sources' operating variability). The Brick MACT decision indicated that 
floors for existing sources must reflect the average emission 
limitation achieved by the best-performing 12 percent of existing 
sources. The Brick MACT decision also reiterated that EPA may account 
for variability in setting floors; however, the Court found that EPA 
erred in assessing variability because it relied on data from the worst 
performers to estimate best performers' variability. The Court held 
that ``EPA may not use emission levels of the worst performers to 
estimate variability of the best performers without a demonstrated 
relationship between the two.'' 479 F. 3d at 882.
    In determining the MACT floor limits, we first determine the floor, 
which, for existing sources, is the emissions limitation achieved in 
practice by the average of the top 12 percent of existing sources, or 
the level achieved in practice by the best controlled similar source 
for new sources. In this rule, EPA is using lowest emissions limitation 
as the measure of best performance. We then assess variability of the 
best performers by using a statistical formula designed to estimate a 
MACT floor level based on the average of the best performing sources 
using the expected distribution of future compliance tests. We used the 
UPL to perform this calculation, as explained below.
    Variability can be accounted for using different statistical 
methods. For example, recent standards have used the UL or the UPL to 
determine the MACT floor emission limits. A UL is based on the 
distribution of the available emission observations (e.g., test runs), 
and does not embody a predictive aspect that a UPL does. A prediction 
interval (e.g., a UPL) for a future observation is an interval that 
will, with a specified degree of confidence, contain the next (or some 
other pre-specified) randomly selected observation from a population. 
In other words, the prediction interval estimates what future values 
will be, based on present or past background samples taken. Given this 
definition, the UPL represents the value the mean of three future test 
run observations (three-run average) can be expected to fall below, 
based on the results of the independent sample of size (n) from the 
same population. Therefore, should a future test condition be selected 
randomly from any of these sources (i.e., average of three runs), we 
can be 99 percent confident that the reported level will fall below a 
MACT floor emission limit calculated using a UPL. The UPL is an 
appropriate statistical tool to use in determining variability in the 
SSI data. For this source category, where there is a limited sampling 
of the source category and we do not have test data from all of the SSI 
units in the best performing 12% for each subcategory, the predictive 
aspect of the UPL calculation is especially important.
    Because the UPL represents the value which we can expect the mean 
(i.e., average) of three future observations (3-run average) to fall 
below, based upon the results of the independent sample size from the 
same population, the UPL reflects average emissions. The UPL is also 
consistent with other recent rulemakings.
    Comment: Several commenters asserted that, in setting MACT 
standards for existing units, EPA pooled and utilized data from all 
available test runs for the best performing units without regard to the 
number of data points available for each unit. The commenters added 
that, for all pollutants, the number of test runs varies from unit to 
unit. One commenter stated that using data this way biases the 
statistical results, and ultimately, the standards by over-weighting 
the performance of the units that have more data. The commenter 
suggested that EPA should employ an alternate methodology which 
determines the emissions limitation achieved for each best performing 
unit first, and then averages these limitations to determine the least 
stringent standard, or MACT floor.
    Response: The SSI emissions database for fluidized bed units 
contains data from six units at four facilities. The entities surveyed 
were requested to provide recent (within the previous 5 years) 
emissions test reports. Most survey recipients provided only the most 
recent report. One facility, with three units, provided results of 
emissions test conducted for compliance reports spanning a 10-year 
period. This facility also uses the most advanced pollution controls on 
their fluidized bed units in the subcategory. This facility constitutes 
70 percent of the Cd and Pb data, 90 percent of the CO and Hg data, and 
75 percent of the HCl data and PM data. As a result, the existing 
source MACT floors calculated using the UPL methodology, and all the 
test run data from the one facility, effectively result in calculating 
more stringent limits more akin to a new source MACT floor than an 
existing

[[Page 15390]]

source MACT floor, because it is based primarily on only the emissions 
performance of the best-performing single source, rather than the 
average of the best-performing 12 percent of sources. In order to 
adequately incorporate the emissions from the best-performing SSI units 
in the fluidized bed subcategory, a weighted UPL was used for 
calculating the existing source MACT floors for the final rule. The 
weighted UPL is calculated from a weighted mean and weighted variance 
as described below.
    There are many different types of weighting procedures. We have 
chosen the most straightforward methodology, to base it on the number 
of data points (i.e., test runs) from each SSI unit.\12\ This weighting 
scheme ensures that no facility in the MACT best performers pool is 
over-represented in the computation of the MACT floor. The first step 
in weighting procedure is to assign a weighting factor to each test run 
by multiplying each observation for source i and run j with a weight 
term, wij, as shown in Equation 1 of this preamble:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Heckert, N. A. and Filliben, James J.(2003). ``NIST 
Handbook 148: DATAPLOT Reference Manual, Volume I: Commands'', 
National Institute of Standards and Technology Handbook Series, June 
2003. [Available at http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/software/dataplot/document.html]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21MR11.014

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where:

Mi= Number of observations (i.e., runs) for source i and
N= Number of best performing sources in the MACT pool.

    The second step is to calculate the mean and total variance for the 
weighted data from the weight terms using Equations 2 and 3 of this 
preamble:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21MR11.015

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21MR11.016

Where:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21MR11.017

is the total number of observations in the MACT best performers 
pool.

    When the weights are equal to one, the above equations reduce to 
those for un-weighted data, as expected. As shown in Equation 4 of this 
preamble, the weighted mean and weighted variance are then used in the 
UPL calculation (discussed in the NPRM) instead of the simple (i.e., 
un-weighted) mean and variance.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21MR11.018

    For multiple hearth units, there are more emissions data from a 
larger number of facilities/units. For example, we have data on Cd and 
Pb from 11 facilities with 14 units, Hg from 11 facilities with 18 
units. The MACT floor calculations are not skewed by one or two units 
or facilities. Consequently, the MACT floor for existing multiple 
hearth units does not need to be calculated using a weighted UPL.
    The revisions to the MACT floor methodology are discussed in detail 
in the memorandum ``Revised MACT Floor Analysis for the Sewage Sludge 
Incinerator Source Category'' in the SSI docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).
    Comment: One commenter contended that EPA should determine the MACT 
floor emission limits to be consistent with EPA's Guidance for Data 
Quality Assessment Manual, which holds that it is more likely that 
environmental data are distributed log-normally. The commenter 
considered it reasonable to believe that environmental emission 
distributions are non-normal, since frequency plots typically show many 
readings approaching zero and fewer large readings forming an elongated 
tail to the right. The commenter concluded that normal distributions 
may exist for certain pollutants where the entire dataset is many 
standard deviations away from zero, and values are controlled by an air 
pollution control process with set points and feedback and control 
loops.
    Response: We have reviewed the document referenced and agree with 
the commenter that the referenced document shows that environmental 
data are more likely to be log-normally distributed than normally 
distributed. In the proposed rule, two statistical measures, skewness 
and kurtosis, were examined to determine if the data used

[[Page 15391]]

to calculate the MACT floor were normally or log-normally distributed. 
If both the reported values and the natural-log transformed reported 
values had skewness and kurtosis statistics that indicated neither were 
normally distributed, the reported dataset was selected as the basis of 
the floor to be conservative. If the results of the skewness and 
kurtosis hypothesis tests were mixed for the reported values and the 
natural log-transformed reported values, the analysis done on the 
reported data values was chosen to be conservative.
    Based on ``Guidance for Data Quality Assessment: Practical Methods 
for Data Analysis'' EPA/600/R-96/084, July 2000, we have modified our 
assumptions when results of the skewness and kurtosis tests do not 
clearly show whether a normal or log-normal distribution better 
represents the data, or when there are not enough data to complete the 
skewness and kurtosis tests. In these cases, we have chosen to use the 
log-normal results for the final MACT floor calculation.
    Comment: Some commenters contended that EPA incorrectly presumes 
that stack test results account for the full variability of a SSI's 
performance. Several commenters stated that emissions from SSI units 
are affected not just by control technology but also by other factors 
including the contents of the sludge that a unit is burning. Many 
commenters urged EPA to determine the MACT floor limits by 
incorporating the variability of the sludge contents. The commenters 
added that the methodology in developing the proposed standards does 
not take into account that Hg, Cd, Pb, HC1 and SO2 emissions 
are a function of the sludge content of Hg, Cd, Pb, chlorine and 
sulfur. The commenters expressed concern that the limits were based on 
test results obtained with sludge containing very low concentration of 
metals, chlorides, and sulfur. The commenter explained that if the 
sludge burned during an emissions test was not at or near the maximum 
constituent concentration level (e.g., due to seasonal variability), a 
new source emission limit based on these data could not be achieved 
over the full range of expected normal operating conditions confronted 
by the best performing source.
    The commenters contended that EPA must consider all available data 
(including Part 503 data) for the best performing source and use that 
to establish a variability factor applied to the stack test data. The 
commenters added that EPA's request for metals data during the stack 
test is insufficient to account for the full intra-source variability. 
The commenters added that variability for the compounds not regulated 
by Part 503 must also be accounted for as well before setting the new 
source limit.
    The commenters explained that POTW, and their SSI units, are 
statutorily obligated to manage all of the sewage that enters into the 
sanitary sewer system, resulting in highly variable and often 
unpredictable spikes in concentrations. The commenters continued that 
POTW inlet concentrations also vary based on the nature and type of 
dischargers. The commenters explained that POTW treat wastewater from 
residential, commercial and industrial dischargers in varying degrees, 
and pretreatment opportunities also vary because POTW authority to 
control discharges into the sewer system is limited and the way that 
authority is exercised varies. The commenters also noted that the 
nature of sewage entering the POTW changes over time as the character 
of a community changes, the age of the population changes, and 
commercial and industrial dischargers come and go. The commenters added 
that without the use of long-term data to support the level of emission 
standards, this variability makes numeric technology-based limits 
impractical and infeasible. The commenters also explained that POTW 
also face significant regional and seasonal variability that is not 
captured by EPA's dataset. The commenters stated that initial high flow 
periods in the spring often scour the sewers and dislodge heavier 
material that has settled in the sewer system during low-flow periods, 
which often results in a spike in metals concentrations (e.g., Hg, Cd, 
Pb) in the sewage sludge. The commenters noted that the ICR stack tests 
in January and February that were used for the EPA database would not 
have captured these events. The commenter also noted that northern 
cities that use salt for de-icing roadways experience significant 
increases in chlorides during the winter months, and high chloride 
concentrations are known to improve the effectiveness of Hg control at 
existing wet scrubbers.
    Response: The variability analysis is based on emissions 
information gathered from nine different facilities located in nine 
different states. The facilities we collected emissions information 
from are located in a mix of northern, southern, eastern, and western 
states. Each facility has its own unique sludge characteristics from 
different residential and commercial populations. We agree that the 
emissions data represents a ``point in time''. However, combined 
together, they represent sufficient variation in regions, climates and 
populations that adequately incorporates variability in wastewater 
treatment systems across the U.S. We have also incorporated variability 
using the UPL. The variability analysis based on the emissions data 
collected adequately characterizes the potential differences in sludge 
contents and regional differences. Because we have a mixture of 
southern and northern states in the emissions database, we believe that 
it also adequately considers differences between cold and warm weather 
climates. Additionally, we did not have sufficient information at 
proposal to consider if it were appropriate to incorporate variability 
based on sludge content. We requested additional information in the 
NPRM, but did not receive adequate sampling data from the best-
performing sources.
    Comment: Some commenters claimed that EPA's identification of the 
relevant best performing units for both existing and new unit standards 
is both unlawful and arbitrary, and EPA may not use sources' control 
technology as a proxy for their actual performance unless ``pollution 
control technology is the only factor determining emission levels.'' 
Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition v. EPA, 255 F.3d 855. 863 (DC Cir. 
2001). The commenters stated that, in Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition 
v. EPA, 255 F.3d 855 (DC Cir 2001) (``CKRC''), the Court considered 
Sierra Club's challenge that EPA could not set the floors based solely 
on the performance of one method: Add-on technology. The commenters 
added that the Court remanded the rule because EPA did not consider all 
of the ways facilities control emissions. The commenters stated that 
this requirement is consistent with doing a more complete study as 
required by section 111 and is antithetical to a methodology based 
solely on emission levels since setting the floor in this fashion does 
not require EPA to examine all methods of control. The commenters 
concluded that EPA's performance data approach in this rule may violate 
CKRC because EPA did not check for all methods that sources use to 
reduce pollution.
    Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter who alleges that EPA has 
not properly identified the best performing SSI units for purposes of 
calculating MACT floor limits. As explained above, EPA targeted its 
emissions testing requests to units it believed had the lowest 
emissions, while accounting for factors such as sludge content and 
seasonal variation by selecting units in different geographic areas of 
the country.

[[Page 15392]]

    EPA further notes that SSI units currently employ non-technology 
measures (pollution prevention) to reduce emissions to comply with CWA 
regulations at 40 CFR part 503. These regulations establish daily 
average concentration limits for Pb, Cd, and other metals in sewage 
sludge that is disposed of by incineration. Part 503 also requires that 
SSI meet the National Emission Standards for Beryllium and Hg in 
subparts C and E, respectively, of 40 CFR part 61. In order to meet the 
40 CFR part 503 standards, facilities are already incorporating 
management practices and measures to reduce waste and limit the 
concentration of pollutants in the sludge sent to SSI units, such as 
segregating contaminated and uncontaminated wastes and establishing 
discharge limits or pre-treatment standards for non-domestic users 
discharging wastewater to POTW. Thus, the facilities from which EPA 
received emissions test results are already applying non-technology 
measures to reduce emissions.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that if EPA employs the 
statistical limit to set MACT floor emission limits, it should use the 
99.9 percent limit. The commenter stated that the 99.9 percent UPL 
represents a 0.1 percent probability of a failure for individual tests, 
or a one percent per unit non-compliance probability per annual 
performance test program. The commenter concluded that this value 
better encompasses unit emissions variability and represents a 
manageable risk to the responsible facility operator.
    Response: We disagree with the commenters. For the final standards, 
we maintain the use of 99 percent UPL is appropriate and sufficiently 
addresses variability in the emissions information. Our analysis of 
variability is explained in detail in the memorandum ``Revised MACT 
Floor Analysis for the Sewage Sludge Incinerator Source Category'' in 
the SSI docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).
    Comment: Several commenters opposed an opacity limit of zero 
percent because opacity is a subjective measurement and no unit can 
meet opacity limits of zero at all times. Another commenter suggested 
that control and monitoring of PM is sufficient.
    Response: We agree that a no visible emissions (zero opacity) limit 
for combustion processes is impractical for both compliance and 
enforcement purposes. We also believe that a measurable opacity may or 
may not be indicative of compliance with a PM emissions limit when 
applied to multiple sources within the category. That is, an opacity 
limit applied to one facility could very readily correspond to a PM 
emissions level different than that same opacity limit applied to 
another facility and one or both may be emitting above the PM limit. 
That opacity limits do not apply very well when wet control devices are 
used further confounds the benefit of such regulatory limits. We also 
agree that there are both CEMS and site-specific parametric monitoring 
approaches applicable to various control devices that can be more 
closely aligned with PM control and compliance with the PM emissions 
limit than would an opacity limit and opacity monitoring. Instead of 
establishing opacity limits that may or may not assure compliance with 
PM emissions limits, the final rules include rigorous requirements for 
establishing site-specific operating limits derived from the results of 
performance testing. The rules also include a requirement that sources 
update those enforceable operating limits with each repeated 
performance test. Re-establishing operating limits periodically will 
assure that the monitoring will continue to indicate compliance with 
the PM emissions limits. The rules also provide the source the option 
of apply CEMS to monitor directly the pollutant of interest in lieu of 
parametric monitoring. We believe that continuous compliance with 
operating limits and periodic stack testing to verify the operating 
limits plus the CEMS option will ensure that sources demonstrate 
continuous compliance with the PM emission limits more effectively than 
would periodic or continuous monitoring of a broadly applicable opacity 
limit.
Format of the Standards
    Comment: Several commenters requested that EPA develop emission 
limits for some pollutants in different units or to provide a control 
efficiency alternative. The commenters expressed concern that the use 
of concentration limits would not reflect the variability of the unique 
sludge characteristics of each SSI unit, and may unfairly penalize 
units with very low or very high feed concentrations of certain 
pollutants, such as Hg, Cd, or Pb. Some commenters suggested 
establishing limits similar to the EPA 503 regulations, which provided 
emission limits based on control efficiencies coupled with feed 
concentration limits.
    Response: We did not have sufficient data to set alternative 
control efficiency standards or standards in other units at proposal. 
We requested additional information in the proposal. However, 
sufficient data were not provided in response to our request for 
alternative formats to be developed.

D. Baseline Emissions

    Comment: Commenters stated that EPA overestimated baseline 
emissions because EPA used incorrect air flow rate parameters, 
pollution control device efficiencies, sludge feed rates, and operating 
hours. Many commenters provided stack test data, emission estimates, 
and corrections to the EPA's SSI inventory database. Other commenters 
noted that EPA used uncorrected flue gas flow rates and flow rate 
factors in combination with pollutant concentrations corrected to seven 
percent oxygen.
    Response: We have incorporated corrections to the inventory and 
calculation inputs provided by the commenters where applicable. In some 
cases, commenters did not provide information sufficient for us to 
revise the inventory or calculation inputs for the commenter's 
facility. For example, commenters may have provided an average 
concentration for a pollutant, but did not provide run-specific 
information that would allow us to convert the concentration 
information provided to standardized units (7 percent oxygen). Other 
commenters may have provided emission rates in pounds per hour, but did 
not provide vent gas flow rate, oxygen content, or moisture content to 
convert to concentration units. None of the commenters provided test 
reports that would have include this information.
    We have also revised the calculation of baseline emissions by 
revising the defaults assigned to SSI units where information was not 
available. Defaults were necessary to be assigned because, even after 
new data were received in comments, a significant number of units did 
not have data on sludge capacity, flue gas flow rates, etc. A detailed 
discussion of the methodology used to estimate baseline emissions for 
the final standards is presented in the memorandum ``Revised Estimation 
of Baseline Emissions from Existing Sewage Sludge Incineration 
Units''(EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559). The revisions to the inventory and other 
corrections resulted in the final rule baseline emissions shown in 
Table 9 of this preamble. The table shows a range of emissions for each 
pollutant. The lower bound represents an estimation of actual emissions 
based on the actual dry sludge feed rates commenters indicated their 
units were running. The upper bound represents an estimation of 
potential emissions if the sludge feed rate was at the dry sludge 
capacity of each unit. We estimated the potential

[[Page 15393]]

emissions because the amount of wastewater treated (and sludge 
produced) may vary significantly based on changes in population or 
sources of wastewater. Facilities have the potential to burn up to 
their units permitted capacity although they may not be doing so 
currently.

                          Table 9--Estimated Baseline Emissions for Existing SSI Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Range of baseline emissions by
                                                                   subcategory (TPY)             Range of total
                       Pollutant                        --------------------------------------      baseline
                                                                 FB                 MH          emissions (TPY)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd.....................................................      0.0022-0.0015           0.91-1.2           0.91-1.2
CO.....................................................             73-100       8,400-11,500       8,500-11,600
HCl....................................................            1.6-2.2              26-41              28-43
Hg.....................................................        0.040-0.058          0.85-1.15            0.9-1.2
NOX....................................................            320-480        2,100-2,800        2,400-3,300
Pb.....................................................      0.0056-0.0077            2.4-3.1            2.4-3.1
PCDD/PCDF TEQ \a\......................................    0.00012-0.00016     0.00076-0.0010      0.0009-0.0012
PCDD/PCDF TMB \a\......................................      0.0014-0.0020        0.011-0.015        0.013-0.017
PM.....................................................              25-37            310-410            330-450
SO2....................................................              43-57          660-1,020          700-1,100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Baseline emissions are in pounds per year for PCDD/PCDF.

E. Beyond-the-Floor Analysis

    Comment: Several commenters requested that EPA reconsider the 
beyond-the-floor Hg limit for MH units because baseline Hg emissions 
were overstated and costs for Hg control were understated. Many of the 
commenters contended that carbon injection is an unproven technology 
for SSI units, and is currently used at only one facility with FB 
units. The commenters added that the facility is undergoing significant 
issues with the technology.
    Commenters also contended that Hg removal using carbon injection 
cannot be accomplished with existing PM controls, such as venturi 
scrubbers, and that FFs would be necessary. The commenters added that 
the high moisture content in the form of liquid droplets from the 
incinerator will plug FFs, and additional equipment may be necessary to 
keep the temperature above the dew point, such as an afterburner.
    Response: We have revised the beyond-the-floor analysis to 
incorporate changes made to the baseline emissions, new facility 
specific data and inputs provided by commenters, and revised control 
options. We analyzed several beyond-the-floor controls for the final 
rule. First, we evaluated the use of an afterburner for control of CO 
at MH units. We then evaluated whether additional control of Hg should 
be required at MH units. We have reviewed the commenters concerns 
regarding Hg control technologies and agree that applying carbon 
injection to existing scrubbers has not been demonstrated to be 
effective at removing Hg. For combustion sources that are not SSI, such 
as boilers, carbon injection in combination with a FF has proven to be 
highly effective in removing Hg. However, for high moisture flue gas 
streams, such as emitted from SSI units, the use of FFs is problematic 
due to plugging/fouling. In order to use carbon injection with a FF 
with high moisture streams, a waste heat boiler, RTO, or afterburner is 
necessary to maintain a high enough temperature to keep the stream 
above the dew point prior to sending the stream to the FF.
    Therefore, we next evaluated the combination of using an 
afterburner, carbon injection, and FF for additional control of Hg at 
MH units. Additional equipment may also be necessary to reduce the 
temperature of the flue gas to prevent damage to the fabric filter 
bags. Sufficient information was not collected to estimate this cost. 
Table 10 of this preamble summarizes the cost for existing SSI units to 
apply different controls that were analyzed.

 Table 10--Costs Expected for Existing SSI Units To Apply MACT Controls
                                Analyzed
                                 [2008$]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Total annualized
        Control analyzed             Total capital    costs  (million ($/
                                   costs (million $)        yr) \a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1--MACT Floor...................                  55                  18
2--MACT Floor + Afterburner for                  155                  46
 MH units.......................
3--MACT Floor + Afterburner and                  490                 138
 Activated carbon injection and
 FF for MH units................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Calculated using a seven percent discount factor.

    Table 11 of this preamble summarizes the emission reductions of 
each pollutant for various controls analyzed.

[[Page 15394]]

         Table 11--Summary of Emission Reductions for Existing Units To Apply the MACT Controls Analyzed
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Emission Reductions for MACT Controls Analyzed (TPY)
                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Pollutant                                               MACT floor +             MACT floor +
                                              MACT floor           afterburner for MH     afterburner + ACI and
                                                                         units               FF for MH units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd...................................                  0.5-0.6                  0.5-0.6                 0.87-1.1
CO...................................                        0              6,900-9,300              6,900-9,300
HCl..................................                    19-30                    19-30                    19-30
Hg...................................            0.0022-0.0025            0.0022-0.0025                0.67-0.89
NOX..................................                   6.8-16                   6.8-16                   6.8-16
Pb...................................                  1.2-1.5                  1.2-1.5                  2.3-2.9
PCDD/PCDF TEQ........................                        0                        0      0.0000003-0.0000004
PCDD/PCDF TMB........................                        0                        0        0.000005-0.000007
PM...................................                    58-70                    58-70                  300-400
SO2..................................                  430-700                  430-700                  430-700
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The results provided in Tables 10 and 11 of this preamble were 
calculated using data gathered for each source (e.g., emissions, vent 
gas flow rates, controls currently used), as well as default values for 
emissions, sludge capacity, and vent gas flow rate for sources where 
data were unavailable. We estimate that requiring the use of an 
afterburner for MH units not already having an afterburner could 
require as much as 1,010 million cubic feet of natural gas a year to be 
burned, resulting in NOX and CO emissions of 51 and 43 TPY, 
respectively. We estimate that applying activated carbon injection with 
a FF and an afterburner or RTO to all MH units to control Hg and PCDD/
PCDF would result in total annualized costs of $138 million dollars 
(using a discount rate of seven percent) and would achieve Hg 
reductions of 0.67-0.89 TPY. The incremental cost-effectiveness of 
adding afterburners/RTO, activated carbon injection, and FFs to all MH 
units is estimated to be $80,000 to $100,000 per pound of Hg removed. 
Costs would increase if equipment necessary to cool the flue gas is 
also necessary. Therefore, given these factors, we are not finalizing 
any beyond-the-floor requirements for SSI units.
    We also analyzed going beyond-the-floor to require packed bed 
scrubbers for additional HCl and SO2 reduction, a wet ESP 
for additional PM, Cd and Pb reduction, and SNCR for additional 
NOX reduction. We determined that it was not appropriate to 
go beyond-the-floor to achieve greater reduction of HCl, 
SO2, PM, Cd, Pb, and NOX considering the cost and 
secondary impacts incurred. Our beyond-the-floor analyses for the final 
standards are documented in the memorandum ``Revised Analysis of Beyond 
the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) Floor Controls for 
Existing SSI Units'' (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).

F. Cost and Economic Impacts

    Comment: Commenters contended that EPA had underestimated the cost 
of the proposed rule for the beyond-the-floor option of Hg control as 
well as for the MACT floor for other pollutants because it only has 
information for less than 12 percent of the SSI units. The commenters 
added that EPA used information from these limited sources and applied 
it to remaining sources for which they did not have. The commenters 
contended that this results inaccurate determinations of which units 
could meet the proposed emission limits and which could not. The 
commenters contended that EPA overestimated the number of sources that 
could meet the proposed standards resulting in a significant 
underestimation of controls.
    Some commenters also contended that EPAs choices of controls to 
cost for compliance with the proposed standards were inappropriate for 
SSI units. Many commenters stated that the high moisture content of 
flue gas streams in some applications may mean that FFs would not be an 
appropriate control for PM, Cd, or Pb.
    Response: EPA is not prescribing a specific control technology or 
method. A source is required to meet the final emissions limits in 
these standards, and has the flexibility to use the control method or 
technology that is best suited for their individual facility. EPA's 
costs are estimated based on technologies we believe may be appropriate 
for the sources to meet the emissions limits.
    At proposal, and for the final standards, we estimated costs and 
emissions reductions based on the best available information to us. We 
acknowledge that the inventory database did not have complete 
information for all 204 SSI units. Consequently, we developed defaults 
for flue gas flow rate, hours of operation, sludge capacity, and other 
inputs for the proposed rule. We have updated our analyses using data 
provided by the commenters as summarized in section IV. Summary of 
Significant Changes Following Proposal and the memorandum titled, 
``Post-Proposal SSI Database Revisions and Data Gap Filling 
Methodology'' in the docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559). However, for a 
number of inputs, we are still assigning default values where data were 
not available for each SSI. For the final rule, we have correlated some 
of the defaults to populations served by the facilities in order to 
better estimate costs and emission reductions more specifically to each 
facility. Sources will have the best idea of the costs of controls for 
their site specific conditions. For some sources, the costs and 
emission reductions estimated by EPA may be higher than what the source 
estimates, and for others they will be less. EPA's estimates are 
estimates based on the best information available to us. We also note 
that the MACT floor costs and emission reductions, and determination of 
the number of sources estimated to require control, estimated for the 
final rule are also based on the revised MACT floor limits.
    For the final standards we have also revised the types of controls 
costed to meet the MACT floor limits. For SSI that we estimate will 
need further control of PM, Cd, or Pb to meet the MACT floor, we have 
costed out wet ESP as a more appropriate PM control for high moisture 
streams. We have also costed out SNCR for SSI that we estimate will 
need further control of NOX to meet the MACT floor limits. 
As at proposal, we have costed out packed scrubbers for SSI that we 
estimate will need further control of HCl or SO2. At the 
MACT floor level, we do not estimate that any SSI will need to add 
control for Hg, PCDD/PCDF, or CO. A detailed discussion of the costs 
and emissions reductions estimates for the final

[[Page 15395]]

standards is provided in the memorandum ``Revised Cost and Emission 
Reduction of the MACT Floor Level of Control'' in the SSI docket (EPA-
HQ-OAR-2009-0559).
    Comment: Commenters contended that EPA had incorrectly calculated 
the costs of the landfilling alternative because it used dry tons of 
sewage sludge instead of wet tons. The commenters added that wet tons 
is the appropriate basis of the sludge because even after the 
dewatering process, the sludge contains 70 to 80 percent moisture. Many 
of the commenters provided estimates for landfilling sludge from their 
specific unit. The commenters added that because of the error, EPA has 
significantly underestimated the impacts from transporting sludge by 
truck. Other commenters added that EPA had not evaluated the negative 
social impact of hauling sludge to a landfill. Some commenters added 
that EPA did not consider the additional costs for specific state 
landfilling regulations.
    Several commenters contended that EPA incorrectly estimated the on-
site sludge storage requirements because calculations were not done on 
a wet basis. Commenters added that the cost of the storage units would 
be significant and would need to include odor control as well as a 
settling basin.
    Other commenters expressed concern regarding the availability of 
landfills to POTW needing disposal sites. The commenters contended 
there was insufficient landfill capacity to handle the influx of sewage 
sludge.
    Response: We have revised our costs and impacts of the landfill 
alternative based on comments received on the proposal and corrections 
made to the analysis. Table 14 of this preamble summarizes the revised 
costs and impacts of this alternative if small entities choose to 
landfill rather than incinerate sewage sludge. A detailed discussion of 
the landfilling alternative analysis is provided in the memorandum 
``Revised Cost and Emission Reduction of the MACT Floor Level of 
Control'' in the SSI docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).
    Based on the revised impacts, it is unlikely that many sources will 
find landfilling an appropriate alternative. The selection of a 
management option for sewage sludge is often a local decision that is 
based on environmental protection concerns, community needs, geographic 
constraints, and economic conditions. Given a full evaluation of these 
factors, for some sources, landfilling or land treatment may be a 
better management option than incineration.

G. Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction

    Comment: Numerous commenters disagreed with EPA's proposed language 
requiring facilities to meet the proposed SSI standards ``at all 
times'' because it would be difficult to comply with certain proposed 
emission limits during startup and shutdown. Many of these commenters 
were specifically concerned about not being able to meet the proposed 
CO concentration limit upon startup of a SSI because when a heat up 
burner system is fired into a cold vessel, the flame tip is quenched 
before the combustion is completed creating a small flow of CO. One 
commenter contended that EPA is proposing a new source CO standard 
without any evidence that it can be achieved during startup, shutdown, 
or malfunction. This commenter provided an example of CO data from one 
hazardous waste combustor that averaged 2.2 ppmv during normal 
operations but averaged 48.6 ppmv during startup, 40.5 ppmv during 
shutdown, and 815.5 during malfunctions. The commenters stated that 
absolute pollutant levels tend to increase during startup and shutdown 
due to incomplete combustion that is unavoidable at lower temperatures, 
and noted that the influence of unstable combustion may be more 
pronounced during shutdowns as the incinerator combusts the remaining 
sewage sludge for 30 minutes or more. The commenters recommended that 
EPA account for situations where higher emissions occur during the time 
it takes to bring control equipment from startup to steady-state 
operations.
    Response: At this time, we are not promulgating a separate emission 
standard for the source category that applies during periods of startup 
and shutdown. We do not have data that would allow us to set a separate 
standard during periods of startup and shutdown. We requested 
information in the NPRM. However, no data were provided. Based on the 
information available at this time, we believe that SSI units will be 
able to meet the emission limits during periods of startup. Units we 
have information on use natural gas, landfill gas, or distillate oil to 
start the unit and add waste once the unit has reached combustion 
temperatures. Emissions from burning natural gas, landfill gas or 
distillate fuel oil are expected to generally be lower than from 
burning solid wastes. Emissions during periods of shutdown are also 
generally lower than emissions during normal operations because the 
materials in the incinerator would be almost fully combusted before 
shutdown occurs. Furthermore, the approach for establishing MACT floors 
for SSI units ranked individual SSI units based on actual performance 
for each pollutant and subcategory, with an appropriate accounting of 
emissions variability. Because we accounted for emissions variability, 
we believe we have adequately addressed any minor variability that may 
potentially occur during startup or shutdown.
    Periods of startup, normal operations, and shutdown are all 
predictable and routine aspects of a source's operations. However, by 
contrast, EPA has determined that malfunctions should not be viewed as 
a distinct operating mode and, therefore, any emissions that occur at 
such times were not needed to be factored into development of CAA 
section 129 standards, which, once promulgated, apply at all times. We 
note that continuous compliance is demonstrated using continuous 
parametric monitoring, except for CO from new sources. CO CEMS are 
required for new source using a 24-hour block average.
    Comment: Some commenters argued that EPA incorrectly claims that 
its authority to prescribe unique standards for SSM periods is 
constrained by Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (DC Cir. 2008). These 
commenters stated that EPA has failed to account adequately for 
emissions that occur during SSM periods. One commenter contended that 
the Sierra Club decision interpreted CAA section 112, not CAA section 
129 (which incorporates, by reference, CAA section 111), and pointed 
out that this interpretation is not merely a technical distinction. The 
commenter pointed out that since 1977, EPA has exempted emissions 
during SSM events from compliance with NSPS under CAA section 111 
(referenced 40 CFR 60.8(c)). The commenter argued that Congress enacted 
the continuous basis language in section 302(k) knowing that EPA`s 
emissions standards under section 111 exempted SSM periods, and pointed 
out that there is nothing in the legislative history of the 1977 
amendments to the CAA that suggests congress intended to overturn that 
practice.
    Response: As explained above, EPA believes the reasoning in the DC 
Circuit's decision in Sierra Club v. EPA applies equally to section 
129. Additionally, EPA explains above the reasons it is not 
establishing different emissions standards for periods of startup, 
shutdown, and malfunction.

H. Compliance Requirements

    Comment: Several commenters indicated that the proposed operating 
parameter ranges for minimum pressure

[[Page 15396]]

drop across a wet scrubber, minimum scrubber liquid flow rate, minimum 
scrubber liquid pH, and minimum combustion temperature (or minimum 
afterburner temperature) would not be achievable. They explained that 
these ranges are too narrow and that they will be inconsistent with the 
operating standards already required by 40 CFR part 60 subpart O, 40 
CFR part 503, and state permits. Two commenters agreed with the 
proposed operating parameter ranges.
    Response: The EPA reviewed the information provided by the 
commenters and determined that proposed procedure for establishing the 
operating ranges (i.e., calculated as the average of three test runs 
and as 90 percent of the minimum value recorded during the applicable 
performance tests) may be too restrictive on control device operations 
in terms of energy or other operating needs. We determined that the 
operating limits should be more appropriately based on values recorded 
during the performance test runs. The final rule requires that 
operating limits be established on a site-specific basis as the minimum 
(or maximum, as appropriate) operating parameter value measured during 
the performance test. This approach has been incorporated into the 
final rule for all operating parameters and will result in achievable 
operating ranges that will ensure that the control devices used for 
compliance will be operated to achieve continuous compliance with the 
emissions limits.
    Comment: Many commenters argued that the proposed operating range 
for sludge feed rate would not be achievable, that it results in the 
EPA changing the current state-permitted maximum sludge feed rate, and 
that it could force SSI units to conduct performance tests at maximum 
rated capacity. They explained that the proposed approach fails to take 
into account the normal feed condition and rate variation that occur on 
a daily and seasonal basis. A few commenters suggested that charging a 
SSI at 75 percent to 90 percent of its rated capacity results in a 
steadier state of control and more efficient combustion of the sludge.
    Many commenters indicated that the proposed operating range for 
sludge moisture content would not be achievable and that EPA does not 
need sludge moisture content to determine whether SSI units are in 
compliance with their emission limits. They explained that sludge 
moisture is very sensitive to the type of dewatering equipment used, 
seasonal changes in the sewage or sludge received by a SSI, temperature 
changes, the biological systems that treat the sewage, and to 
operational changes, and that these changes cannot always be 
anticipated and are not always immediately correctable.
    Response: The EPA reviewed its decision at proposal to require that 
SSI units maintain the sludge feed rate and sludge moisture content of 
the incinerated sludge within specified ranges. We determined that the 
operating limit for temperature of the combustion chamber (or 
afterburner temperature) is sufficient to ensure good combustion 
practice, and that moisture content is not needed to establish that SSI 
units are in compliance with their emission limits. If a SSI has a 
higher moisture content, the SSI will need to use more fuel to comply 
with their operating limit for temperature of the combustion chamber. 
We are no longer requiring that SSI units maintain sludge moisture 
content within specified ranges. We are also no longer requiring SSI 
units to maintain sludge feed rates within specified ranges due to the 
seasonal variability at wastewater treatment plants. Sludge feed rate 
information is necessary during performance test runs to establish that 
SSI units are in compliance with the new requirement that they conduct 
performance tests at 85 percent capacity. We are retaining the 
requirement to keep daily records of sludge feed rates and moisture 
contents, as SSI units should already be keeping records of these 
parameters, and this information will be useful in establishing 
representative operating limitations for a SSI unit.
    EPA added a requirement that performance tests be conducted at 85 
percent of the permitted maximum capacity. This level has been selected 
based on the performance test operating information provided by the 
commenters and previous EPA standards.
    Comment: A few commenters indicated that the 4-hour rolling 
averaging period selected in the proposed rule for determining 
compliance with the operating parameters and CO limit was more 
burdensome and difficult to achieve. They explained that the 
recordkeeping and compliance burden is less if the averaging period for 
CEMS and CPMS are both based on a 24-hour block average. They also 
explained that the proposed CO limit on a 4-hour rolling average basis 
would be unachievable with MH incinerators and difficult to achieve 
with FB incinerators.
    Response: The EPA has determined that a 24-hour block averaging 
period for compliance with the CO CEMS requirement for new sources will 
provide a sufficient indication of compliance and will allow more 
flexibility for facilities. Additionally, the proposed CO emission 
guidelines limit of 7.4 ppm for existing fluidized bed SSI units has 
changed in the final guidelines to 27 ppm, and this change is discussed 
in Section IV of this preamble. We have also revised the averaging 
periods for all other operating parameters, except scrubber liquid pH, 
to be on a 12-hour block average instead of a 4-hour rolling average 
basis in order to relate the averaging time for operating limits to the 
duration of the performance tests (e.g., a three run test of 4 hour 
test runs would equal a 12-hour averaging time). For scrubber liquid 
pH, we chose 3-hour averages to be consistent with the performance test 
duration for acid gas scrubbers.
    In the final rule, we are also not incorporating the alternative 
THC compliance requirement. Section 129 requires that limits be set for 
each of the 9 regulated pollutants. Surrogates, such as THC, cannot be 
used in place of the regulated pollutants.
    Comment: Many commenters disagreed with the requirement in the 
proposed rule for annual testing, and argued that annual testing of 
each SSI is not needed to demonstrate compliance, too costly, and 
inconsistent with current Title V permits. They also argued that Method 
22 compliance testing for fugitive ash emissions is not feasible or 
difficult to conduct due to space constraints, and that many FB 
incinerators utilize wet ash removal systems that do not require annual 
testing. They explained that the cost for emissions testing may be 
significantly higher than the proposed cost of $61,000 per unit. They 
further explained that Title V permits require facilities to test each 
of its SSI units once per 5 years. They pointed out that current 
management practices and strict health-based sludge content limits 
under the CWA section 405 and the CAA 40 CFR part 503 regulations will 
help ensure that SSI units are in compliance with their emission 
limits. One commenter pointed out that the proposed compliance schedule 
of every 10 to 12 months will essentially shorten the testing year by 
one month each year.
    Response: The proposed standards included provisions for less 
frequent testing. In the final standards, EPA has revised these 
provisions, making it easier for facilities to qualify for less 
frequent testing, allowing less frequent testing for more pollutants, 
and ensuring that facilities that do less frequent testing are well 
below their emission limits. In the final standards,

[[Page 15397]]

owners or operators are required to establish that emissions of a given 
pollutant are under a specified threshold for two consecutive years, 
rather than 3 years as proposed, to qualify for less frequent testing 
for that pollutant. We have also extended the option to do less 
frequent testing to PCDD/PCDF and fugitive ash emissions testing. The 
threshold is 75 percent of the emission limit for each of the nine 
regulated pollutants. In order to allow a decrease in testing 
frequency, EPA must have assurance that SSI units can meet a more 
stringent threshold than the limits. This is particularly necessary 
because of the variability in sludge that may occur at wastewater 
treatment facilities. Additionally, in the final standards we are also 
providing assurance that the SSI unit is being operated properly and 
emission limits are being met continuously by requiring stringent 
parametric monitoring requirements. Specifically, exceedances of the 
minimum or maximum values established during the performance tests are 
considered deviations. For fugitive emissions from ash handling, owners 
or operators must demonstrate that visible emissions occur no more than 
2 percent of the time during each Method 22 1-hour observation period. 
This allowance for fugitive ash emissions has been included in the 
final standards with a new requirement that all facilities must submit 
a monitoring plan at least 60 days before their initial compliance test 
to establish that their ash handling system will continuously meet the 
visible emissions limit.
    Additionally, to allow facilities more flexibility regarding their 
test dates, to ensure that facilities are not forced to test at 
intervals less than 12 months, and to ensure that facilities are 
testing once per year, we have revised the testing schedule provisions. 
In the final standards, performance tests (except for pollutants that 
qualify for less frequent testing) must be conducted on a calendar year 
basis (no less than nine calendar months and no more than 15 calendar 
months following the previous performance test); and facilities must 
complete five performance tests per pollutant in each 5-year calendar 
period.
    Comment: Many commenters requested that the definition of ``process 
change'' be revised to exclude the provision that a process change 
include an increase in the allowable wastewater received from an 
industrial source. They pointed out that any such increase would 
trigger a performance test, as required by the proposed standards, and 
that such increases did not warrant a re-test. They explained that 
industrial discharges often constitute only a small percentage of total 
influent flow (e.g., 3.5 percent, four to eight percent), that such 
discharges are sometimes from sources that do not discharge the 
pollutants regulated by the proposed NSPS and guidelines (e.g., food 
processing facilities), that some merchant SSI facilities regularly 
receive variable amounts of sludge from other regional wastewater 
treatment plants and POTW, and that it is difficult for impossible to 
anticipate some industrial load changes ahead of time. Several 
commenters argued that this proposed requirement would be redundant to 
the National Pretreatment Regulations at 40 CFR part 403, which are 
incorporated into their SSI's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 
System (NPDES) permit, which require them to establish local limits on 
industrial discharges to prevent interference with sludge processes, 
use, and disposal. The commenters anticipate that they would establish 
similar limits to prevent noncompliance with the final emission limits. 
A few commenters suggested that the proposed provision for industrial 
discharges is vague and open to interpretation.
    Response: The EPA reviewed the definition of ``process change'' and 
agrees with the commenters that there are some situations where an 
increase in the allowable wastewater received from an industrial source 
should not trigger a performance test. We have revised the definition 
of ``process change'' to more specifically and clearly identify the 
type of process change that will trigger a performance test. The 
revised definition identifies a ``process change'' as pollutant-
specific and as including only situations where the SSI has undergone a 
significant permit revision. This revision will ensure that facilities 
retest whenever they have a significant change in the process that 
could trigger higher emissions of a given pollutant.
    Comment: Several commenters requested EPA clarify what equipment 
are included as part of the SSI unit. The commenters stated that the 
proposed rules do not specify the equipment and without clarification, 
a SSI unit could be interpreted inconsistently or over-broadly. 
Commenters requested clarification regarding whether the 
``modification'' (which refers to an ``SSI unit'') applies to the 
multiple hearth or fluid bed ``reactor'' or whether it includes the 
entire system including all air emission controls and auxiliary 
equipment.
    Response: We agree that the definition of the SSI unit in the 
proposed rule was unclear as to what equipment constitutes the SSI 
unit. We have revised the definition of SSI unit in the final rule. A 
SSI unit means an incineration unit combusting sewage sludge for the 
purpose of reducing the volume of the sewage sludge by removing 
combustible matter. Sewage sludge incineration unit designs include 
fluidized bed and multiple hearth. We have clarified that a SSI unit 
also includes, but is not limited to, the sewage sludge feed system, 
auxiliary fuel feed system, grate system, flue gas system, waste heat 
recovery equipment, if any, and bottom ash system. The SSI unit 
includes all ash handling systems connected to the bottom ash handling 
system. The combustion unit bottom ash system ends at the truck loading 
station or similar equipment that transfers the ash to final disposal. 
The SSI unit does not include air pollution control equipment or the 
stack.

VI. Impacts of the Final Action

    As discussed in sections IV and V of this preamble, we have made 
several revisions to the impacts analyses for the final rules. We have 
incorporated revisions to the variability calculation. These revisions 
include: incorporating weighted UPL's for existing FB units, selecting 
log-normal results when it is not clear that data are normally 
distributed, and revising CO limits based on an analysis of the span of 
the test. The result of these changes increased UPL values for most 
pollutants.
    Additionally, we have incorporated corrections to the inventory and 
calculation inputs provided by the commenters where applicable. We have 
also revised the calculation of baseline emissions by revising the 
defaults assigned to SSI units where information was not available. 
These changes resulted in decreasing the baseline emissions for each of 
the pollutants. The combination of increase UPL and decreased baseline 
emissions resulted in less SSI units estimated to need additional 
control to meet the MACT floor limits.
    For the final rules, we also selected the MACT floor level of 
control for both subcategories instead of selecting a beyond-the-floor 
requirement.
    For the final rules we have also revised the types of controls 
costed to meet the MACT floor limits. For SSI that we estimate will 
need further control of PM, Cd, or Pb to meet the MACT floor, we have 
costed out wet ESP as a more appropriate PM control for high moisture 
streams. We have also costed out SNCR for SSI that we estimate will 
need further control of NOX to meet the MACT floor limits. 
As at proposal, we have costed out packed-bed scrubbers

[[Page 15398]]

for SSI that we estimate will need further control of HCl or 
SO2.

A. Impacts of the Final Action for Existing Units

1. What are the primary air impacts?
    We have estimated the potential emission reductions that may be 
realized through implementation of the final emission limits. As 
discussed in section V of this preamble, we have revised the estimation 
of baseline emissions and emission reductions to present a range to 
show the variability in the emission calculations between estimated 
actual and estimated potential sludge feed rates. Table 12 of this 
preamble summarizes the emission reductions for MACT compliance for 
each pollutant. The analysis is documented in the memorandum ``Revised 
Analysis of Beyond the Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) 
Floor Controls for Existing SSI Units'' in the SSI docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-
2009-0559).

   Table 12--Projected Emission Reductions for Existing SSI Units Complying With the Proposed Emission Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Range of reductions achieved through
                                                           meeting MACT by subcategory (TPY)     Range of total
                       Pollutant                        --------------------------------------  reductions (TPY)
                                                                 FB                 MH
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd.....................................................                  0            0.5-0.6            0.5-0.6
CO.....................................................                  0                  0                  0
HCl....................................................          0.73-0.94              18-29              19-30
Hg.....................................................      0.0005-0.0006      0.0017-0.0019      0.0022-0.0025
NOX....................................................             6.8-16                  0             6.8-16
Pb.....................................................                  0            1.2-1.5            1.2-1.5
PCDD/PCDF TEQ..........................................                  0                  0                  0
PCDD/PCDF TMB..........................................                  0                  0                  0
PM.....................................................                  0              58-70              58-70
SO2....................................................              17-21            420-680            430-700
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. What are the water and solid waste impacts?
    We anticipate affected sources will need to apply additional 
controls to meet the proposed emission limits. These controls may 
utilize water, such as wet scrubbers, which would need to be treated. 
We estimate an annual requirement of 234 million gallons per year of 
additional wastewater will be generated as a result of operating 
additional controls or increased sorbents.
    The analysis is documented in the memorandum ``Revised Secondary 
Impacts for the Sewage Sludge Incineration Source Category'' in the SSI 
docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).
3. What are the energy impacts?
    The energy impacts associated with meeting the proposed emission 
limits consist primarily of additional electricity needs to run added 
or improved air pollution control devices. For example, increased 
scrubber pump horsepower may cause slight increases in electricity 
consumption; sorbent injection controls would likewise require 
electricity to power pumps and motors. We anticipate that an additional 
5,420 megawatt-hours per year will be required for the additional and 
improved control devices. The analysis is documented in the memorandum 
``Revised Secondary Impacts for the Sewage Sludge Incineration Source 
Category'' in the SSI docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).
4. What are the secondary air impacts?
    For SSI units adding controls to meet the final emission limits, we 
anticipate very minor secondary air impacts. The combustion of fuel 
needed to generate additional electricity will yield slight increases 
in emissions, including NOX, CO, PM and SO2 and 
an increase in CO2 emissions. Since NOX and 
SO2 are covered by capped emissions trading programs, and 
methodological limitations prevent us from quantifying the change in CO 
and PM, we do not estimate an increase in secondary air impacts for 
this rule from additional electricity demand.
5. What are the cost and economic impacts?
    We have estimated compliance costs for all existing units to add 
the necessary controls, monitoring equipment, inspections, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements to comply with Option 1 
(i.e., the selected SSI standards). Based on this analysis, we 
anticipate an overall total capital investment of $55 million with an 
associated total annualized cost of $18 million, in 2008 dollars (and 
using a discount rate of seven percent), as shown in Table 13 of this 
preamble. We anticipate that owner/operators will need to install one 
or more air pollution control devices for 43 of the 204 affected units 
to meet the final emission limits. The analysis is documented in the 
memorandum ``Revised Analysis of Beyond the Maximum Achievable Control 
Technology (MACT) Floor Controls for Existing SSI Units'' in the SSI 
docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).

 Table 13--Summary of Costs for Existing SSI If All Entities Comply With
                        Proposed Emission Limits
                           [Millions of 2008$]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Annualized cost
              Subcategory                Capital cost     ($million/yr)
                                          ($million)           \a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FB....................................            10.1               3.1
MH....................................            45.0              14.7
                                       ---------------------------------
  Total                                           55.0              17.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Calculated using a discount factor of seven percent.

    Analysis of Alternative Sewage Sludge Disposal. At proposal, we 
evaluated landfilling as an alternative disposal method. We have 
revised our costs and impacts of this alternative based on comments 
received on the proposal and corrections made to the analysis. Table 14 
of this preamble summarizes the revised costs and impacts of this 
alternative if small entities choose to landfill rather than incinerate 
sewage sludge. A detailed discussion of the landfilling alternative 
analysis is provided in the memorandum ``Revised Cost and Emission 
Reduction of the MACT Floor Level of Control'' in the SSI docket (EPA-
HQ-OAR-2009-0559).
    Based on the revised impacts, it is unlikely that many sources will 
find landfilling an appropriate alternative. However, the selection of 
a management option for sewage sludge is often a local

[[Page 15399]]

decision that is based on environmental protection concerns, community 
needs, geographic constraints, and economic conditions. Given a full 
evaluation of these factors, for some sources, landfilling or land 
treatment may be a better management option than incineration.

 Table 14--Summary of Revised Costs for Small Entities that Landfill in
                          Lieu of Incineration
                           [Millions of 2008$]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Annualized cost
              Subcategory                Capital cost     ($million/yr)
                                          ($million)           \a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FB....................................             278                38
MH....................................             313              42.7
                                       ---------------------------------
  Total                                            591              80.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Calculated using a discount factor of seven percent.

B. Impacts of the Final Action for New Units

    As discussed in the proposal, based on trends of SSI units 
constructed and replaced, technical advantages of FB incinerators, and 
information provided by the industry on likely units constructed, we 
believe that new SSI units constructed are likely to be FB 
incinerators.
1. What are the primary air impacts?
    We have estimated the potential emission reductions that may be 
realized through implementation of the final emission limits on two new 
FB incinerators potentially being constructed in the next 5 years. 
Table 15 of this preamble summarizes these emission reductions for MACT 
compliance for each pollutant from two new FB incinerators. The 
analysis is documented in the memorandum ``Revised Estimation of 
Impacts for New Units Constructed Within 5 Years After Promulgation of 
the SSI NSPS'' in the SSI docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).

Table 15--Emission Reductions for Two New SSI Units (i.e., Fluidized Bed
                        Incinerators) Constructed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Emission
                       Pollutant                         reduction (TPY)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cd....................................................                 0
CDD/CDF, TEQ..........................................      0.0000000033
CDD/CDF, TMB..........................................       0.000000051
CO....................................................              0.26
HCl...................................................                 0
Hg....................................................            0.0026
NOX...................................................                14
Pb....................................................           0.00053
PM....................................................                 0
PM2.5.................................................                 0
SO2...................................................                 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. What are the water and solid waste impacts?
    We anticipate affected sources would need to apply controls in 
addition to what they would have planned to include in the absence of 
this rule to meet the final emission limits. These controls may utilize 
water, such as wet scrubbers, which would need to be treated. We 
estimate an annual requirement of 8.6 million gallons per year of 
additional wastewater will be generated as a result of operating 
additional controls or increased sorbents for the two new units 
expected to come on-line in the next 5 years. The analysis is 
documented in the memorandum ``Revised Analysis of Secondary Impacts 
for the Sewage Sludge Incineration Source Category'' in the SSI docket 
(EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).
    Likewise, the application of PM controls results in particulate 
collected that would require disposal. Furthermore, activated carbon 
injection may be used by some sources, which would result in solid 
waste needing disposal. The annual amounts of solid waste that will 
require disposal are anticipated to be approximately 34 TPY from 
activated carbon injection for the two units.
3. What are the energy impacts?
    The energy impacts associated with meeting the final emission 
limits would consist primarily of additional electricity needs to run 
added or improved air pollution control devices. For example, increased 
scrubber pump horsepower may cause slight increases in electricity 
consumption. Sorbent injection controls would likewise require 
electricity to power pumps and motors. By our estimate, we anticipate 
that an additional 300 megawatt-hours per year will be required for the 
additional and improved control devices for the two new units modeled 
to come on-line in the next 5 years. The analysis is documented in the 
memorandum ``Revised Analysis of Secondary Impacts for the Sewage 
Sludge Incineration Source Category Analysis of New Units for the 
Sewage Sludge Incineration Source Category'' in the SSI docket (EPA-HQ-
OAR-2009-0559).
4. What are the secondary air impacts?
    For SSI units adding controls to meet the final emission limits, we 
anticipate very minor secondary air impacts. The analysis is documented 
in the memorandum ``Revised Analysis of Secondary Impacts for the 
Sewage Sludge Incineration Source Category.''
5. What are the cost impacts?
    We have estimated compliance costs for new SSI units coming on-line 
in the next 5 years. This analysis is based on a model plant, the 
assumption that two new units will come on-line and will add the 
necessary controls, monitoring equipment, inspections, recordkeeping, 
and reporting requirements to comply with the final SSI standards. 
Based on this analysis, we anticipate an overall total capital 
investment of $8 million (2008$) with an associated total annualized 
cost of $2 million (2008$ and using a seven percent discount rate). 
This analysis assumes that new SSI units constructed are only FB 
incinerators.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 
EO 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this action is a ``significant 
regulatory action'' because it was likely to have an annual effect on 
the economy of $100 million or more based on the proposed standards. 
However, the cost of the final standards are no longer likely to have 
an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. Despite the 
change in costs, EPA submitted this action to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) for review under EOs 12866 and 13563 and any changes 
made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the 
docket for this action. Although EPA prepared a RIA of the potential 
costs and benefits associated with the proposed standards we are simply 
updating the RIA rather than revising it.
    A RIA was prepared in September of 2010 for the proposed Standards 
of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for 
Existing Sources: Sewage Sludge Incineration Units. However, based on 
the lower costs associated with the selected alternative in this final 
action we are providing an update of the RIA rather than completely 
revising the RIA. Within this update, we are providing updated costs 
and benefits of the controls analyzed and have provided a comparison of 
the selected controls with the alternatives.\13\ While the 
characteristics of the controls analyzed have changed, we have also 
provided a comparison of the costs and benefits of

[[Page 15400]]

the proposed controls analyzed with the selected alternative in this 
final action. A summary of the differences are presented below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ In the RIA, the controls analyzed are referred to as Option 
1 (MACT floor), Option 2 (MACT floor, plus afterburner for MH 
units), and Option 3 (MACT floor, plus afterburner and activated 
carbon injection and fabric filter for MH units).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Costs for the selected controls analyzed for promulgation 
are 80% lower and benefits are 81% lower than they were for the 
selected controls analyzed for proposal.
     Because the regulated sewage sludge incineration is a 
government provided service that does not involve a market, no price, 
quantity, or employment impacts were estimated for the proposal RIA. 
The economic impact analysis focused on the comparison of control cost 
to total governmental revenue. Because the costs are 80% lower for the 
selected controls analyzed for promulgation compared to the proposed 
controls analyzed, the control costs are expected to be a smaller 
portion of government revenues for the selected controls for 
promulgation than they were for the proposed controls.
     Because of insufficient information, employment changes 
due to the requirements for operating and maintaining control equipment 
were not estimated. Also, we did not have the information needed to 
estimate any labor changes related to governmental decisions to switch 
from incineration to landfilling.
     Monetized benefits are greater than costs for the selected 
option by $3 million to $34 million at three percent and $1 million to 
$29 million at seven percent. The benefits from reducing exposure to 
HAP, direct exposure to NOX and SO2, ecosystem 
effects, and visibility impairment have not been monetized, including 
reducing 19 tons of HCl, 4 pounds of Hg, 2,400 pounds of Pb, and 1,000 
pounds of Cd.

      Net Benefits for Final Sewage Sludge Incinerators NSPS and EG
                           [Millions of $2008]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    MACT floor (selected)       3% Discount rate      7% Discount rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monetized Benefits..........  $21 to $52..........  $19 to $47.
Costs.......................  $18 to $18..........  $18 to $18.
Net Benefits................  $3 to $34...........  $1 to $29.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Monetized Benefits for Final Sewage Sludge Incinerators NSPS and EG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total monetized benefits for
   final controls analyzed      3% Discount rate      7% Discount rate
     (millions of 2008$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MACT Floor (Selected).......  $21 to $52..........  $19 to $47.
MACT Floor + Afterburner for  $20 to $50..........  $18 to $45.
 MH units.
MACT Floor + Afterburner and  $55 to $140.........  $50 to $130.
 Activated carbon injection
 and fabric filter for MH
 units.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Monetized benefits changes
 for MACT floor (millions of    3% Discount rate      7% Discount rate
           2008$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal (MACT Floor, all     $110 to $270........  $100 to $250.
 comply).
Final (MACT Floor)..........  $21 to $52..........  $19 to $47.
% Change....................  -81%................  -81%.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Monetized benefits changes
    for selected controls       3% Discount rate      7% Discount rate
analyzed (millions of 2008$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal (BTF Option 2, all   $110 to $270........  $100 to $250.
 comply).
Final (MACT Floor)..........  $21 to $52..........  $19 to $47.
% Change....................  -81%................  -81%.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

         Costs for Final Sewage Sludge Incinerators NSPS and EG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Total costs for final controls analyzed (millions of       3% or 7%
                         2008$)                            Discount rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MACT Floor (selected)...................................             $18
MACT Floor + Afterburner for MH units...................              46
MACT Floor + Afterburner and activated carbon injection              138
 + fabric filter for MH units...........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             3% or 7%
    Costs changes for MACT floor (millions of 2008$)       Discount rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal (MACT Floor, all comply).......................             $63
Final (MACT Floor)......................................             $18
% Change................................................            -71%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost changes for selected controls analyzed (millions of     3% or 7%
                         2008$)                            Discount rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal (BTF Option 2, all comply).....................             $92
Final (MACT Floor)......................................             $18

[[Page 15401]]

 
% Change................................................            -80%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this rule have been 
submitted for approval to the OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The information collection requirements are not 
enforceable until OMB approves them. The ICR documents prepared by EPA 
have been assigned EPA ICR number 2369.02 for subpart LLLL, and 2403.02 
for subpart MMMM.
    The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in this rule are based 
on the information collection requirements in CAA section 129 and EPA's 
NSPS General Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A). The recordkeeping 
and reporting requirements in the General Provisions are mandatory 
pursuant to CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information other 
than emissions data submitted to EPA pursuant to the information 
collection requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made is 
safeguarded according to CAA section 114(c) and EPA's implementing 
regulations at 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
    The requirements in this action result in industry recordkeeping 
and reporting burden associated with review of the amendments for all 
SSI and initial and annual compliance with the emission limits using 
EPA approved emissions test methods. The burden also includes 
continuous parameter monitoring and annual inspections of air pollution 
control devices that may be used to meet the emission limits. Operators 
are required to obtain qualification and complete annual training. New 
units are also required to submit a report prior to construction, 
including a siting analysis.
    When a malfunction occurs, sources must report them according to 
the applicable reporting requirements of Subparts LLLL and MMMM. An 
affirmative defense to civil penalties for exceedances of emission 
limits that are caused by malfunctions is available to a source if it 
can demonstrate that certain criteria and requirements are satisfied. 
The criteria ensure that the affirmative defense is available only 
where the event that causes an exceedance of the emission limit meets 
the narrow definition of malfunction in 40 CFR 60.2 (sudden, 
infrequent, not reasonably preventable and not caused by poor 
maintenance and or careless operation) and where the source took 
necessary actions to minimize emissions. In addition, the source must 
meet certain notification and reporting requirements. For example, the 
source must prepare a written root cause analysis and submit a written 
report to the Administrator documenting that it has met the conditions 
and requirements for assertion of the affirmative defense.
    To provide the public with an estimate of the relative magnitude of 
the burden associated with an assertion of the affirmative defense 
position adopted by a source, EPA provides an administrative adjustment 
to this ICR that shows what the notification, recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements associated with the assertion of the affirmative 
defense might entail. EPA's estimate for the required notification, 
reports and records, including the root cause analysis, totals $3,141 
and is based on the time and effort required of a source to review 
relevant data, interview plant employees, and document the events 
surrounding a malfunction that has caused an exceedance of an emission 
limit. The estimate also includes time to produce and retain the record 
and reports for submission to EPA. EPA provides this illustrative 
estimate of this burden because these costs are only incurred if there 
has been a violation and a source chooses to take advantage of the 
affirmative defense.
    The annual average burden associated with the emission guidelines 
over the first 3 years following promulgation is estimated to be $9.6 
million. This includes 39,350 hours at a total annual labor cost of 
$2.2 million and total annualized capital/startup and operation and 
maintenance costs of $7.4 million per year, associated with the 
monitoring requirements, storage of data and reports and photocopying 
and postage over the 3-year period of the ICR. The annual inspection 
costs are included under the recordkeeping and reporting labor costs
    The annual average burden associated with the NSPS over the first 3 
years following promulgation is estimated to involve 701 hours at a 
total annual labor cost of $40,000. The total annualized capital/
startup costs are estimated at $232,000 per year. This gives a 
cumulative annual burden of $272,000 per year for the NSPS. Burden is 
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it currently displays 
a valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When this ICR is 
approved by OMB, the Agency will publish a technical amendment to 40 
CFR part 9 in the Federal Register to display the OMB control number 
for the approved information collection requirements contained in this 
final.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act or any 
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small 
governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this action on small 
entities, a small entity is defined as follows: (1) A small business as 
defined by the SBA regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small 
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, 
school district, or special district with a population of less than 
50,000; or (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit 
enterprise that is independently-owned and operated and is not dominant 
in its field.
    In the proposal, we certified that there would not be a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The economic 
analysis conducted at proposal identified 18 small entities none of 
which had cost-revenue-ratios greater than one percent. The cost 
analysis for the final standards showed a significant decrease (35 to 
98 percent) in all costs for 11 of the 18 small entities. The cost-
revenue-ratios were again estimated using the costs for the final rule 
and the same revenue estimates used in the proposal screening analysis. 
The revenue estimates were obtained using census average per capita 
revenue numbers ($1,696 for entities with populations between 10 
thousand and 25 thousand and $1,677 for entities with populations 
between 25 thousand and 50 thousand) The resulting cost-revenue-ratios 
ranged between 0.04% and 0.5. Thus all cost-revenue-ratios were well 
below 1%. Therefore, we consider the final rule to

[[Page 15402]]

have no significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    After considering the economic impacts of this final rule on small 
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. None of the 
18 small entities has cost-revenue-ratios greater than one percent. 
Thus, this is not considered to be a significant impact.
    Although the final rule will not have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has tried to 
reduce the impact of this rule on small entities by allowing optional 
CEMS instead of requiring them, allowing information from tests 
conducted in recent years to show compliance rather than require all 
new testing and allowing reduced testing with continued compliance.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in 
expenditures of $100 million or more for state, local, and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 year. 
Thus, this final rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 
202 or 205 of UMRA.
    At proposal, EPA prepared under section 202 of the UMRA a written 
statement that is summarized in section VIII.D of the proposal preamble 
(75 FR 63260, October 14, 2010). A copy of the UMRA written statement 
can be found in the docket.
    At proposal, the estimated costs were higher than the estimated 
costs of the final rule. At proposal, EPA prepared an RIA, including 
EPA's assessment of costs and benefits, which is detailed in the 
``Regulatory Impact Analysis: Standards of Performance for New 
Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Sewage 
Sludge Incineration Units'' in the docket. Based on estimated 
compliance costs associated with the final rule and the predicted 
change in prices and production in the affected industries, the 
estimated social costs of the final rule are $55 million ($).
    At proposal, EPA consulted with governmental entities expected to 
be affected by the proposed rule, consistent with the intergovernmental 
consultation provisions of section 204 of the UMRA. Those consultations 
are discussed in section VIII.D of the proposal preamble (75 FR 63260).
    This final rule is not subject to the requirements of section 203 
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Because this final 
rule's requirements apply equally to SSI units owned and/or operated by 
governments or SSI units owned and/or operated by private entities, 
there would be no requirements that uniquely apply to such government 
or impose any disproportionate impacts on them.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It 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.
    Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue an action that has 
federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance 
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by state and local governments, or EPA consults with 
state and local officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed action.
    EPA's proposed action estimated expenditures of greater than $100 
million to state and local governments and therefore as specified by 
the Executive Order, EPA consulted with elected state and local 
government officials, or their representative national organizations, 
when developing regulations and policies that impose substantial 
compliance costs on state and local governments. Pursuant to Agency 
policy, EPA conducted a briefing for the ``Big 10'' intergovernmental 
organizations representing elected state and local government 
officials, as discussed in section VIII.D of the proposal preamble (75 
FR 63260) to formally request their comments and input on the action. 
The Big 10 provided EPA with feedback on the proposed standards and EG 
for SSI units.
    EPA has concluded that this final rule will not have federalism 
implications, as defined by Agency guidance for implementing the 
Executive Order, due to the final rule's direct compliance costs on 
state or local governments resulting in expenditures of less than $100 
million.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132 and consistent with EPA 
policy to promote communications between EPA and state and local 
governments, EPA specifically solicited comment on the proposed rule 
from state and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    During proposal EPA was not aware of any SSI owned or operated by 
an Indian tribe or tribal governments, thus, Executive Order 13175 did 
not appear to have implications. However as specified in Executive 
Order 13175, (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), EPA has attempted to 
outreach and discuss possible SSI implications with tribal contacts.
    EPA presented information on the SSI proposal and specifically 
solicited additional comment on the proposed action from tribal 
contacts in the proposal period via the NTAA conference calls.
    EPA has received coordinated comments from the NTAA; those comments 
can be reviewed in the public docket, document number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-
0559-0130.1. Commenters expressed that SSI units located in proximity 
to Indian country units, obtaining Title V permits, may trigger tribal 
consultation with regard to potential impact from the SSI unit. 
Commenters are dismayed, as they believe EPA failed to consult with 
Indian tribes regarding the standards and have failed to fully assess 
the potential impacts of SSI units on tribal communities. Lastly, 
commenters recommended that EPA provide a map overlay that accounts for 
both SSI units and tribal lands so tribes can acquire a better 
understanding on how they might be affected by such sites and these 
standards in general.
    EPA participated on two NTAA conference calls to discuss the rule 
development process, first to provide general information on the 
development of the SSI standards and second providing more specific 
background information on the purpose of the rulemaking, number and 
locations of units, and unit types. EPA allowed time for clarifying 
questions and requested information if any NTAA members were aware of 
any type of incinerator burning sewage sludge in Indian Country. EPA 
will provide a map overlay for the SSI docket so that tribes can 
acquire a better understanding on how they might be affected by SSI 
sites and the standards in general.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 
as applying to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety 
risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the 
Executive Order has the

[[Page 15403]]

potential to influence the regulation. This final action is not subject 
to Executive Order 13045 because it is based solely on technology 
performance. We note however, that reductions in air emissions by these 
facilities will improve air quality, with expected positive impacts for 
children's health.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, 
May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA of 1995, Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 
U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) 
in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, 
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available 
and applicable VCS.
    EPA conducted searches for the ``Standards of Performance for New 
Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Sewage 
Sludge Incineration Units'' through the Enhanced National Standards 
Service Network Database managed by the ANSI. We also contacted VCS 
organizations, accessed, and searched their data bases.
    This rulemaking involves technical standards. EPA has decided to 
use ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses,'' for 
its manual methods of measuring the oxygen or carbon dioxide content of 
the exhaust gas. These parts of ASME PTC 19.10-1981 are acceptable 
alternatives to EPA Methods 6, 7. This standard is available from the 
ASME, Three Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990.
    Another VCS, ASTM D6784-02 (Reapproved 2008), ``Standard Test 
Method for Elemental, Oxidized, Particle-Bound and Total Mercury Gas 
Generated From Coal-Fired Stationary Sources (Ontario Hydro Method)'' 
is an acceptable alternative to Method 29 and 30B. EPA has also decided 
to use EPA Methods 5, 6, 6C, 7, 7E, 9, 10, 10A, 10B, 22, 23, 26A, 29 
and 30B. No VCS were found for EPA Method 9 and 22.
    During the search, if the title or abstract (if provided) of the 
VCS described technical sampling and analytical procedures that are 
similar to EPA's reference method, EPA ordered a copy of the standard 
and reviewed it as a potential equivalent method. All potential 
standards were reviewed to determine the practicality of the VCS for 
this rule. This review requires significant method validation data that 
meet the requirements of EPA Method 301 for accepting alternative 
methods or scientific, engineering and policy equivalence to procedures 
in EPA reference methods. EPA may reconsider determinations of 
impracticality when additional information is available for particular 
VCS.
    The search identified other VCS that were potentially applicable 
for this rule in lieu of EPA reference methods. After reviewing the 
available standards, EPA determined that candidate VCS (ASME B133.9-
1994 (2001), ISO 9096:1992 (2003), ANSI/ASME PTC PTC-38-1980 (1985), 
ASTM D3685/D3685M-98 (2005), CAN/CSA Z223.1-M1977, ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-
1981, ISO 10396:1993 (2007), ISO 12039:2001, ASTM D5835-95 (2007), ASTM 
D6522-00 (2005), CAN/CSA Z223.2-M86 (1999), ISO 7934:1998, ISO 
11632:1998, ASTM D1608-98 (2003), ISO I1564:1998, CAN/CSA Z223.24-
MI983, CAN/CSA Z223.21-MI978, ASTM D3162-94 (2005), EN 1948-3 (1996), 
EN 1911-1,2,3 (1998), ASTM D6735-01, EN 13211:2001, CAN/CSA Z223.26-
MI987) identified for measuring emissions of pollutants or their 
surrogates subject to emission standards in the rule would not be 
practical due to lack of equivalency, documentation, validation data, 
and other important technical and policy considerations.
    Under 40 CFR 60.13(i) of the NSPS General Provisions, a source may 
apply to EPA for permission to use alternative test methods or 
alternative monitoring requirements in place of any required testing 
methods, performance specifications, or procedures in the final rule 
and any amendments.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes 
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this final rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the 
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without 
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low-
income populations. Additionally, the Agency has reviewed this final 
rule to determine if there was existing disproportionately high and 
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-income 
populations that could be mitigated by this rulemaking. An analysis of 
demographic data showed that the average of populations in close 
proximity to the sources, and thus most likely to be effected by the 
sources, were similar in demographic composition to national averages. 
The results of the demographic analysis are presented in ``Review of 
Environmental Justice Impacts,'' June 2010, a copy of which is 
available in the SSI docket (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0559).
    This final action establishes national emission standards for new 
and existing SSI units. The EPA estimates that there are approximately 
204 such units covered by this rule. The final rule will reduce 
emissions of many of the listed HAP emitted from this source. This 
includes emissions of Cd, HCl, Pb, and Hg. Adverse health effects from 
these pollutants include cancer, irritation of the lungs, skin and 
mucus membranes, effects on the central nervous system and damage to 
the kidneys and acute health disorders. The rule will also result in 
substantial reductions of criteria pollutants such as CO, 
NOX, PM and PM2.5 and SO2. Sulfur 
dioxide and NOX are precursors for the formation of 
PM2.5 and ozone. Reducing these emissions will reduce ozone 
and PM2.5 formation and associated health effects, such as 
adult premature mortality, chronic and acute bronchitis, asthma and 
other respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. For additional 
information, please refer to the RIA contained in the docket for this 
rulemaking. In EPA's July 2010 ``Interim Guidance on Considering 
Environmental Justice During the Development of an Action,'' EPA 
defines ``environmental justice'' as the fair treatment and meaningful 
involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, 
or income with respect to the development,

[[Page 15404]]

implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and 
policies.
    To help achieve EPA's goal for Environmental Justice (i.e., the 
fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people), EPA places 
particular emphasis on the public health of and environmental 
conditions affecting minority, low-income, and indigenous populations. 
In recognizing that these populations frequently bear a 
disproportionate burden of environmental harms and risks, EPA works to 
protect them from adverse public health and environmental effects of 
its programs. EPA looks at the vulnerabilities of these populations 
because they have historically been exposed to a combination of 
physical, chemical, biological, social, and cultural factors that have 
imposed greater environmental burdens on them than those imposed on the 
general population.
    To promote meaningful involvement, EPA has developed a 
communication and outreach strategy to ensure that interested 
communities have access to this final rule, are aware of its content 
and have an opportunity to comment during the comment period. During 
the comment period, EPA publicized the rulemaking via environmental 
newsletters, tribal newsletters, environmental justice listservs, and 
the Internet, including the OPEI Rulemaking Gateway Web site (http://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/RuleGate.nsf/). EPA will also provide general 
rulemaking fact sheets (e.g., why is this important for my community) 
for environmental justice community groups and conduct conference calls 
with interested communities. In addition, state and Federal permitting 
requirements will provide state and local governments and members of 
affected communities the opportunity to provide comments on the permit 
conditions associated with permitting the sources affected by this 
rulemaking.

J. Congressional Review Act

    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. EPA will submit a report containing this 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 rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective May 20, 2011.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental 
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 21, 2011.
Lisa Jackson,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 
60 of the Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as follows:

PART 60--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.

0
2. Section 60.17 is amended by:
0
a. Adding paragraph (a)(93);
0
b. Revising paragraph (h)(4); and
0
c. Adding paragraph (o) to read as follows:

Sec.  60.17  Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (93) ASTM D6784-02 (Reapproved 2008) Standard Test Method for 
Elemental, Oxidized, Particle-Bound and Total Mercury in Flue Gas 
Generated from Coal-Fired Stationary Sources (Ontario Hydro Method), 
approved April 1, 2008, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  60.2165(j), 
60.2730(j), tables 1, 5, 6 and 8 to subpart CCCC, tables 2, 6, 7, and 9 
to subpart DDDD, Sec. Sec.  60.4900(b)(4)(v), 60.5220(b)(4)(v), tables 
1 and 2 to subpart LLLL, and tables 2 and 3 to subpart MMMM.
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (4) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part 
10, Instruments and Apparatus], IBR approved for Sec.  60.56c(b)(4), 
Sec.  60.63(f)(2) and (f)(4), Sec.  60.106(e)(2), Sec. Sec.  
60.104a(d)(3), (d)(5), (d)(6), (h)(3), (h)(4), (h)(5), (i)(3), (i)(4), 
(i)(5), (j)(3), and (j)(4), Sec.  60.105a(d)(4), (f)(2), (f)(4), 
(g)(2), and (g)(4), Sec.  60.106a(a)(1)(iii), (a)(2)(iii), (a)(2)(v), 
(a)(2)(viii), (a)(3)(ii), and (a)(3)(v), and Sec.  60.107a(a)(1)(ii), 
(a)(1)(iv), (a)(2)(ii), (c)(2), (c)(4), and (d)(2), tables 1 and 3 of 
subpart EEEE, tables 2 and 4 of subpart FFFF, table 2 of subpart JJJJ, 
Sec. Sec.  60.4415(a)(2) and (a)(3), 60.2145(s)(1)(i) and (ii), 
60.2145(t)(1)(ii), 60.2145(t)(5)(i), 60.2710(s)(1)(i) and (ii), 
60.2710(t)(1)(ii), 60.2710(t)(5)(i), 60.2710(w)(3), 60.2730(q)(3), 
60.4900(b)(4)(vii) and (viii), 60.4900(b)(5)(i), 60.5220(b)(4)(vii) and 
(viii), 60.5220(b)(5)(i), tables 1 and 2 to subpart LLLL, and tables 2 
and 3 to subpart MMMM.
* * * * *
    (o) The following material is available from the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, 
(202) 272-0167, http://www.epa.gov.
    (1) Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) Fabric 
Filter Bag Leak Detection Guidance, EPA-454/R-98-015, September 1997, 
IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  60.2145(r)(2), 60.2710(r)(2), 
60.4905(b)(3)(i)(B), and 60.5225(b)(3)(i)(B).
    (2) [Reserved]

0
3. Part 60 is amended by adding subparts LLLL and MMMM to read as 
follows:

Subpart LLLL--Standards of Performance for New Sewage Sludge 
Incineration Units

Sec.

Introduction

60.4760 What does this subpart do?
60.4765 When does this subpart become effective?

Applicability and Delegation of Authority

60.4770 Does this subpart apply to my sewage sludge incineration 
unit?
60.4775 What is a new sewage sludge incineration unit?
60.4780 What sewage sludge incineration units are exempt from this 
subpart?
60.4785 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
60.4790 How are these new source performance standards structured?
60.4795 Do all nine components of these new source performance 
standards apply at the same time?

Preconstruction Siting Analysis

60.4800 Who must prepare a siting analysis?
60.4805 What is a siting analysis?

Operator Training and Qualification

60.4810 What are the operator training and qualification 
requirements?
60.4815 When must the operator training course be completed?
60.4820 How do I obtain my operator qualification?
60.4825 How do I maintain my operator qualification?
60.4830 How do I renew my lapsed operator qualification?
60.4835 What if all the qualified operators are temporarily not 
accessible?
60.4840 What site-specific documentation is required and how often 
must it be reviewed by qualified operators and plant personnel?

[[Page 15405]]

Emission Limits, Emission Standards, and Operating Limits and 
Requirements

60.4845 What emission limits and standards must I meet and by when?
60.4850 What operating limits and requirements must I meet and by 
when?
60.4855 How do I establish operating limits if I do not use a wet 
scrubber, fabric filter, electrostatic precipitator, or activated 
carbon injection, or if I limit emissions in some other manner, to 
comply with the emission limits?
60.4860 Do the emission limits, emission standards, and operating 
limits apply during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction?
60.4861 How do I establish affirmative defense for exceedance of an 
emission limit or standard during malfunction?

Initial Compliance Requirements

60.4865 How and when do I demonstrate initial compliance with the 
emission limits and standards?
60.4870 How do I establish my operating limits?
60.4875 By what date must I conduct the initial air pollution 
control device inspection and make any necessary repairs?
60.4880 How do I develop a site-specific monitoring plan for my 
continuous monitoring, bag leak detection, and ash handling systems, 
and by what date must I conduct an initial performance evaluation?

Continuous Compliance Requirements

60.4885 How and when do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the 
emission limits and standards?
60.4890 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with my operating 
limits?
60.4895 By what date must I conduct annual air pollution control 
device inspections and make any necessary repairs?

Performance Testing, Monitoring, and Calibration Requirements

60.4900 What are the performance testing, monitoring, and 
calibration requirements for compliance with the emission limits and 
standards?
60.4905 What are the monitoring and calibration requirements for 
compliance with my operating limits?

Recordkeeping and Reporting

60.4910 What records must I keep?
60.4915 What reports must I submit?

Title V Operating Permits

60.4920 Am I required to apply for and obtain a Title V operating 
permit for my unit?
60.4925 When must I submit a title V permit application for my new 
SSI unit?

Definitions

60.4930 What definitions must I know?

Tables

Table 1 to Subpart LLLL of Part 60--Emission Limits and Standards 
for Fluidized Bed New Sewage Sludge Incineration Units
Table 2 to Subpart LLLL of Part 60--Emission Limits and Standards 
for New Multiple Hearth Sewage Sludge Incineration Units
Table 3 to Subpart LLLL of Part 60--Operating Parameters for New 
Sewage Sludge Incineration Units
Table 4 to Subpart LLLL of Part 60--Toxic Equivalency Factors
Table 5 to Subpart LLLL of Part 60--Summary of Reporting 
Requirements for New Sewage Sludge Incineration Units *COM019*

Introduction

Sec.  60.4760  What does this subpart do?

    This subpart establishes new source performance standards for 
sewage sludge incineration (SSI) units. To the extent any requirement 
of this subpart is inconsistent with the requirements of subpart A of 
this part, the requirements of this subpart will apply.

Sec.  60.4765  When does this subpart become effective?

    This subpart takes effect on September 21, 2011. Some of the 
requirements in this subpart apply to planning a SSI unit and must be 
completed even before construction is initiated on a SSI unit (i.e., 
the preconstruction requirements in Sec. Sec.  60.4800 and 60.4805). 
Other requirements such as the emission limits, emission standards, and 
operating limits apply after the SSI unit begins operation.

Applicability and Delegation of Authority

Sec.  60.4770  Does this subpart apply to my sewage sludge incineration 
unit?

    Yes, your SSI unit is an affected source if it meets all the 
criteria specified in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section.
    (a) Your SSI unit is a SSI unit for which construction commenced 
after October 14, 2010 or for which modification commenced after 
September 21, 2011.
    (b) Your SSI unit is a SSI unit as defined in Sec.  60.4930.
    (c) Your SSI unit is not exempt under Sec.  60.4780.

Sec.  60.4775  What is a new sewage sludge incineration unit?

    (a) A new SSI unit is a SSI unit that meets either of the two 
criteria specified in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this section.
    (1) Commenced construction after October 14, 2010.
    (2) Commenced modification after September 21, 2011.
    (b) Physical or operational changes made to your SSI unit to comply 
with the emission guidelines in subpart MMMM of this part (Emission 
Guidelines and Compliance Times for Existing Sewage Sludge Incineration 
Units) do not qualify as a modification under this subpart.

Sec.  60.4780  What sewage sludge incineration units are exempt from 
this subpart?

    This subpart exempts combustion units that incinerate sewage sludge 
and are not located at a wastewater treatment facility designed to 
treat domestic sewage sludge. These units may be subject to another 
subpart of this part (e.g., subpart CCCC of this part). The owner or 
operator of such a combustion unit must notify the Administrator of an 
exemption claim under this section.

Sec.  60.4785  Who implements and enforces this subpart?

    (a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by the 
Administrator, as defined in Sec.  60.2, or a delegated authority such 
as your state, local, or tribal agency. If the Administrator has 
delegated authority to your state, local, or tribal agency, then that 
agency (as well as the Administrator) has the authority to implement 
and enforce this subpart. You should contact your EPA Regional Office 
to find out if this subpart is delegated to your state, local, or 
tribal agency.
    (b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this 
subpart to a state, local, or tribal agency, the authorities contained 
in paragraph (c) of this section are retained by the Administrator and 
are not transferred to the state, local, or tribal agency.
    (c) The authorities that will not be delegated to state, local, or 
tribal agencies are specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(8) of 
this section.
    (1) Approval of alternatives to the emission limits and standards 
in Tables 1 and 2 to this subpart and operating limits established 
under Sec.  60.4850.
    (2) Approval of major alternatives to test methods.
    (3) Approval of major alternatives to monitoring.
    (4) Approval of major alternatives to recordkeeping and reporting.
    (5) The requirements in Sec.  60.4855.
    (6) The requirements in Sec.  60.4835(b)(2).
    (7) Performance test and data reduction waivers under Sec.  
60.8(b).
    (8) Preconstruction siting analysis in Sec.  60.4800 and Sec.  
60.4805.

Sec.  60.4790  How are these new source performance standards 
structured?

    These new source performance standards contain the nine major

[[Page 15406]]

components listed in paragraphs (a) through (i) of this section.
    (a) Preconstruction siting analysis.
    (b) Operator training and qualification.
    (c) Emission limits, emission standards, and operating limits.
    (d) Initial compliance requirements.
    (e) Continuous compliance requirements.
    (f) Performance testing, monitoring, and calibration requirements.
    (g) Recordkeeping and reporting.
    (h) Definitions.
    (i) Tables.

Sec.  60.4795  Do all nine components of these new source performance 
standards apply at the same time?

    No. You must meet the preconstruction siting analysis requirements 
before you commence construction of the SSI unit. The operator training 
and qualification, emission limits, emission standards, operating 
limits, performance testing, and compliance, monitoring, and most 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements are met after the SSI unit 
begins operation.

Preconstruction Siting Analysis

Sec.  60.4800  Who must prepare a siting analysis?

    (a) You must prepare a siting analysis if you plan to commence 
construction of a SSI unit after October 14, 2010.
    (b) You must prepare a siting analysis if you are required to 
submit an initial application for a construction permit under 40 CFR 
part 51, subpart I, or 40 CFR part 52, as applicable, for the 
modification of your SSI unit.

Sec.  60.4805  What is a siting analysis?

    (a) The siting analysis must consider air pollution control 
alternatives that minimize, on a site-specific basis, to the maximum 
extent practicable, potential risks to public health or the 
environment, including impacts of the affected SSI unit on ambient air 
quality, visibility, soils, and vegetation. In considering such 
alternatives, the analysis may consider costs, energy impacts, nonair 
environmental impacts, or any other factors related to the 
practicability of the alternatives.
    (b) Analyses of your SSI unit's impacts that are prepared to comply 
with state, local, or other Federal regulatory requirements may be used 
to satisfy the requirements of this section, provided they include the 
consideration of air pollution control alternatives specified in 
paragraph (a) of this section.
    (c) You must complete and submit the siting requirements of this 
section as required under Sec.  60.4915(a)(3) prior to commencing 
construction.

Operator Training and Qualification

Sec.  60.4810  What are the operator training and qualification 
requirements?

    (a) A SSI unit cannot be operated unless a fully trained and 
qualified SSI unit operator is accessible, either at the facility or 
can be at the facility within 1 hour. The trained and qualified SSI 
unit operator may operate the SSI unit directly or be the direct 
supervisor of one or more other plant personnel who operate the unit. 
If all qualified SSI unit operators are temporarily not accessible, you 
must follow the procedures in Sec.  60.4835.
    (b) Operator training and qualification must be obtained through a 
state-approved program or by completing the requirements included in 
paragraph (c) of this section.
    (c) Training must be obtained by completing an incinerator operator 
training course that includes, at a minimum, the three elements 
described in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(3) of this section.
    (1) Training on the 10 subjects listed in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) 
through (c)(1)(x) of this section.
    (i) Environmental concerns, including types of emissions.
    (ii) Basic combustion principles, including products of combustion.
    (iii) Operation of the specific type of incinerator to be used by 
the operator, including proper startup, sewage sludge feeding, and 
shutdown procedures.
    (iv) Combustion controls and monitoring.
    (v) Operation of air pollution control equipment and factors 
affecting performance (if applicable).
    (vi) Inspection and maintenance of the incinerator and air 
pollution control devices.
    (vii) Actions to prevent malfunctions or to prevent conditions that 
may lead to malfunctions.
    (viii) Bottom and fly ash characteristics and handling procedures.
    (ix) Applicable Federal, State, and local regulations, including 
Occupational Safety and Health Administration workplace standards.
    (x) Pollution prevention.
    (2) An examination designed and administered by the state-approved 
program.
    (3) Written material covering the training course topics that may 
serve as reference material following completion of the course.

Sec.  60.4815  When must the operator training course be completed?

    The operator training course must be completed by the later of the 
two dates specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
    (a) Six months after your SSI unit startup.
    (b) The date before an employee assumes responsibility for 
operating the SSI unit or assumes responsibility for supervising the 
operation of the SSI unit.

Sec.  60.4820  How do I obtain my operator qualification?

    (a) You must obtain operator qualification by completing a training 
course that satisfies the criteria under Sec.  60.4810(b).
    (b) Qualification is valid from the date on which the training 
course is completed and the operator successfully passes the 
examination required under Sec.  60.4810(c)(2).

Sec.  60.4825  How do I maintain my operator qualification?

    To maintain qualification, you must complete an annual review or 
refresher course covering, at a minimum, the five topics described in 
paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section.
    (a) Update of regulations.
    (b) Incinerator operation, including startup and shutdown 
procedures, sewage sludge feeding, and ash handling.
    (c) Inspection and maintenance.
    (d) Prevention of malfunctions or conditions that may lead to 
malfunction.
    (e) Discussion of operating problems encountered by attendees.

Sec.  60.4830  How do I renew my lapsed operator qualification?

    You must renew a lapsed operator qualification before you begin 
operation of a SSI unit by one of the two methods specified in 
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
    (a) For a lapse of less than 3 years, you must complete a standard 
annual refresher course described in Sec.  60.4825.
    (b) For a lapse of 3 years or more, you must repeat the initial 
qualification requirements in Sec.  60.4820(a).

Sec.  60.4835  What if all the qualified operators are temporarily not 
accessible?

    If a qualified operator is not at the facility and cannot be at the 
facility within 1 hour, you must meet the criteria specified in either 
paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, depending on the length of time 
that a qualified operator is not accessible.
    (a) When a qualified operator is not accessible for more than 8 
hours, the SSI unit may be operated for less than 2 weeks by other 
plant personnel who are familiar with the operation of the SSI unit and 
who have completed a review

[[Page 15407]]

of the information specified in Sec.  60.4840 within the past 12 
months. However, you must record the period when a qualified operator 
was not accessible and include this deviation in the annual report as 
specified under Sec.  60.4915(d).
    (b) When a qualified operator is not accessible for 2 weeks or 
more, you must take the two actions that are described in paragraphs 
(b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.
    (1) Notify the Administrator of this deviation in writing within 10 
days. In the notice, state what caused this deviation, what you are 
doing to ensure that a qualified operator is accessible, and when you 
anticipate that a qualified operator will be accessible.
    (2) Submit a status report to the Administrator every 4 weeks 
outlining what you are doing to ensure that a qualified operator is 
accessible, stating when you anticipate that a qualified operator will 
be accessible, and requesting approval from the Administrator to 
continue operation of the SSI unit. You must submit the first status 
report 4 weeks after you notify the Administrator of the deviation 
under paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (i) If the Administrator notifies you that your request to continue 
operation of the SSI unit is disapproved, the SSI unit may continue 
operation for 30 days, and then must cease operation.
    (ii) Operation of the unit may resume if a qualified operator is 
accessible as required under Sec.  60.4810(a). You must notify the 
Administrator within 5 days of having resumed operations and of having 
a qualified operator accessible.

Sec.  60.4840  What site-specific documentation is required and how 
often must it be reviewed by qualified operators and plant personnel?

    (a) You must maintain at the facility the documentation of the 
operator training procedures specified under Sec.  60.4910(c)(1) and 
make the documentation readily accessible to all SSI unit operators.
    (b) You must establish a program for reviewing the information 
listed in Sec.  60.4910(c)(1) with each qualified incinerator operator 
and other plant personnel who may operate the unit according to the 
provisions of Sec.  60.4835(a), according to the following schedule:
    (1) The initial review of the information listed in Sec.  
60.4910(c)(1) must be conducted within 6 months after the effective 
date of this subpart or prior to an employee's assumption of 
responsibilities for operation of the SSI unit, whichever date is 
later.
    (2) Subsequent annual reviews of the information listed in Sec.  
60.4910(c)(1) must be conducted no later than 12 months following the 
previous review.

Emission Limits, Emission Standards, and Operating Limits and 
Requirements

Sec.  60.4845  What emission limits and standards must I meet and by 
when?

    You must meet the emission limits and standards specified in Table 
1 or 2 to this subpart within 60 days after your SSI unit reaches the 
feed rate at which it will operate or within 180 days after its initial 
startup, whichever comes first. The emission limits and standards apply 
at all times the unit is operating, and during periods of malfunction. 
The emission limits and standards apply to emissions from a bypass 
stack or vent while sewage sludge is in the combustion chamber (i.e., 
until the sewage sludge feed to the combustor has been cut off for a 
period of time not less than the sewage sludge incineration residence 
time).

Sec.  60.4850  What operating limits and requirements must I meet and 
by when?

    You must meet, as applicable, the operating limits and requirements 
specified in paragraphs (a) through (d) and (h) of this section, 
according to the schedule specified in paragraph (e) of this section. 
The operating parameters for which you will establish operating limits 
for a wet scrubber, fabric filter, electrostatic precipitator, or 
activated carbon injection are listed in Table 3 to this subpart. You 
must comply with the operating requirements in paragraph (f) of this 
section and the requirements in paragraph (g) of this section for 
meeting any new operating limits, re-established in Sec.  60.4890. The 
operating limits apply at all times that sewage sludge is in the 
combustion chamber (i.e., until the sewage sludge feed to the combustor 
has been cut off for a period of time not less than the sewage sludge 
incineration residence time).
    (a) You must meet a site-specific operating limit for minimum 
operating temperature of the combustion chamber (or afterburner 
combustion chamber) that you establish in Sec.  60.4890(a)(2)(i).
    (b) If you use a wet scrubber, electrostatic precipitator, or 
activated carbon injection to comply with an emission limit, you must 
meet the site-specific operating limits that you establish in Sec.  
60.4870 for each operating parameter associated with each air pollution 
control device.
    (c) If you use a fabric filter to comply with the emission limits, 
you must install the bag leak detection system specified in Sec. Sec.  
60.4880(b) and 60.4905(b)(3)(i) and operate the bag leak detection 
system such that the alarm does not sound more than 5 percent of the 
operating time during a 6-month period. You must calculate the alarm 
time as specified in Sec.  60.4870.
    (d) You must meet the operating requirements in your site-specific 
fugitive emission monitoring plan, submitted as specified in Sec.  
60.4880(d) to ensure that your ash handling system will meet the 
emission standard for fugitive emissions from ash handling.
    (e) You must meet the operating limits and requirements specified 
in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section 60 days after your SSI 
unit reaches the feed rate at which it will operate, or within 180 days 
after its initial startup, whichever comes first.
    (f) You must monitor the feed rate and moisture content of the 
sewage sludge fed to the sewage sludge incinerator, as specified in 
paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this section.
    (1) Continuously monitor the sewage sludge feed rate and calculate 
a daily average for all hours of operation during each 24-hour period. 
Keep a record of the daily average feed rate, as specified in Sec.  
60.4910(f)(3)(ii).
    (2) Take at least one grab sample per day of the sewage sludge fed 
to the sewage sludge incinerator. If you take more than one grab sample 
in a day, calculate the daily average for the grab samples. Keep a 
record of the daily average moisture content, as specified in Sec.  
60.4910(f)(3)(ii).
    (g) For the operating limits and requirements specified in 
paragraphs (a) through (d) and (h) of this section, you must meet any 
new operating limits and requirements, re-established according to 
Sec.  60.4890(d).
    (h) If you use an air pollution control device other than a wet 
scrubber, fabric filter, electrostatic precipitator, or activated 
carbon injection to comply with the emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to 
this subpart, you must meet any site-specific operating limits or 
requirements that you establish as required in Sec.  60.4855.

Sec.  60.4855  How do I establish operating limits if I do not use a 
wet scrubber, fabric filter, electrostatic precipitator, or activated 
carbon injection, or if I limit emissions in some other manner, to 
comply with the emission limits?

    If you use an air pollution control device other than a wet 
scrubber, fabric filter, electrostatic precipitator, or activated 
carbon injection, or limit emissions in some other manner (e.g., 
materials balance) to comply with the emission limits in Sec.  60.4845, 
you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this 
section.
    (a) Meet the applicable operating limits and requirements in Sec.  
60.4850,

[[Page 15408]]

and establish applicable operating limits according to Sec.  60.4870.
    (b) Petition the Administrator for specific operating parameters, 
operating limits, and averaging periods to be established during the 
initial performance test and to be monitored continuously thereafter.
    (1) You are responsible for submitting any supporting information 
in a timely manner to enable the Administrator to consider the 
application prior to the performance test. You must not conduct the 
initial performance test until after the petition has been approved by 
the Administrator, and you must comply with the operating limits as 
written, pending approval by the Administrator. Neither submittal of an 
application, nor the Administrator's failure to approve or disapprove 
the application relieves you of the responsibility to comply with any 
provision of this subpart.
    (2) Your petition must include the five items listed in paragraphs 
(b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(v) of this section.
    (i) Identification of the specific parameters you propose to 
monitor.
    (ii) A discussion of the relationship between these parameters and 
emissions of regulated pollutants, identifying how emissions of 
regulated pollutants change with changes in these parameters, and how 
limits on these parameters will serve to limit emissions of regulated 
pollutants.
    (iii) A discussion of how you will establish the upper and/or lower 
values for these parameters that will establish the operating limits on 
these parameters, including a discussion of the averaging periods 
associated with those parameters for determining compliance.
    (iv) A discussion identifying the methods you will use to measure 
and the instruments you will use to monitor these parameters, as well 
as the relative accuracy and precision of these methods and 
instruments.
    (v) A discussion identifying the frequency and methods for 
recalibrating the instruments you will use for monitoring these 
parameters.

Sec.  60.4860  Do the emission limits, emission standards, and 
operating limits apply during periods of startup, shutdown, and 
malfunction?

    The emission limits and standards apply at all times and during 
periods of malfunction. The operating limits apply at all times that 
sewage sludge is in the combustion chamber (i.e., until the sewage 
sludge feed to the combustor has been cut off for a period of time not 
less than the sewage sludge incineration residence time).

Sec.  60.4861  How do I establish an affirmative defense for exceedance 
of an emission limit or standard during malfunction?

    In response to an action to enforce the numerical emission 
standards set forth in paragraph Sec.  60.4845, you may assert an 
affirmative defense to a claim for civil penalties for exceedances of 
emission limits that are caused by malfunction, as defined in Sec.  
60.2. Appropriate penalties may be assessed, however, if you fail to 
meet your burden of proving all of the requirements in the affirmative 
defense. The affirmative defense shall not be available for claims for 
injunctive relief.
    (a) To establish the affirmative defense in any action to enforce 
such a limit, you must timely meet the notification requirements in 
paragraph (b) of this section, and must prove by a preponderance of 
evidence that the conditions in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(9) of 
this section are met.
    (1) The excess emissions meet:
    (i) Were caused by a sudden, infrequent, and unavoidable failure of 
air pollution control and monitoring equipment, process equipment, or a 
process to operate in a normal or usual manner, and
    (ii) Could not have been prevented through careful planning, proper 
design or better operation and maintenance practices, and
    (iii) Did not stem from any activity or event that could have been 
foreseen and avoided, or planned for, and
    (iv) Were not part of a recurring pattern indicative of inadequate 
design, operation, or maintenance, and (2) Repairs were made as 
expeditiously as possible when the applicable emission limits were 
being exceeded. Off-shift and overtime labor were used, to the extent 
practicable to make these repairs, and
    (3) The frequency, amount and duration of the excess emissions 
(including any bypass) were minimized to the maximum extent practicable 
during periods of such emissions, and
    (4) If the excess emissions resulted from a bypass of control 
equipment or a process, then the bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss 
of life, personal injury, or severe property damage, and
    (5) All possible steps were taken to minimize the impact of the 
excess emissions on ambient air quality, the environment and human 
health, and
    (6) All emissions monitoring and control systems were kept in 
operation if at all possible consistent with safety and good air 
pollution control practices, and
    (7) All of the actions in response to the excess emissions were 
documented by properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, and
    (8) At all times, the affected facility was operated in a manner 
consistent with good practices for minimizing emissions, and
    (9) A written root cause analysis has been prepared the purpose of 
which is to determine, correct, and eliminate the primary causes of the 
malfunction and the excess emissions resulting from the malfunction 
event at issue. The analysis shall also specify, using best monitoring 
methods and engineering judgment, the amount of excess emissions that 
were the result of the malfunction.
    (b) The owner or operator of the SSI unit experiencing an 
exceedance of its emission limit(s) during a malfunction, shall notify 
the Administrator by telephone or facsimile (fax) transmission as soon 
as possible, but no later than 2 business days after the initial 
occurrence of the malfunction, if it wishes to avail itself of an 
affirmative defense to civil penalties for that malfunction. The owner 
or operator seeking to assert an affirmative defense shall also submit 
a written report to the Administrator within 45 days of the initial 
occurrence of the exceedance of the standard in Sec.  60.4845 to 
demonstrate, with all necessary supporting documentation, that it has 
met the requirements set forth in paragraph (a) of this section. The 
owner or operator may seek an extension of this deadline for up to 30 
additional days by submitting a written request to the Administrator 
before the expiration of the 45 day period. Until a request for an 
extension has been approved by the Administrator, the owner or operator 
is subject to the requirement to submit such report within 45 days of 
the initial occurrence of the exceedance.

Initial Compliance Requirements

Sec.  60.4865  How and when do I demonstrate initial compliance with 
the emission limits and standards?

    To demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limits and 
standards in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, use the procedures specified 
in paragraph (a) of this section for particulate matter, hydrogen 
chloride, dioxins/furans (total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis), 
mercury, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, cadmium, lead, and fugitive 
emissions from ash handling, and follow the procedures specified in 
paragraph (b) of this section for carbon monoxide. In lieu of using the 
procedures specified in paragraph (a) of this section, you also have 
the option to demonstrate initial compliance using the procedures 
specified in paragraph (b) of this section for particulate matter,

[[Page 15409]]

hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans (total mass basis or toxic 
equivalency basis), mercury, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, cadmium, 
and lead. You must meet the requirements of paragraphs (a) or (b) of 
this section, as applicable, and paragraphs (c) and (d) of this 
section, according to the performance testing, monitoring, and 
calibration requirements in Sec.  60.4900(a) and (b). Except as 
provided in paragraph (e) of this section, within 60 days after your 
SSI unit reaches the feed rate at which it will operate, or within 180 
days after its initial startup, whichever comes first, you must 
demonstrate that your SSI unit meets the emission limits and standards 
specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.
    (a) Demonstrate initial compliance using the performance test 
required in Sec.  60.8. You must demonstrate that your SSI unit meets 
the emission limits and standards specified in Table 1 or 2 to this 
subpart for particulate matter, hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans 
(total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis), mercury, nitrogen 
oxides, sulfur dioxide, cadmium, lead, and fugitive emissions from ash 
handling using the performance test. The initial performance test must 
be conducted using the test methods, averaging methods, and minimum 
sampling volumes or durations specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart 
and according to the testing, monitoring, and calibration requirements 
specified in Sec.  60.4900(a).
    (b) Demonstrate initial compliance using a continuous emissions 
monitoring system or continuous automated sampling system. The option 
to use a continuous emissions monitoring system for hydrogen chloride, 
dioxins/furans, cadmium, or lead takes effect on the date a final 
performance specification applicable to hydrogen chloride, dioxins/
furans, cadmium, or lead is published in the Federal Register. The 
option to use a continuous automated sampling system for dioxins/furans 
takes effect on the date a final performance specification for such a 
continuous automated sampling system is published in the Federal 
Register. Collect data as specified in Sec.  60.4900(b)(6) and use the 
following procedures:
    (1) To demonstrate initial compliance with the carbon monoxide 
emission limit specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, you must use 
the carbon monoxide continuous emissions monitoring system specified in 
Sec.  60.4900(b). For determining compliance with the carbon monoxide 
concentration limit using carbon monoxide CEMS, the correction to 7 
percent oxygen does not apply during periods of startup or shutdown. 
Use the measured carbon monoxide concentration without correcting for 
oxygen concentration in averaging with other carbon monoxide 
concentrations (corrected to 7 percent oxygen) to determine the 24-hour 
average value.
    (2) To demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limits 
specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart for particulate matter, 
hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans (total mass basis or toxic 
equivalency basis), mercury, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, cadmium, 
and lead, you may substitute the use of a continuous monitoring system 
in lieu of conducting the initial performance test required in 
paragraph (a) of this section, as follows:
    (i) You may substitute the use of a continuous emissions monitoring 
system for any pollutant specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section 
in lieu of conducting the initial performance test for that pollutant 
in paragraph (a) of this section.
    (ii) You may substitute the use of a continuous automated sampling 
system for mercury or dioxins/furans in lieu of conducting the initial 
mercury or dioxin/furan performance test in paragraph (a) of this 
section.
    (3) If you use a continuous emissions monitoring system to 
demonstrate compliance with an applicable emission limit in Table 1 or 
2 to this subpart, as described in paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this 
section, you must use the continuous emissions monitoring system and 
follow the requirements specified in Sec.  60.4900(b). You must measure 
emissions according to Sec.  60.13 to calculate 1-hour arithmetic 
averages, corrected to 7 percent oxygen (or carbon dioxide). You must 
demonstrate initial compliance using a 24-hour block average of these 
1-hour arithmetic average emission concentrations, calculated using 
Equation 19-19 in section 12.4.1 of Method 19 of 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-7.
    (4) If you use a continuous automated sampling system to 
demonstrate compliance with an applicable emission limit in Table 1 or 
2 to this subpart, as described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, 
you must:
    (i) Use the continuous automated sampling system specified in Sec.  
60.58b(p) and (q), and measure and calculate average emissions 
corrected to 7 percent oxygen (or carbon dioxide) according to Sec.  
60.58b(p) and your monitoring plan.
    (A) Use the procedures specified in Sec.  60.58b(p) to calculate 
24-hour block averages to determine compliance with the mercury 
emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.
    (B) Use the procedures specified in Sec.  60.58b(p) to calculate 2-
week block averages to determine compliance with the dioxin/furan 
(total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis) emission limits in Table 
1 or 2 to this subpart.
    (ii) Comply with the provisions in Sec.  60.58b(q) to develop a 
monitoring plan. For mercury continuous automated sampling systems, you 
must use Performance Specification 12B of appendix B of part 75 and 
Procedure 5 of appendix F of this part.
    (5) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, you must 
complete your initial performance evaluations required under your 
monitoring plan for any continuous emissions monitoring system and 
continuous automated sampling systems according to the provisions of 
Sec.  60.4880. Your performance evaluation must be conducted using the 
procedures and acceptance criteria specified in Sec.  60.4880(a)(3).
    (c) To demonstrate initial compliance with the dioxins/furans toxic 
equivalency emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, determine 
dioxins/furans toxic equivalency as follows:
    (1) Measure the concentration of each dioxin/furan tetra- through 
octachlorinated-isomer emitted using Method 23 at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-7.
    (2) Multiply the concentration of each dioxin/furan (tetra- through 
octa-chlorinated) isomer by its corresponding toxic equivalency factor 
specified in Table 4 to this subpart.
    (3) Sum the products calculated in accordance with paragraph (c)(2) 
of this section to obtain the total concentration of dioxins/furans 
emitted in terms of toxic equivalency.
    (d) Submit an initial compliance report, as specified in Sec.  
60.4915(c).
    (e) If you demonstrate initial compliance using the performance 
test specified in paragraph (a) of this section, then the provisions of 
this paragraph (e) apply. If a force majeure is about to occur, occurs, 
or has occurred for which you intend to assert a claim of force 
majeure, you must notify the Administrator in writing as specified in 
Sec.  60.4915(g). You must conduct the initial performance test as soon 
as practicable after the force majeure occurs. The Administrator will 
determine whether or not to grant the extension to the initial 
performance test deadline, and will notify you in writing of approval 
or disapproval of the request for an extension as soon as practicable. 
Until an extension of the performance test deadline has been approved 
by the Administrator, you remain strictly subject to the requirements 
of this subpart.

[[Page 15410]]

Sec.  60.4870  How do I establish my operating limits?

    (a) You must establish the site-specific operating limits specified 
in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section or established in Sec.  
60.4855, as applicable, during your initial performance tests required 
in Sec.  60.4865. You must meet the requirements in Sec.  60.4890(d) to 
confirm these operating limits or re-establish new operating limits 
using operating data recorded during any performance tests or 
performance evaluations required in Sec.  60.4885. You must follow the 
data measurement and recording frequencies and data averaging times 
specified in Table 3 to this subpart or as established in Sec.  
60.4855, and you must follow the testing, monitoring, and calibration 
requirements specified in Sec. Sec.  60.4900 and 60.4905 or established 
in Sec.  60.4855. You are not required to establish operating limits 
for the operating parameters listed in Table 3 to this subpart for a 
control device if you use a continuous monitoring system to demonstrate 
compliance with the emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart for 
the applicable pollutants, as follows:
    (1) For a scrubber designed to control emissions of hydrogen 
chloride or sulfur dioxide, you are not required to establish an 
operating limit and monitor, scrubber liquid flow rate or scrubber 
liquid pH if you use the continuous monitoring system specified in 
Sec. Sec.  60.4865(b) and 60.4885(b) to demonstrate compliance with the 
emission limit for hydrogen chloride or sulfur dioxide.
    (2) For a scrubber designed to control emissions of particulate 
matter, cadmium, and lead, you are not required to establish an 
operating limit and monitor pressure drop across the scrubber or 
scrubber liquid flow rate if you use the continuous monitoring system 
specified in Sec. Sec.  60.4865(b) and 60.4885(b) to demonstrate 
compliance with the emission limit for particulate matter, cadmium, and 
lead.
    (3) For an electrostatic precipitator designed to control emissions 
of particulate matter, cadmium, and lead, you are not required to 
establish an operating limit and monitor secondary voltage of the 
collection plates, secondary amperage of the collection plates, or 
effluent water flow rate at the outlet of the electrostatic 
precipitator if you use the continuous monitoring system specified in 
Sec. Sec.  60.4865(b) and 60.4885(b) to demonstrate compliance with the 
emission limit for particulate matter, cadmium, and lead.
    (4) For an activated carbon injection system designed to control 
emissions of mercury, you are not required to establish an operating 
limit and monitor sorbent injection rate and carrier gas flow rate (or 
carrier gas pressure drop) if you use the continuous monitoring system 
specified in Sec. Sec.  60.4865(b) and 60.4885(b) to demonstrate 
compliance with the emission limit for mercury.
    (5) For an activated carbon injection system designed to control 
emissions of dioxins/furans, you are not required to establish an 
operating limit and monitor sorbent injection rate and carrier gas flow 
rate (or carrier gas pressure drop) if you use the continuous 
monitoring system specified in Sec. Sec.  60.4865(b) and 60.4885(b) to 
demonstrate compliance with the emission limit for dioxins/furans 
(total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis).
    (b) Minimum pressure drop across each wet scrubber used to meet the 
particulate matter, lead, and cadmium emission limits in Table 1 or 2 
to this subpart, equal to the lowest 4-hour average pressure drop 
across each such wet scrubber measured during the most recent 
performance test demonstrating compliance with the particulate matter, 
lead, and cadmium emission limits.
    (c) Minimum scrubber liquid flow rate (measured at the inlet to 
each wet scrubber), equal to the lowest 4-hour average liquid flow rate 
measured during the most recent performance test demonstrating 
compliance with all applicable emission limits.
    (d) Minimum scrubber liquid pH for each wet scrubber used to meet 
the sulfur dioxide or hydrogen chloride emission limits in Table 1 or 2 
to this subpart, equal to the lowest 1-hour average scrubber liquid pH 
measured during the most recent performance test demonstrating 
compliance with the sulfur dioxide and hydrogen chloride emission 
limits.
    (e) Minimum combustion chamber operating temperature (or minimum 
afterburner temperature), equal to the lowest 4-hour average combustion 
chamber operating temperature (or afterburner temperature) measured 
during the most recent performance test demonstrating compliance with 
all applicable emission limits.
    (f) Minimum power input to the electrostatic precipitator 
collection plates, equal to the lowest 4-hour average power measured 
during the most recent performance test demonstrating compliance with 
the particulate matter, lead, and cadmium emission limits. Power input 
must be calculated as the product of the secondary voltage and 
secondary amperage to the electrostatic precipitator collection plates. 
Both the secondary voltage and secondary amperage must be recorded 
during the performance test.
    (g) Minimum effluent water flow rate at the outlet of the 
electrostatic precipitator, equal to the lowest 4-hour average effluent 
water flow rate at the outlet of the electrostatic precipitator 
measured during the most recent performance test demonstrating 
compliance with the particulate matter, lead, and cadmium emission 
limits.
    (h) For activated carbon injection, establish the site-specific 
operating limits specified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(3) of this 
section.
    (1) Minimum mercury sorbent injection rate, equal to the lowest 4-
hour average mercury sorbent injection rate measured during the most 
recent performance test demonstrating compliance with the mercury 
emission limit.
    (2) Minimum dioxin/furan sorbent injection rate, equal to the 
lowest 4-hour average dioxin/furan sorbent injection rate measured 
during the most recent performance test demonstrating compliance with 
the dioxin/furan (total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis) emission 
limit.
    (3) Minimum carrier gas flow rate or minimum carrier gas pressure 
drop, as follows:
    (i) Minimum carrier gas flow rate, equal to the lowest 4-hour 
average carrier gas flow rate measured during the most recent 
performance test demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission 
limit.
    (ii) Minimum carrier gas pressure drop, equal to the lowest 4-hour 
average carrier gas flow rate measured during the most recent 
performance test demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission 
limit.

Sec.  60.4875  By what date must I conduct the initial air pollution 
control device inspection and make any necessary repairs?

    (a) You must conduct an air pollution control device inspection 
according to Sec.  60.4900(c) within 60 days of installing an air 
pollution control device or within 180 days of startup of the SSI unit 
using the air pollution control device, whichever comes first.
    (b) Within 10 operating days following the air pollution control 
device inspection under paragraph (a) of this section, all necessary 
repairs must be completed unless you obtain written approval from the 
Administrator establishing a date whereby all necessary repairs of the 
SSI unit must be completed.

[[Page 15411]]

Sec.  60.4880  How do I develop a site-specific monitoring plan for my 
continuous monitoring, bag leak detection, and ash handling systems, 
and by what date must I conduct an initial performance evaluation?

    You must develop and submit to the Administrator for approval a 
site-specific monitoring plan for each continuous monitoring system 
required under this subpart, according to the requirements in 
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section. This requirement also 
applies to you if you petition the Administrator for alternative 
monitoring parameters under Sec.  60.13(i) and paragraph (e) of this 
section. If you use a continuous automated sampling system to comply 
with the mercury or dioxin/furan (total mass basis or toxic equivalency 
basis) emission limit, you must develop your monitoring plan as 
specified in Sec.  60.58b(q), and you are not required to meet the 
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. You must also 
submit a site-specific monitoring plan for your ash handling system, as 
specified in paragraph (d) of this section. You must submit and update 
your monitoring plans as specified in paragraphs (f) through (h) of 
this section.
    (a) For each continuous monitoring system, your monitoring plan 
must address the elements and requirements specified in paragraphs 
(a)(1) through (a)(8) of this section. You must operate and maintain 
the continuous monitoring system in continuous operation according to 
the site-specific monitoring plan.
    (1) Installation of the continuous monitoring system sampling probe 
or other interface at a measurement location relative to each affected 
process unit such that the measurement is representative of control of 
the exhaust emissions (e.g., on or downstream of the last control 
device).
    (2) Performance and equipment specifications for the sample 
interface, the pollutant concentration or parametric signal analyzer 
and the data collection and reduction systems.
    (3) Performance evaluation procedures and acceptance criteria 
(e.g., calibrations).
    (i) For continuous emissions monitoring systems, your performance 
evaluation and acceptance criteria must include, but is not limited to, 
the following:
    (A) The applicable requirements for continuous emissions monitoring 
systems specified in Sec.  60.13.
    (B) The applicable performance specifications (e.g., relative 
accuracy tests) in appendix B of this part.
    (C) The applicable procedures (e.g., quarterly accuracy 
determinations and daily calibration drift tests) in appendix F of this 
part.
    (D) A discussion of how the occurrence and duration of out-of-
control periods will affect the suitability of CEMS data, where out-of-
control has the meaning given in section (a)(7)(i) of this section.
    (ii) For continuous parameter monitoring systems, your performance 
evaluation and acceptance criteria must include, but is not limited to 
the following:
    (A) If you have an operating limit that requires the use of a flow 
monitoring system, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs 
(a)(3)(ii)(A)(1) through (4) of this section.
    (1) Install the flow sensor and other necessary equipment in a 
position that provides a representative flow.
    (2) Use a flow sensor with a measurement sensitivity of no greater 
than 2 percent of the expected process flow rate.
    (3) Minimize the effects of swirling flow or abnormal velocity 
distributions due to upstream and downstream disturbances.
    (4) Conduct a flow monitoring system performance evaluation in 
accordance with your monitoring plan at the time of each performance 
test but no less frequently than annually.
    (B) If you have an operating limit that requires the use of a 
pressure monitoring system, you must meet the requirements in 
paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(B)(1) through (6) of this section.
    (1) Install the pressure sensor(s) in a position that provides a 
representative measurement of the pressure (e.g., particulate matter 
scrubber pressure drop).
    (2) Minimize or eliminate pulsating pressure, vibration, and 
internal and external corrosion.
    (3) Use a pressure sensor with a minimum tolerance of 1.27 
centimeters of water or a minimum tolerance of 1 percent of the 
pressure monitoring system operating range, whichever is less.
    (4) Perform checks at least once each process operating day to 
ensure pressure measurements are not obstructed (e.g., check for 
pressure tap pluggage daily).
    (5) Conduct a performance evaluation of the pressure monitoring 
system in accordance with your monitoring plan at the time of each 
performance test but no less frequently than annually.
    (6) If at any time the measured pressure exceeds the manufacturer's 
specified maximum operating pressure range, conduct a performance 
evaluation of the pressure monitoring system in accordance with your 
monitoring plan and confirm that the pressure monitoring system 
continues to meet the performance requirements in your monitoring plan. 
Alternatively, install and verify the operation of a new pressure 
sensor.
    (C) If you have an operating limit that requires a pH monitoring 
system, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(C)(1) 
through (4) of this section.
    (1) Install the pH sensor in a position that provides a 
representative measurement of scrubber effluent pH.
    (2) Ensure the sample is properly mixed and representative of the 
fluid to be measured.
    (3) Conduct a performance evaluation of the pH monitoring system in 
accordance with your monitoring plan at least once each process 
operating day.
    (4) Conduct a performance evaluation (including a two-point 
calibration with one of the two buffer solutions having a pH within 1 
of the pH of the operating limit) of the pH monitoring system in 
accordance with your monitoring plan at the time of each performance 
test but no less frequently than quarterly.
    (D) If you have an operating limit that requires the use of a 
temperature measurement device, you must meet the requirements in 
paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(D)(1) through (4) of this section.
    (1) Install the temperature sensor and other necessary equipment in 
a position that provides a representative temperature.
    (2) Use a temperature sensor with a minimum tolerance of 2.8 
degrees Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit), or 1.0 percent of the 
temperature value, whichever is larger, for a noncryogenic temperature 
range.
    (3) Use a temperature sensor with a minimum tolerance of 2.8 
degrees Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit), or 2.5 percent of the 
temperature value, whichever is larger, for a cryogenic temperature 
range.
    (4) Conduct a temperature measurement device performance evaluation 
at the time of each performance test but no less frequently than 
annually.
    (E) If you have an operating limit that requires a secondary 
electric power monitoring system for an electrostatic precipitator, you 
must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(E)(1) and (2) of 
this section.
    (1) Install sensors to measure (secondary) voltage and current to 
the electrostatic precipitator collection plates.
    (2) Conduct a performance evaluation of the electric power 
monitoring system in accordance with your monitoring plan at the time 
of each performance

[[Page 15412]]

test but no less frequently than annually.
    (F) If you have an operating limit that requires the use of a 
monitoring system to measure sorbent injection rate (e.g., weigh belt, 
weigh hopper, or hopper flow measurement device), you must meet the 
requirements in paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(F)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Install the system in a position(s) that provides a 
representative measurement of the total sorbent injection rate.
    (2) Conduct a performance evaluation of the sorbent injection rate 
monitoring system in accordance with your monitoring plan at the time 
of each performance test but no less frequently than annually.
    (4) Ongoing operation and maintenance procedures in accordance with 
the general requirements of Sec.  60.11(d).
    (5) Ongoing data quality assurance procedures in accordance with 
the general requirements of Sec.  60.13.
    (6) Ongoing recordkeeping and reporting procedures in accordance 
with the general requirements of Sec.  60.7(b), (c), (c)(1), (c)(4), 
(d), (e), (f) and (g).
    (7) Provisions for periods when the continuous monitoring system is 
out of control, as follows:
    (i) A continuous monitoring system is out of control if the 
conditions of paragraph (a)(7)(i)(A) or (a)(7)(i)(B) of this section 
are met.
    (A) The zero (low-level), mid-level (if applicable), or high-level 
calibration drift exceeds two times the applicable calibration drift 
specification in the applicable performance specification or in the 
relevant standard.
    (B) The continuous monitoring system fails a performance test audit 
(e.g., cylinder gas audit), relative accuracy audit, relative accuracy 
test audit, or linearity test audit.
    (ii) When the continuous monitoring system is out of control as 
specified in paragraph (a)(7)(i) of this section, you must take the 
necessary corrective action and must repeat all necessary tests that 
indicate that the system is out of control. You must take corrective 
action and conduct retesting until the performance requirements are 
below the applicable limits. The beginning of the out-of-control period 
is the hour you conduct a performance check (e.g., calibration drift) 
that indicates an exceedance of the performance requirements 
established under this part. The end of the out-of-control period is 
the hour following the completion of corrective action and successful 
demonstration that the system is within the allowable limits.
    (8) Schedule for conducting initial and periodic performance 
evaluations.
    (b) If a bag leak detection system is used, your monitoring plan 
must include a description of the following items:
    (1) Installation of the bag leak detection system in accordance 
with paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section.
    (i) Install the bag leak detection sensor(s) in a position(s) that 
will be representative of the relative or absolute particulate matter 
loadings for each exhaust stack, roof vent, or compartment (e.g., for a 
positive pressure fabric filter) of the fabric filter.
    (ii) Use a bag leak detection system certified by the manufacturer 
to be capable of detecting particulate matter emissions at 
concentrations of 10 milligrams per actual cubic meter or less.
    (2) Initial and periodic adjustment of the bag leak detection 
system, including how the alarm set-point will be established. Use a 
bag leak detection system equipped with a system that will sound an 
alarm when the system detects an increase in relative particulate 
matter emissions over a preset level. The alarm must be located where 
it is observed readily and any alert is detected and recognized easily 
by plant operating personnel.
    (3) Evaluations of the performance of the bag leak detection 
system, performed in accordance with your monitoring plan and 
consistent with the guidance provided in Fabric Filter Bag Leak 
Detection Guidance, EPA-454/R-98-015, September 1997 (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  60.17).
    (4) Operation of the bag leak detection system, including quality 
assurance procedures.
    (5) Maintenance of the bag leak detection system, including a 
routine maintenance schedule and spare parts inventory list.
    (6) Recordkeeping (including record retention) of the bag leak 
detection system data. Use a bag leak detection system equipped with a 
device to continuously record the output signal from the sensor.
    (c) You must conduct an initial performance evaluation of each 
continuous monitoring system and bag leak detection system, as 
applicable, in accordance with your monitoring plan and Sec.  60.13(c). 
For the purposes of this subpart, the provisions of Sec.  60.13(c) also 
apply to the bag leak detection system. You must conduct the initial 
performance evaluation of each continuous monitoring system within 60 
days of installation of the monitoring system.
    (d) You must submit a monitoring plan specifying the ash handling 
system operating procedures that you will follow to ensure that you 
meet the fugitive emissions limit specified in Table 1 or 2 to this 
subpart.
    (e) You may submit an application to the Administrator for approval 
of alternate monitoring requirements to demonstrate compliance with the 
standards of this subpart, subject to the provisions of paragraphs 
(e)(1) through (e)(6) of this section.
    (1) The Administrator will not approve averaging periods other than 
those specified in this section, unless you document, using data or 
information, that the longer averaging period will ensure that 
emissions do not exceed levels achieved over the duration of three 
performance test runs.
    (2) If the application to use an alternate monitoring requirement 
is approved, you must continue to use the original monitoring 
requirement until approval is received to use another monitoring 
requirement.
    (3) You must submit the application for approval of alternate 
monitoring requirements no later than the notification of performance 
test. The application must contain the information specified in 
paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (e)(3)(iii) of this section:
    (i) Data or information justifying the request, such as the 
technical or economic infeasibility, or the impracticality of using the 
required approach.
    (ii) A description of the proposed alternative monitoring 
requirement, including the operating parameter to be monitored, the 
monitoring approach and technique, the averaging period for the limit, 
and how the limit is to be calculated.
    (iii) Data or information documenting that the alternative 
monitoring requirement would provide equivalent or better assurance of 
compliance with the relevant emission standard.
    (4) The Administrator will notify you of the approval or denial of 
the application within 90 calendar days after receipt of the original 
request, or within 60 calendar days of the receipt of any supplementary 
information, whichever is later. The Administrator will not approve an 
alternate monitoring application unless it would provide equivalent or 
better assurance of compliance with the relevant emission standard. 
Before disapproving any alternate monitoring application, the 
Administrator will provide the following:
    (i) Notice of the information and findings upon which the intended 
disapproval is based.

[[Page 15413]]

    (ii) Notice of opportunity for you to present additional supporting 
information before final action is taken on the application. This 
notice will specify how much additional time is allowed for you to 
provide additional supporting information.
    (5) You are responsible for submitting any supporting information 
in a timely manner to enable the Administrator to consider the 
application prior to the performance test. Neither submittal of an 
application, nor the Administrator's failure to approve or disapprove 
the application relieves you of the responsibility to comply with any 
provision of this subpart.
    (6) The Administrator may decide at any time, on a case-by-case 
basis, that additional or alternative operating limits, or alternative 
approaches to establishing operating limits, are necessary to 
demonstrate compliance with the emission standards of this subpart.
    (f) You must submit your monitoring plans required in paragraphs 
(a) and (b) of this section at least 60 days before your initial 
performance evaluation of your continuous monitoring system(s).
    (g) You must submit your monitoring plan for your ash handling 
system, as required in paragraph (d) of this section, at least 60 days 
before your initial compliance test date.
    (h) You must update and resubmit your monitoring plan if there are 
any changes or potential changes in your monitoring procedures or if 
there is a process change, as defined in Sec.  60.4930.

Continuous Compliance Requirements

Sec.  60.4885  How and when do I demonstrate continuous compliance with 
the emission limits and standards?

    To demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limits and 
standards specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, use the procedures 
specified in paragraph (a) of this section for particulate matter, 
hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans (total mass basis or toxic 
equivalency basis), mercury, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, cadmium, 
lead, and fugitive emissions from ash handling, and follow the 
procedures specified in paragraph (b) of this section for carbon 
monoxide. In lieu of using the procedures specified in paragraph (a) of 
this section, you also have the option to demonstrate continuous 
compliance using the procedures specified in paragraph (b) of this 
section for particulate matter, hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans 
(total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis), mercury, nitrogen 
oxides, sulfur dioxide, cadmium, and lead. You must meet the 
requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, as applicable, 
and paragraphs (c) through (e) of this section, according to the 
performance testing, monitoring, and calibration requirements in Sec.  
60.4900(a) and (b). You may also petition the Administrator for 
alternative monitoring parameters as specified in paragraph (f) of this 
section.
    (a) Demonstrate continuous compliance using a performance test. 
Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(3) and (e) of this section, 
following the date that the initial performance test for each pollutant 
in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart except carbon monoxide is completed, 
you must conduct a performance test for each such pollutant on an 
annual basis (between 11 and 13 calendar months following the previous 
performance test). The performance test must be conducted using the 
test methods, averaging methods, and minimum sampling volumes or 
durations specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart and according to 
the testing, monitoring, and calibration requirements specified in 
Sec.  60.4900(a).
    (1) You may conduct a repeat performance test at any time to 
establish new values for the operating limits to apply from that point 
forward. The Administrator may request a repeat performance test at any 
time.
    (2) You must repeat the performance test within 60 days of a 
process change, as defined in Sec.  60.4930.
    (3) Except as specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this 
section, you can conduct performance tests less often for a given 
pollutant, as specified in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (iii) of this 
section.
    (i) You can conduct performance tests less often if your 
performance tests for the pollutant for at least 2 consecutive years 
show that your emissions are at or below 75 percent of the emission 
limit specified in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart, and there are no 
changes in the operation of the affected source or air pollution 
control equipment that could increase emissions. In this case, you do 
not have to conduct a performance test for that pollutant for the next 
2 years. You must conduct a performance test during the third year and 
no more than 37 months after the previous performance test.
    (ii) If your SSI unit continues to meet the emission limit for the 
pollutant, you may choose to conduct performance tests for the 
pollutant every third year if your emissions are at or below 75 percent 
of the emission limit, and if there are no changes in the operation of 
the affected source or air pollution control equipment that could 
increase emissions, but each such performance test must be conducted no 
more than 37 months after the previous performance test.
    (iii) If a performance test shows emissions exceeded 75 percent of 
the emission limit for a pollutant, you must conduct annual performance 
tests for that pollutant until all performance tests over 2 consecutive 
years show compliance.
    (b) Demonstrate continuous compliance using a continuous emissions 
monitoring system or continuous automated sampling system. The option 
to use a continuous emissions monitoring system for hydrogen chloride, 
dioxins/furans, cadmium, or lead takes effect on the date a final 
performance specification applicable to hydrogen chloride, dioxins/
furans, cadmium, or lead is published in the Federal Register. The 
option to use a continuous automated sampling system for dioxins/furans 
takes effect on the date a final performance specification for such a 
continuous automated sampling system is published in the Federal 
Register. Collect data as specified in Sec.  60.4900(b)(6) and use the 
following procedures:
    (1) To demonstrate continuous compliance with the carbon monoxide 
emission limit, you must use the carbon monoxide continuous emissions 
monitoring system specified in Sec.  60.4900(b). For determining 
compliance with the carbon monoxide concentration limit using carbon 
monoxide CEMS, the correction to 7 percent oxygen does not apply during 
periods of startup or shutdown. Use the measured carbon monoxide 
concentration without correcting for oxygen concentration in averaging 
with other carbon monoxide concentrations (corrected to 7 percent 
oxygen) to determine the 24-hour average value.
    (2) To demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limits 
for particulate matter, hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans (total mass 
basis or toxic equivalency basis), mercury, nitrogen oxides, sulfur 
dioxide, cadmium, and lead, you may substitute the use of a continuous 
monitoring system in lieu of conducting the annual performance test 
required in paragraph (a) of this section, as follows:
    (i) You may substitute the use of a continuous emissions monitoring 
system for any pollutant specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section 
in lieu of conducting the annual performance test for that pollutant in 
paragraph (a) of this section.
    (ii) You may substitute the use of a continuous automated sampling 
system for mercury or dioxins/furans in lieu of

[[Page 15414]]

conducting the annual mercury or dioxin/furan performance test in 
paragraph (a) of this section.
    (3) If you use a continuous emissions monitoring system to 
demonstrate compliance with an applicable emission limit in either 
paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, you must use the continuous 
emissions monitoring system and follow the requirements specified in 
Sec.  60.4900(b). You must measure emissions according to Sec.  60.13 
to calculate 1-hour arithmetic averages, corrected to 7 percent oxygen 
(or carbon dioxide). You must demonstrate initial compliance using a 
24-hour block average of these 1-hour arithmetic average emission 
concentrations, calculated using Equation 19-19 in section 12.4.1 of 
Method 19 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7.
    (4) If you use a continuous automated sampling system to 
demonstrate compliance with an applicable emission limit in paragraph 
(b)(2) of this section, you must:
    (i) Use the continuous automated sampling system specified in Sec.  
60.58b(p) and (q), and measure and calculate average emissions 
corrected to 7 percent oxygen (or carbon dioxide) according to Sec.  
60.58b(p) and your monitoring plan.
    (A) Use the procedures specified in Sec.  60.58b(p) to calculate 
24-hour averages to determine compliance with the mercury emission 
limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.
    (B) Use the procedures specified in Sec.  60.58b(p) to calculate 2-
week averages to determine compliance with the dioxin/furan emission 
limit (total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis) in Table 1 or 2 to 
this subpart.
    (ii) Update your monitoring plan as specified in Sec.  60.4880(e). 
For mercury continuous automated sampling systems, you must use 
Performance Specification 12B of appendix B of part 75 and Procedure 5 
of appendix F of this part.
    (5) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, you must 
complete your periodic performance evaluations required under your 
monitoring plan for any continuous emissions monitoring system and 
continuous automated sampling systems, according to the schedule 
specified in your monitoring plan. If you were previously determining 
compliance by conducting an annual performance test (or according to 
the less frequent testing for a pollutant as provided in paragraph 
(a)(3) of this section), you must complete the initial performance 
evaluation required in your monitoring plan in Sec.  60.4880 for the 
continuous monitoring system prior to using the continuous emissions 
monitoring system to demonstrate compliance or continuous automated 
sampling system. Your performance evaluation must be conducted using 
the procedures and acceptance criteria specified in Sec.  
60.4880(a)(3).
    (c) To demonstrate compliance with the dioxins/furans toxic 
equivalency emission limit in paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, you 
must determine dioxins/furans toxic equivalency as follows:
    (1) Measure the concentration of each dioxin/furan tetra- through 
octa-chlorinated isomer emitted using EPA Method 23.
    (2) For each dioxin/furan (tetra- through octa-chlorinated) isomer 
measured in accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of this section, multiply 
the isomer concentration by its corresponding toxic equivalency factor 
specified in Table 4 to this subpart.
    (3) Sum the products calculated in accordance with paragraph (c)(2) 
of this section to obtain the total concentration of dioxins/furans 
emitted in terms of toxic equivalency.
    (d) You must submit the annual compliance report specified in Sec.  
60.4915(d). You must submit the deviation report specified in Sec.  
60.4915(e) for each instance that you did not meet each emission limit 
in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.
    (e) If you demonstrate continuous compliance using a performance 
test, as specified in paragraph (a) of this section, then the 
provisions of this paragraph (e) apply. If a force majeure is about to 
occur, occurs, or has occurred for which you intend to assert a claim 
of force majeure, you must notify the Administrator in writing as 
specified in Sec.  60.4915(g). You must conduct the performance test as 
soon as practicable after the force majeure occurs. The Administrator 
will determine whether or not to grant the extension to the performance 
test deadline, and will notify you in writing of approval or 
disapproval of the request for an extension as soon as practicable. 
Until an extension of the performance test deadline has been approved 
by the Administrator, you remain strictly subject to the requirements 
of this subpart.
    (f) After any initial requests in Sec.  60.4880 for alternative 
monitoring requirements for initial compliance, you may subsequently 
petition the Administrator for alternative monitoring parameters as 
specified in Sec. Sec.  60.13(i) and 60.4880(e).

Sec.  60.4890  How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with my 
operating limits?

    You must continuously monitor your operating parameters as 
specified in paragraph (a) of this section and meet the requirements of 
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, according to the monitoring and 
calibration requirements in Sec.  60.4905. You must confirm and re-
establish your operating limits as specified in paragraph (d) of this 
section.
    (a) You must continuously monitor the operating parameters 
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section using the 
continuous monitoring equipment and according to the procedures 
specified in Sec.  60.4905 or established in Sec.  60.4855. To 
determine compliance, you must use the data averaging period specified 
in Table 3 to this subpart (except for alarm time of the baghouse leak 
detection system) unless a different averaging period is established 
under Sec.  60.4855.
    (1) You must demonstrate that the SSI unit meets the operating 
limits established according to Sec. Sec.  60.4855 and 60.4870 and 
paragraph (d) of this section for each applicable operating parameter.
    (2) You must demonstrate that the SSI unit meets the operating 
limit for bag leak detection systems as follows:
    (i) For a bag leak detection system, you must calculate the alarm 
time as follows:
    (A) If inspection of the fabric filter demonstrates that no 
corrective action is required, no alarm time is counted.
    (B) If corrective action is required, each alarm time shall be 
counted as a minimum of 1 hour.
    (C) If you take longer than 1 hour to initiate corrective action, 
each alarm time (i.e., time that the alarm sounds) is counted as the 
actual amount of time taken by you to initiate corrective action.
    (ii) Your maximum alarm time is equal to 5 percent of the operating 
time during a 6-month period, as specified in Sec.  60.4850(c).
    (b) Operation above the established maximum, below the established 
minimum, or outside the allowable range of the operating limits 
specified in paragraph (a) of this section constitutes a deviation from 
your operating limits established under this subpart, except during 
performance tests conducted to determine compliance with the emission 
and operating limits or to establish new operating limits. You must 
submit the deviation report specified in Sec.  60.4915(e) for each 
instance that you did not meet one of

[[Page 15415]]

your operating limits established under this subpart.
    (c) You must submit the annual compliance report specified in Sec.  
60.4915(d) to demonstrate continuous compliance.
    (d) You must confirm your operating limits according to paragraph 
(d)(1) of this section or re-establish operating limits according to 
paragraph (d)(2) of this section. Your operating limits must be 
established so as to assure ongoing compliance with the emission 
limits. These requirements also apply to your operating requirements in 
your fugitive emissions monitoring plan specified in Sec.  60.4850(d).
    (1) Your operating limits must be based on operating data recorded 
during any performance test required in Sec.  60.4885(a) or any 
performance evaluation required in Sec.  60.4885(b)(5).
    (2) You may conduct a repeat performance test at any time to 
establish new values for the operating limits to apply from that point 
forward.

Sec.  60.4895  By what date must I conduct annual air pollution control 
device inspections and make any necessary repairs?

    (a) You must conduct an annual inspection of each air pollution 
control device used to comply with the emission limits, according to 
Sec.  60.4900(c), no later than 12 months following the previous annual 
air pollution control device inspection.
    (b) Within 10 operating days following an air pollution control 
device inspection, all necessary repairs must be completed unless you 
obtain written approval from the Administrator establishing a date 
whereby all necessary repairs of the affected SSI unit must be 
completed.

Performance Testing, Monitoring, and Calibration Requirements

Sec.  60.4900  What are the performance testing, monitoring, and 
calibration requirements for compliance with the emission limits and 
standards?

    You must meet, as applicable, the performance testing requirements 
specified in paragraph (a) of this section, the monitoring requirements 
specified in paragraph (b) of this section, the air pollution control 
device inspections requirements specified in paragraph (c) of this 
section, and the bypass stack provisions specified in paragraph (d) of 
this section.
    (a) Performance testing requirements.
    (1) All performance tests must consist of a minimum of three test 
runs conducted under conditions representative of normal operations, as 
specified in Sec.  60.8(c). Emissions in excess of the emission limits 
or standards during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction are 
considered deviations from the applicable emission limits or standards.
    (2) You must document that the dry sludge burned during the 
performance test is representative of the sludge burned under normal 
operating conditions by:
    (i) Maintaining a log of the quantity of sewage sludge burned 
during the performance test by continuously monitoring and recording 
the average hourly rate that sewage sludge is fed to the incinerator.
    (ii) Maintaining a log of the moisture content of the sewage sludge 
burned during the performance test by taking grab samples of the sewage 
sludge fed to the incinerator for each 8 hour period that testing is 
conducted.
    (3) All performance tests must be conducted using the test methods, 
minimum sampling volume, observation period, and averaging methods 
specified in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.
    (4) Method 1 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-1 must be used to select 
the sampling location and number of traverse points.
    (5) Method 3A or 3B at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2 must be used 
for gas composition analysis, including measurement of oxygen 
concentration. Method 3A or 3B at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2 must be 
used simultaneously with each method.
    (6) All pollutant concentrations must be adjusted to 7 percent 
oxygen using Equation 1 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21MR11.019

Where:

Cadj = Pollutant concentration adjusted to 7 percent 
oxygen.
Cmeas = Pollutant concentration measured on a dry basis.
(20.9-7) = 20.9 percent oxygen-7 percent oxygen (defined oxygen 
correction basis).
20.9 = Oxygen concentration in air, percent.
%O2 = Oxygen concentration measured on a dry basis, 
percent.

    (7) Performance tests must be conducted and data reduced in 
accordance with the test methods and procedures contained in this 
subpart unless the Administrator does one of the following.
    (i) Specifies or approves, in specific cases, the use of a method 
with minor changes in methodology.
    (ii) Approves the use of an equivalent method.
    (iii) Approves the use of an alternative method the results of 
which he has determined to be adequate for indicating whether a 
specific source is in compliance.
    (iv) Waives the requirement for performance tests because you have 
demonstrated by other means to the Administrator's satisfaction that 
the affected SSI unit is in compliance with the standard.
    (v) Approves shorter sampling times and smaller sample volumes when 
necessitated by process variables or other factors. Nothing in this 
paragraph is construed to abrogate the Administrator's authority to 
require testing under section 114 of the Clean Air Act.
    (8) You must provide the Administrator at least 30 days prior 
notice of any performance test, except as specified under other 
subparts, to afford the Administrator the opportunity to have an 
observer present. If after 30 days notice for an initially scheduled 
performance test, there is a delay (due to operational problems, etc.) 
in conducting the scheduled performance test, you must notify the 
Administrator as soon as possible of any delay in the original test 
date, either by providing at least 7 days prior notice of the 
rescheduled date of the performance test, or by arranging a rescheduled 
date with the Administrator by mutual agreement.
    (9) You must provide, or cause to be provided, performance testing 
facilities as follows:
    (i) Sampling ports adequate for the test methods applicable to the 
SSI unit, as follows:
    (A) Constructing the air pollution control system such that 
volumetric flow rates and pollutant emission rates can be accurately 
determined by applicable test methods and procedures.
    (B) Providing a stack or duct free of cyclonic flow during 
performance tests, as demonstrated by applicable test methods and 
procedures.
    (ii) Safe sampling platform(s).
    (iii) Safe access to sampling platform(s).
    (iv) Utilities for sampling and testing equipment.

[[Page 15416]]

    (10) Unless otherwise specified in this subpart, each performance 
test must consist of three separate runs using the applicable test 
method. Each run must be conducted for the time and under the 
conditions specified in the applicable standard. Compliance with each 
emission limit must be determined by calculating the arithmetic mean of 
the three runs. In the event that a sample is accidentally lost or 
conditions occur in which one of the three runs must be discontinued 
because of forced shutdown, failure of an irreplaceable portion of the 
sample train, extreme meteorological conditions, or other 
circumstances, beyond your control, compliance may, upon the 
Administrator's approval, be determined using the arithmetic mean of 
the results of the two other runs.
    (11) During each test run specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this 
section, you must operate your sewage sludge incinerator at a minimum 
of 85 percent of your maximum permitted capacity.
    (b) Continuous monitor requirements. You must meet the following 
requirements, as applicable, when using a continuous monitoring system 
to demonstrate compliance with the emission limits in Table 1 or 2 to 
this subpart. The option to use a continuous emissions monitoring 
system for hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans, cadmium, or lead takes 
effect on the date a final performance specification applicable to 
hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans, cadmium, or lead is published in the 
Federal Register. If you elect to use a continuous emissions monitoring 
system instead of conducting annual performance testing, you must meet 
the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(6) of this section. 
If you elect to use a continuous automated sampling system instead of 
conducting annual performance testing, you must meet the requirements 
of paragraph (b)(7) of this section. The option to use a continuous 
automated sampling system for dioxins/furans takes effect on the date a 
final performance specification for such a continuous automated 
sampling system is published in the Federal Register.
    (1) You must notify the Administrator one month before starting use 
of the continuous monitoring system.
    (2) You must notify the Administrator one month before stopping use 
of the continuous monitoring system, in which case you must also 
conduct a performance test prior to ceasing operation of the system.
    (3) You must install, operate, calibrate, and maintain an 
instrument for continuously measuring and recording the emissions to 
the atmosphere in accordance with the following:
    (i) Section 60.13 of subpart A of this part.
    (ii) The following performance specifications of appendix B of this 
part, as applicable:
    (A) For particulate matter, Performance Specification 11 of 
appendix B of this part.
    (B) For hydrogen chloride, Performance Specification 15 of appendix 
B of this part.
    (C) For carbon monoxide, Performance Specification 4B of appendix B 
of this part with the modifications shown in Tables 1 and 2 to this 
subpart.
    (D) [Reserved]
    (E) For mercury, Performance Specification 12A of appendix B of 
this part.
    (F) For nitrogen oxides, Performance Specification 2 of appendix B 
of this part.
    (G) For sulfur dioxide, Performance Specification 2 of appendix B 
of this part.
    (iii) For continuous emissions monitoring systems, the quality 
assurance procedures (e.g., quarterly accuracy determinations and daily 
calibration drift tests) of appendix F of this part specified in 
paragraphs (b)(3)(iii)(A) through (b)(3)(iii)(G) of this section. For 
each pollutant, the span value of the continuous emissions monitoring 
system is two times the applicable emission limit, expressed as a 
concentration.
    (A) For particulate matter, Procedure 2 in appendix F of this part.
    (B) For hydrogen chloride, Procedure 1 in appendix F of this part 
except that the Relative Accuracy Test Audit requirements of Procedure 
1 shall be replaced with the validation requirements and criteria of 
sections 11.1.1 and 12.0 of Performance Specification 15 of appendix B 
of this part.
    (C) For carbon monoxide, Procedure 1 in appendix F of this part.
    (D) [Reserved]
    (E) For mercury, Procedures 5 in appendix F of this part.
    (F) For nitrogen oxides, Procedure 1 in appendix F of this part.
    (G) For sulfur dioxide, Procedure 1 in appendix F of this part.
    (iv) If your monitoring system has a malfunction or out-of-control 
period, you must complete repairs and resume operation of your 
monitoring system as expeditiously as possible.
    (4) During each relative accuracy test run of the continuous 
emissions monitoring system using the performance specifications in 
paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section, emission data for each regulated 
pollutant and oxygen (or carbon dioxide as established in paragraph 
(b)(5) of this section) must be collected concurrently (or within a 30- 
to 60-minute period) by both the continuous emissions monitoring 
systems and the test methods specified in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through 
(b)(4)(viii) of this section. Relative accuracy testing must be at 
representative operating conditions while the SSI unit is charging 
sewage sludge.
    (i) For particulate matter, Method 5 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-
3 or Method 26A or 29 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-8 shall be used.
    (ii) For hydrogen chloride, Method 26 or 26A at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-8, shall be used as specified in Tables 2 and 3 to this 
subpart.
    (iii) For carbon monoxide, Method 10, 10A, or 10B at 40 CFR part 
60, appendix A-4, shall be used.
    (iv) For dioxins/furans, Method 23 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7, 
shall be used.
    (v) For mercury, cadmium, and lead, Method 29 at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-8 shall be used. Alternatively for mercury, Method 30B at 40 
CFR part 60, appendix A-8 or ASTM D6784-02 (Reapproved 2008) 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  60.17), may be used.
    (vi) For nitrogen oxides, Method 7 or 7E at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-4, shall be used.
    (vii) For sulfur dioxide, Method 6 or 6C at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-4, or as an alternative ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  60.17) must be used. For sources 
that have actual inlet emissions less than 100 parts per million dry 
volume, the relative accuracy criterion for inlet sulfur dioxide 
continuous emissions monitoring system should be no greater than 20 
percent of the mean value of the method test data in terms of the units 
of the emission standard, or 5 parts per million dry volume absolute 
value of the mean difference between the method and the continuous 
emissions monitoring system, whichever is greater.
    (viii) For oxygen (or carbon dioxide as established in (b)(5) of 
this section), Method 3A or 3B at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2, or as 
an alternative ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  60.17), as applicable, must be used.
    (5) You may request that compliance with the emission limits be 
determined using carbon dioxide measurements corrected to an equivalent 
of 7 percent oxygen. If carbon dioxide is selected for use in diluent 
corrections, the relationship between oxygen and carbon

[[Page 15417]]

dioxide levels must be established during the initial performance test 
according to the procedures and methods specified in paragraphs 
(b)(5)(i) through (b)(5)(iv) of this section. This relationship may be 
re-established during subsequent performance tests.
    (i) The fuel factor equation in Method 3B at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-2 must be used to determine the relationship between oxygen 
and carbon dioxide at a sampling location. Method 3A or 3B at 50 CFR 
part 60, appendix A-2, or as an alternative ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  60.17), as applicable, must be 
used to determine the oxygen concentration at the same location as the 
carbon dioxide monitor.
    (ii) Samples must be taken for at least 30 minutes in each hour.
    (iii) Each sample must represent a 1-hour average.
    (iv) A minimum of three runs must be performed.
    (6) You must operate the continuous monitoring system and collect 
data with the continuous monitoring system as follows:
    (i) You must collect data using the continuous monitoring system at 
all times the affected SSI unit is operating and at the intervals 
specified in paragraph (b)(6)(ii) of this section, except for periods 
of monitoring system malfunctions that occur during periods specified 
in Sec.  60.4880(a)(7)(i), repairs associated with monitoring system 
malfunctions, and required monitoring system quality assurance or 
quality control activities (including, as applicable, calibration 
checks and required zero and span adjustments). Any such periods that 
you do not collect data using the continuous monitoring system 
constitute a deviation from the monitoring requirements and must be 
reported in a deviation report.
    (ii) You must collect continuous emissions monitoring system data 
in accordance with Sec.  60.13(e)(2).
    (iii) Any data collected during monitoring system malfunctions, 
repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions, or required 
monitoring system quality assurance or control activities conducted 
during monitoring system malfunctions must not be included in 
calculations used to report emissions or operating levels. Any such 
periods must be reported in a deviation report.
    (iv) Any data collected during periods when the monitoring system 
is out of control as specified in Sec.  60.4880(a)(7)(i), repairs 
associated with periods when the monitoring system is out of control, 
or required monitoring system quality assurance or control activities 
conducted during out-of-control periods must not be included in 
calculations used to report emissions or operating levels. Any such 
periods that do not coincide with a monitoring system malfunction 
constitute a deviation from the monitoring requirements and must be 
reported in a deviation report.
    (v) You must use all the data collected during all periods except 
those periods specified in paragraphs (b)(6)(iii) and (b)(6)(iv) of 
this section in assessing the operation of the control device and 
associated control system.
    (7) If you elect to use a continuous automated sampling system 
instead of conducting annual performance testing, you must:
    (i) Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous 
automated sampling system according to the site-specific monitoring 
plan developed in Sec.  60.58b(p)(1) through (p)(6), (p)(9), (p)(10), 
and (q).
    (ii) Collect data according to Sec.  60.58b(p)(5) and paragraph 
(b)(6) of this section.
    (c) Air pollution control device inspections. You must conduct air 
pollution control device inspections that include, at a minimum, the 
following:
    (1) Inspect air pollution control device(s) for proper operation.
    (2) Generally observe that the equipment is maintained in good 
operating condition.
    (3) Develop a site-specific monitoring plan according to the 
requirements in Sec.  60.4880. This requirement also applies to you if 
you petition the EPA Administrator for alternative monitoring 
parameters under Sec.  60.13(i).
    (d) Bypass stack. Use of the bypass stack at any time that sewage 
sludge is being charged to the SSI unit is an emissions standards 
deviation for all pollutants listed in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart. 
The use of the bypass stack during a performance test invalidates the 
performance test.

Sec.  60.4905  What are the monitoring and calibration requirements for 
compliance with my operating limits?

    (a) You must install, operate, calibrate, and maintain the 
continuous parameter monitoring systems according to the requirements 
in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Meet the following general requirements for flow, pressure, pH, 
and operating temperature measurement devices:
    (i) You must collect data using the continuous monitoring system at 
all times the affected SSI unit is operating and at the intervals 
specified in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, except for periods 
of monitoring system malfunctions that occur during periods specified 
in Sec.  60.4880(a)(7)(i), repairs associated with monitoring system 
malfunctions, and required monitoring system quality assurance or 
quality control activities (including, as applicable, calibration 
checks and required zero and span adjustments). Any such periods that 
you do not collect data using the continuous monitoring system 
constitute a deviation from the monitoring requirements and must be 
reported in a deviation report.
    (ii) You must collect continuous parameter monitoring system data 
in accordance with Sec.  60.13(e)(2).
    (iii) Any data collected during monitoring system malfunctions, 
repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions, or required 
monitoring system quality assurance or control activities conducted 
during monitoring system malfunctions must not be included in 
calculations used to report emissions or operating levels. Any such 
periods must be reported in your annual deviation report.
    (iv) Any data collected during periods when the monitoring system 
is out of control as specified in Sec.  60.4880(a)(7)(i), repairs 
associated with periods when the monitoring system is out of control, 
or required monitoring system quality assurance or control activities 
conducted during out-of-control periods must not be included in 
calculations used to report emissions or operating levels. Any such 
periods that do not coincide with a monitoring system malfunction, as 
defined in Sec.  60.4930, constitute a deviation from the monitoring 
requirements and must be reported in a deviation report.
    (v) You must use all the data collected during all periods except 
those periods specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (a)(1)(iv) of 
this section in assessing the operation of the control device and 
associated control system.
    (vi) Record the results of each inspection, calibration, and 
validation check.
    (2) Operate and maintain your continuous monitoring system 
according to your monitoring plan required under Sec.  60.4880. 
Additionally:
    (i) For carrier gas flow rate monitors (for activated carbon 
injection), during the performance test conducted pursuant to Sec.  
60.4885, you must demonstrate that the system is maintained within +/-5 
percent accuracy, according to the procedures in appendix A to part 75 
of this chapter.
    (ii) For carrier gas pressure drop monitors (for activated carbon

[[Page 15418]]

injection), during the performance test conducted pursuant to Sec.  
60.4885, you must demonstrate that the system is maintained within +/-5 
percent accuracy.
    (b) You must operate and maintain your bag leak detection system in 
continuous operation according to your monitoring plan required under 
Sec.  60.4880. Additionally:
    (1) For positive pressure fabric filter systems that do not duct 
all compartments of cells to a common stack, a bag leak detection 
system must be installed in each baghouse compartment or cell.
    (2) Where multiple bag leak detectors are required, the system's 
instrumentation and alarm may be shared among detectors.
    (3) You must initiate procedures to determine the cause of every 
alarm within 8 hours of the alarm, and you must alleviate the cause of 
the alarm within 24 hours of the alarm by taking whatever corrective 
action(s) are necessary. Corrective actions may include, but are not 
limited to the following:
    (i) Inspecting the fabric filter for air leaks, torn or broken bags 
or filter media, or any other condition that may cause an increase in 
particulate matter emissions.
    (ii) Sealing off defective bags or filter media.
    (iii) Replacing defective bags or filter media or otherwise 
repairing the control device.
    (iv) Sealing off a defective fabric filter compartment.
    (v) Cleaning the bag leak detection system probe or otherwise 
repairing the bag leak detection system.
    (vi) Shutting down the process producing the particulate matter 
emissions.
    (c) You must operate and maintain the continuous parameter 
monitoring systems specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section 
in continuous operation according to your monitoring plan required 
under Sec.  60.4880.
    (d) If your SSI unit has a bypass stack, you must install, 
calibrate (to manufacturers' specifications), maintain, and operate a 
device or method for measuring the use of the bypass stack including 
date, time, and duration.

Recordkeeping and Reporting

Sec.  60.4910  What records must I keep?

    You must maintain the items (as applicable) specified in paragraphs 
(a) through (n) of this section for a period of at least 5 years. All 
records must be available on site in either paper copy or computer-
readable format that can be printed upon request, unless an alternative 
format is approved by the Administrator.
    (a) Date. Calendar date of each record.
    (b) Siting. All documentation produced as a result of the siting 
requirements of Sec. Sec.  60.4800 and 60.4805.
    (c) Operator Training. Documentation of the operator training 
procedures and records specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of 
this section. You must make available and readily accessible at the 
facility at all times for all SSI unit operators the documentation 
specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
    (1) Documentation of the following operator training procedures and 
information:
    (i) Summary of the applicable standards under this subpart.
    (ii) Procedures for receiving, handling, and feeding sewage sludge.
    (iii) Incinerator startup, shutdown, and malfunction preventative 
and corrective procedures.
    (iv) Procedures for maintaining proper combustion air supply 
levels.
    (v) Procedures for operating the incinerator and associated air 
pollution control systems within the standards established under this 
subpart.
    (vi) Monitoring procedures for demonstrating compliance with the 
incinerator operating limits.
    (vii) Reporting and recordkeeping procedures.
    (viii) Procedures for handling ash.
    (ix) A list of the materials burned during the performance test, if 
in addition to sewage sludge.
    (x) For each qualified operator and other plant personnel who may 
operate the unit according to the provisions of Sec.  60.4835(a), the 
phone and/or pager number at which they can be reached during operating 
hours.
    (2) Records showing the names of SSI unit operators and other plant 
personnel who may operate the unit according to the provisions of Sec.  
60.4835(a), as follows:
    (i) Records showing the names of SSI unit operators and other plant 
personnel who have completed review of the information in paragraph 
(c)(1) of this section as required by Sec.  60.4840(b), including the 
date of the initial review and all subsequent annual reviews.
    (ii) Records showing the names of the SSI operators who have 
completed the operator training requirements under Sec.  60.4810, met 
the criteria for qualification under Sec.  60.4820, and maintained or 
renewed their qualification under Sec.  60.4825 or Sec.  60.4830. 
Records must include documentation of training, including the dates of 
their initial qualification and all subsequent renewals of such 
qualifications.
    (3) Records showing the periods when no qualified operators were 
accessible for more than 8 hours, but less than 2 weeks, as required in 
Sec.  60.4835(a).
    (4) Records showing the periods when no qualified operators were 
accessible for 2 weeks or more along with copies of reports submitted 
as required in Sec.  60.4835(b).
    (d) Air pollution control device inspections. Records of the 
results of initial and annual air pollution control device inspections 
conducted as specified in Sec. Sec.  60.4875 and 60.4900(c), including 
any required maintenance and any repairs not completed within 10 days 
of an inspection or the timeframe established by the Administrator.
    (e) Performance test reports.
    (1) The results of the initial, annual, and any subsequent 
performance tests conducted to determine compliance with the emission 
limits and standards and/or to establish operating limits, as 
applicable.
    (2) Retain a copy of the complete performance test report, 
including calculations.
    (3) Keep a record of the hourly dry sludge feed rate measured 
during performance test runs, as specified in Sec.  60.4900(a)(2)(i).
    (4) Keep any necessary records to demonstrate that the performance 
test was conducted under conditions representative of normal 
operations, including a record of the moisture content measured as 
required in Sec.  60.4900(a)(2)(ii) for each grab sample taken of the 
sewage sludge burned during the performance test.
    (f) Continuous monitoring data. Records of the following data, as 
applicable:
    (1) For continuous emissions monitoring systems, all 1-hour average 
concentrations of particulate matter, hydrogen chloride, carbon 
monoxide, dioxins/furans total mass basis, mercury, nitrogen oxides, 
sulfur dioxide, cadmium, and lead emissions.
    (2) For continuous automated sampling systems, all average 
concentrations measured for mercury and dioxins/furans total mass basis 
at the frequencies specified in your monitoring plan.
    (3) For continuous parameter monitoring systems:
    (i) All 1-hour average values recorded for the following operating 
parameters, as applicable:
    (A) Combustion chamber operating temperature (or afterburner 
temperature).

[[Page 15419]]

    (B) If a wet scrubber is used to comply with the rule, pressure 
drop across each wet scrubber system, liquid flow rate to each wet 
scrubber used to comply with the emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this 
subpart for particulate matter, cadmium, or lead, and scrubber liquid 
flow rate and scrubber liquid pH for each wet scrubber used to comply 
with an emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart for sulfur 
dioxide or hydrogen chloride.
    (C) If an electrostatic precipitator is used to comply with the 
rule, secondary voltage and secondary amperage of the electrostatic 
precipitator collection plates, and effluent water flow rate at the 
outlet of the wet electrostatic precipitator.
    (D) If activated carbon injection is used to comply with the rule, 
sorbent flow rate and carrier gas flow rate or pressure drop, as 
applicable.
    (ii) All daily average values recorded for the feed rate and 
moisture content of the sewage sludge fed to the sewage sludge 
incinerator, monitored and calculated as specified in Sec.  60.4850(f).
    (iii) If a fabric filter is used to comply with the rule, the date, 
time, and duration of each alarm and the time corrective action was 
initiated and completed, and a brief description of the cause of the 
alarm and the corrective action taken. You must also record the percent 
of operating time during each 6-month period that the alarm sounds, 
calculated as specified in Sec.  60.4890.
    (iv) For other control devices for which you must establish 
operating limits under Sec.  60.4855, you must maintain data collected 
for all operating parameters used to determine compliance with the 
operating limits, at the frequencies specified in your monitoring plan.
    (g) Other records for continuous monitoring systems. You must keep 
the following records, as applicable:
    (1) Keep records of any notifications to the Administrator in Sec.  
60.4915(h)(1) of starting or stopping use of a continuous monitoring 
system for determining compliance with any emissions limit.
    (2) Keep records of any requests under Sec.  60.4900(b)(5) that 
compliance with the emission limits be determined using carbon dioxide 
measurements corrected to an equivalent of 7 percent oxygen.
    (3) If activated carbon injection is used to comply with the rule, 
the type of sorbent used and any changes in the type of sorbent used.
    (h) Deviation Reports. Records of any deviation reports submitted 
under Sec.  60.4915(e) and (f).
    (i) Equipment specifications and operation and maintenance 
requirements. Equipment specifications and related operation and 
maintenance requirements received from vendors for the incinerator, 
emission controls, and monitoring equipment.
    (j) Inspections, calibrations, and validation checks of monitoring 
devices. Records of inspections, calibrations, and validations checks 
of any monitoring devices as required under Sec. Sec.  60.4900 and 
60.4905.
    (k) Monitoring plan and performance evaluations for continuous 
monitoring systems. Records of the monitoring plans required under 
Sec.  60.4880, and records of performance evaluations required under 
Sec.  60.4885(b)(5).
    (l) Less frequent testing. If, consistent with 60.4885(a)(3), you 
elect to conduct performance tests less frequently than annually, you 
must keep annual records that document that your emissions in the 2 
previous consecutive years were at or below 75 percent of the 
applicable emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, and document 
that there were no changes in source operations or air pollution 
control equipment that would cause emissions of the relevant pollutant 
to increase within the past 2 years.
    (m) Use of bypass stack. Records indicating use of the bypass 
stack, including dates, times, and durations as required under Sec.  
60.4905(d).
    (n) If a malfunction occurs, you must keep a record of the 
information submitted in your annual report in Sec.  60.4915(d)(16).

Sec.  60.4915  What reports must I submit?

    You must submit the reports specified in paragraphs (a) through (j) 
of this section. See Table 5 to this subpart for a summary of these 
reports.
    (a) Notification of construction. You must submit a notification 
prior to commencing construction that includes the four items listed in 
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this section:
    (1) A statement of intent to construct.
    (2) The anticipated date of commencement of construction.
    (3) All documentation produced as a result of the siting 
requirements of Sec.  60.4805.
    (4) Anticipated date of initial startup.
    (b) Notification of initial startup. You must submit the 
information specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(5) of this 
section prior to initial startup:
    (1) The maximum design dry sludge burning capacity.
    (2) The anticipated and permitted maximum dry sludge feed rate.
    (3) If applicable, the petition for site-specific operating limits 
specified in Sec.  60.4855.
    (4) The anticipated date of initial startup.
    (5) The site-specific monitoring plan required under Sec.  60.4880, 
at least 60 days before your initial performance evaluation of your 
continuous monitoring system.
    (6) The site-specific monitoring plan for your ash handling system 
required under Sec.  60.4880, at least 60 days before your initial 
performance test to demonstrate compliance with your fugitive ash 
emission limit.
    (c) Initial compliance report. You must submit the following 
information no later than 60 days following the initial performance 
test.
    (1) Company name, physical address, and mailing address.
    (2) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's name, 
title, and signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of the 
report.
    (3) Date of report.
    (4) The complete test report for the initial performance test 
results obtained by using the test methods specified in Table 1 or 2 to 
this subpart.
    (5) If an initial performance evaluation of a continuous monitoring 
system was conducted, the results of that initial performance 
evaluation.
    (6) The values for the site-specific operating limits established 
pursuant to Sec. Sec.  60.4850 and 60.4855 and the calculations and 
methods, as applicable, used to establish each operating limit.
    (7) If you are using a fabric filter to comply with the emission 
limits, documentation that a bag leak detection system has been 
installed and is being operated, calibrated, and maintained as required 
by Sec.  60.4850(b).
    (8) The results of the initial air pollution control device 
inspection required in Sec.  60.4875, including a description of 
repairs.
    (d) Annual compliance report. You must submit an annual compliance 
report that includes the items listed in paragraphs (d)(1) through 
(d)(16) of this section for the reporting period specified in paragraph 
(d)(3) of this section. You must submit your first annual compliance 
report no later than 12 months following the submission of the initial 
compliance report in paragraph (c) of this section. You must submit 
subsequent annual compliance reports no more than 12 months following 
the previous annual compliance report. (You may be required to submit 
these reports (or additional compliance information) more frequently by 
the title V operating permit required in Sec.  60.4920.)
    (1) Company name, physical address, and mailing address.
    (2) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's name, 
title, and

[[Page 15420]]

signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of the report.
    (3) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the reporting 
period.
    (4) If a performance test was conducted during the reporting 
period, the results of that performance test.
    (i) If operating limits were established during the performance 
test, include the value for each operating limit and, as applicable, 
the method used to establish each operating limit, including 
calculations.
    (ii) If activated carbon is used during the performance test, 
include the type of activated carbon used.
    (5) For each pollutant and operating parameter recorded using a 
continuous monitoring system, the highest average value and lowest 
average value recorded during the reporting period, as follows:
    (i) For continuous emission monitoring systems and continuous 
automated sampling systems, report the highest and lowest 24-hour 
average emission value.
    (ii) For continuous parameter monitoring systems, report the 
following values:
    (A) For all operating parameters except scrubber liquid pH, the 
highest and lowest 12-hour average values.
    (B) For scrubber liquid pH, the highest and lowest 3-hour average 
values.
    (6) If there are no deviations during the reporting period from any 
emission limit, emission standard, or operating limit that applies to 
you, a statement that there were no deviations from the emission 
limits, emission standard, or operating limits.
    (7) Information for bag leak detection systems recorded under Sec.  
60.4910(f)(3)(iii).
    (8) If a performance evaluation of a continuous monitoring system 
was conducted, the results of that performance evaluation. If new 
operating limits were established during the performance evaluation, 
include your calculations for establishing those operating limits.
    (9) If you elect to conduct performance tests less frequently as 
allowed in Sec.  60.4885(a)(3) and did not conduct a performance test 
during the reporting period, you must include the dates of the last two 
performance tests, a comparison of the emission level you achieved in 
the last two performance tests to the 75 percent emission limit 
threshold specified in Sec.  60.4885(a)(3), and a statement as to 
whether there have been any process changes and whether the process 
change resulted in an increase in emissions.
    (10) Documentation of periods when all qualified SSI unit operators 
were unavailable for more than 8 hours, but less than 2 weeks.
    (11) Results of annual air pollution control device inspections 
recorded under Sec.  60.4910(d) for the reporting period, including a 
description of repairs.
    (12) If there were no periods during the reporting period when your 
continuous monitoring systems had a malfunction, a statement that there 
were no periods during which your continuous monitoring systems had a 
malfunction.
    (13) If there were no periods during the reporting period when a 
continuous monitoring system was out of control, a statement that there 
were no periods during which your continuous monitoring system was out 
of control.
    (14) If there were no operator training deviations, a statement 
that there were no such deviations during the reporting period.
    (15) If you did not make revisions to your site-specific monitoring 
plan during the reporting period, a statement that you did not make any 
revisions to your site-specific monitoring plan during the reporting 
period. If you made revisions to your site-specific monitoring plan 
during the reporting period, a copy of the revised plan.
    (16) If you had a malfunction during the reporting period, the 
compliance report must include the number, duration, and a brief 
description for each type of malfunction that occurred during the 
reporting period and that caused or may have caused any applicable 
emission limitation to be exceeded. The report must also include a 
description of actions taken by an owner or operator during a 
malfunction of an affected source to minimize emissions in accordance 
with Sec.  60.11(d), including actions taken to correct a malfunction.
    (e) Deviation reports.
    (1) You must submit a deviation report if:
    (i) Any recorded operating parameter level, based on the averaging 
time specified in Table 3 to this subpart, is above the maximum 
operating limit or below the minimum operating limit established under 
this subpart.
    (ii) The bag leak detection system alarm sounds for more than 5 
percent of the operating time for the 6-month reporting period.
    (iii) Any recorded 24-hour block average emissions level is above 
the emission limit, if a continuous monitoring system is used to comply 
with an emission limit.
    (iv) There are visible emissions of combustion ash from an ash 
conveying system for more than 5 percent of the hourly observation 
period.
    (v) A performance test was conducted that deviated from any 
emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart.
    (vi) A continuous monitoring system was out of control.
    (vii) You had a malfunction (e.g., continuous monitoring system 
malfunction) that caused or may have caused any applicable emission 
limit to be exceeded.
    (2) The deviation report must be submitted by August 1 of that year 
for data collected during the first half of the calendar year (January 
1 to June 30), and by February 1 of the following year for data you 
collected during the second half of the calendar year (July 1 to 
December 31).
    (3) For each deviation where you are using a continuous monitoring 
system to comply with an associated emission limit or operating limit, 
report the items described in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (e)(3)(viii) 
of this section.
    (i) Company name, physical address, and mailing address.
    (ii) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's 
name, title, and signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of 
the report.
    (iii) The calendar dates and times your unit deviated from the 
emission limits, emission standards, or operating limits requirements.
    (iv) The averaged and recorded data for those dates.
    (v) Duration and cause of each deviation from the following:
    (A) Emission limits, emission standards, operating limits, and your 
corrective actions.
    (B) Bypass events and your corrective actions.
    (vi) Dates, times, and causes for monitor downtime incidents.
    (vii) A copy of the operating parameter monitoring data during each 
deviation and any test report that documents the emission levels.
    (viii) If there were periods during which the continuous monitoring 
system malfunctioned or was out of control, you must include the 
following information for each deviation from an emission limit or 
operating limit:
    (A) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.
    (B) The date, time, and duration that each continuous monitoring 
system was inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level 
checks.
    (C) The date, time, and duration that each continuous monitoring 
system was out of control, including start and end dates and hours and 
descriptions of corrective actions taken.
    (D) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and

[[Page 15421]]

whether each deviation occurred during a period of malfunction, during 
a period when the system as out of control, or during another period.
    (E) A summary of the total duration of the deviation during the 
reporting period, and the total duration as a percent of the total 
source operating time during that reporting period.
    (F) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the 
reporting period into those that are due to control equipment problems, 
process problems, other known causes, and other unknown causes.
    (G) A summary of the total duration of continuous monitoring system 
downtime during the reporting period, and the total duration of 
continuous monitoring system downtime as a percent of the total 
operating time of the SSI unit at which the continuous monitoring 
system downtime occurred during that reporting period.
    (H) An identification of each parameter and pollutant that was 
monitored at the SSI unit.
    (I) A brief description of the SSI unit.
    (J) A brief description of the continuous monitoring system.
    (K) The date of the latest continuous monitoring system 
certification or audit.
    (L) A description of any changes in continuous monitoring system, 
processes, or controls since the last reporting period.
    (4) For each deviation where you are not using a continuous 
monitoring system to comply with the associated emission limit or 
operating limit, report the following items:
    (i) Company name, physical address, and mailing address.
    (ii) Statement by a responsible official with that official's name, 
title, and signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of the 
report.
    (iii) The total operating time of each affected SSI during the 
reporting period.
    (iv) The calendar dates and times your unit deviated from the 
emission limits, emission standards, or operating limits requirements.
    (v) The averaged and recorded data for those dates.
    (vi) Duration and cause of each deviation from the following:
    (A) Emission limits, emission standard, and operating limits, and 
your corrective actions.
    (B) Bypass events and your corrective actions.
    (vii) A copy of any performance test report that showed a deviation 
from the emission limits or standard.
    (viii) A brief description of any malfunction reported in paragraph 
(e)(1)(vii) of this section, including a description of actions taken 
during the malfunction to minimize emissions in accordance with 
60.11(d) and to correct the malfunction.
    (f) Qualified operator deviation.
    (1) If all qualified operators are not accessible for 2 weeks or 
more, you must take the two actions in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) and 
(f)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (i) Submit a notification of the deviation within 10 days that 
includes the three items in paragraphs (f)(1)(i)(A) through 
(f)(1)(i)(C) of this section.
    (A) A statement of what caused the deviation.
    (B) A description of actions taken to ensure that a qualified 
operator is accessible.
    (C) The date when you anticipate that a qualified operator will be 
available.
    (ii) Submit a status report to the Administrator every 4 weeks that 
includes the three items in paragraphs (f)(1)(ii)(A) through 
(f)(1)(ii)(C) of this section.
    (A) A description of actions taken to ensure that a qualified 
operator is accessible.
    (B) The date when you anticipate that a qualified operator will be 
accessible.
    (C) Request for approval from the Administrator to continue 
operation of the SSI unit.
    (2) If your unit was shut down by the Administrator, under the 
provisions of Sec.  60.4835(b)(2)(i), due to a failure to provide an 
accessible qualified operator, you must notify the Administrator within 
5 days of meeting Sec.  60.4835(b)(2)(ii) that you are resuming 
operation.
    (g) Notification of a force majeure. If a force majeure is about to 
occur, occurs, or has occurred for which you intend to assert a claim 
of force majeure:
    (1) You must notify the Administrator, in writing as soon as 
practicable following the date you first knew, or through due diligence 
should have known that the event may cause or caused a delay in 
conducting a performance test beyond the regulatory deadline, but the 
notification must occur before the performance test deadline unless the 
initial force majeure or a subsequent force majeure event delays the 
notice, and in such cases, the notification must occur as soon as 
practicable.
    (2) You must provide to the Administrator a written description of 
the force majeure event and a rationale for attributing the delay in 
conducting the performance test beyond the regulatory deadline to the 
force majeure; describe the measures taken or to be taken to minimize 
the delay; and identify a date by which you propose to conduct the 
performance test.
    (h) Other notifications and reports required. You must submit other 
notifications as provided by Sec.  60.7 and as follows:
    (1) You must notify the Administrator 1 month before starting or 
stopping use of a continuous monitoring system for determining 
compliance with any emission limit.
    (2) You must notify the Administrator at least 30 days prior to any 
performance test conducted to comply with the provisions of this 
subpart, to afford the Administrator the opportunity to have an 
observer present.
    (3) As specified in Sec.  60.4900(a)(8), you must notify the 
Administrator at least 7 days prior to the date of a rescheduled 
performance test for which notification was previously made in 
paragraph (h)(2) of this section.
    (i) Report submission form.
    (1) Submit initial, annual, and deviation reports electronically or 
in paper format, postmarked on or before the submittal due dates.
    (2) As of January 1, 2012 and within 60 days after the date of 
completing each performance test, as defined in Sec.  63.2, conducted 
to demonstrate compliance with this subpart, you must submit relative 
accuracy test audit (i.e., reference method) data and performance test 
(i.e., compliance test) data, except opacity data, electronically to 
EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) by using the Electronic Reporting 
Tool (ERT) (see http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html/) or 
other compatible electronic spreadsheet. Only data collected using test 
methods compatible with ERT are subject to this requirement to be 
submitted electronically into EPA's WebFIRE database.
    (j) Changing report dates. If the Administrator agrees, you may 
change the semi-annual or annual reporting dates. See Sec.  60.19(c) 
for procedures to seek approval to change your reporting date.

Title V Operating Permits

Sec.  60.4920  Am I required to apply for and obtain a title V 
operating permit for my unit?

    Yes, if you are subject to this subpart, you are required to apply 
for and obtain a Title V operating permit unless you meet the relevant 
requirements for an exemption specified in Sec.  60.4780.

Sec.  60.4925  When must I submit a title V permit application for my 
new SSI unit?

    (a) If your new SSI unit subject to this subpart is not subject to 
an earlier permit application deadline, a complete Title V permit 
application must be submitted on or before one of the dates specified 
in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of

[[Page 15422]]

this section. (See section 503(c) of the Clean Air Act and 40 CFR 
70.5(a)(1)(i) and 40 CFR 71.5(a)(1)(i)).
    (1) For a SSI unit that commenced operation as a new SSI unit as of 
March 21, 2011, then a complete title V permit application must be 
submitted not later than March 21, 2012.
    (2) For a SSI unit that does not commence operation as a new SSI 
unit until after March 21, 2011, then a complete title V permit 
application must be submitted not later than 12 months after the date 
the unit commences operation as a new source.
    (b) If your new SSI unit subject to this subpart is subject to 
title V as a result of some triggering requirement(s) other than this 
subpart (for example, a unit subject to this subpart may be a major 
source or part of a major source), then your unit may be required to 
apply for a title V permit prior to the deadlines specified in 
paragraph (a) of this section. If more than one requirement triggers a 
source's obligation to apply for a title V permit, the 12-month 
timeframe for filing a title V permit application is triggered by the 
requirement that first causes the source to be subject to title V. (See 
section 503(c) of the Clean Air Act and 40 CFR 70.3(a) and (b), 40 CFR 
70.5(a)(1)(i), 40 CFR 71.3(a) and (b), and 40 CFR 71.5(a)(1)(i).)
    (c) A ``complete'' title V permit application is one that has been 
determined or deemed complete by the relevant permitting authority 
under section 503(d) of the Clean Air Act and 40 CFR 70.5(a)(2) or 40 
CFR 71.5(a)(2). You must submit a complete permit application by the 
relevant application deadline in order to operate after this date in 
compliance with Federal law. (See sections 503(d) and 502(a) of the 
Clean Air Act and 40 CFR 70.7(b) and 40 CFR 71.7(b).)

Definitions

Sec.  60.4930  What definitions must I know?

    Terms used but not defined in this subpart are defined in the Clean 
Air Act and Sec.  60.2.
    Affected source means a sewage sludge incineration unit as defined 
in Sec.  60.4930.
    Affirmative defense means, in the context of an enforcement 
proceeding, a response or defense put forward by a defendant, regarding 
which the defendant has the burden of proof, and the merits of which 
are independently and objectively evaluated in a judicial or 
administrative proceeding.
    Auxiliary fuel means natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, fuel 
oil, or diesel fuel.
    Bag leak detection system means an instrument that is capable of 
monitoring particulate matter loadings in the exhaust of a fabric 
filter (i.e., baghouse) in order to detect bag failures. A bag leak 
detection system includes, but is not limited to, an instrument that 
operates on triboelectric, light scattering, light transmittance, or 
other principle to monitor relative particulate matter loadings.
    Bypass stack means a device used for discharging combustion gases 
to avoid severe damage to the air pollution control device or other 
equipment.
    Calendar year means 365 consecutive days starting on January 1 and 
ending on December 31.
    Continuous automated sampling system means the total equipment and 
procedures for automated sample collection and sample recovery/analysis 
to determine a pollutant concentration or emission rate by collecting a 
single integrated sample(s) or multiple integrated sample(s) of the 
pollutant (or diluent gas) for subsequent on- or off-site analysis; 
integrated sample(s) collected are representative of the emissions for 
the sample time as specified by the applicable requirement.
    Continuous emissions monitoring system means a monitoring system 
for continuously measuring and recording the emissions of a pollutant 
from an affected facility.
    Continuous monitoring system (CMS) means a continuous emissions 
monitoring system, continuous automated sampling system, continuous 
parameter monitoring system, or other manual or automatic monitoring 
that is used for demonstrating compliance with an applicable regulation 
on a continuous basis as defined by this subpart. The term refers to 
the total equipment used to sample and condition (if applicable), to 
analyze, and to provide a permanent record of emissions or process 
parameters.
    Continuous parameter monitoring system means a monitoring system 
for continuously measuring and recording operating conditions 
associated with air pollution control device systems (e.g., operating 
temperature, pressure, and power).
    Deviation means any instance in which an affected source subject to 
this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this 
subpart, including but not limited to any emission limit, operating 
limit, or operator qualification and accessibility requirements.
    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to 
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is 
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to 
obtain such a permit.
    Dioxins/furans means tetra- through octachlorinated dibenzo-p-
dioxins and dibenzofurans.
    Electrostatic precipitator or wet electrostatic precipitator means 
an air pollution control device that uses both electrical forces and, 
if applicable, water to remove pollutants in the exit gas from a sewage 
sludge incinerator stack.
    Existing sewage sludge incineration unit means a sewage sludge 
incineration unit the construction of which is commenced on or before 
October 14, 2010.
    Fabric filter means an add-on air pollution control device used to 
capture particulate matter by filtering gas streams through filter 
media, also known as a baghouse.
    Fluidized bed incinerator means an enclosed device in which organic 
matter and inorganic matter in sewage sludge are combusted in a bed of 
particles suspended in the combustion chamber gas.
    Malfunction means any sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably 
preventable failure of air pollution control and monitoring equipment, 
process equipment, or a process to operate in a normal or usual manner. 
Failures that are caused, in part, by poor maintenance or careless 
operation are not malfunctions.
    Modification means a change to an existing SSI unit later than 
September 21, 2011 and that meets one of two criteria:
    (1) The cumulative cost of the changes over the life of the unit 
exceeds 50 percent of the original cost of building and installing the 
SSI unit (not including the cost of land) updated to current costs 
(current dollars). To determine what systems are within the boundary of 
the SSI unit used to calculate these costs, see the definition of SSI 
unit.
    (2) Any physical change in the SSI unit or change in the method of 
operating it that increases the amount of any air pollutant emitted for 
which section 129 or section 111 of the Clean Air Act has established 
standards.
    Modified sewage sludge incineration (SSI) unit means an existing 
SSI unit that undergoes a modification, as defined in this section.
    Multiple hearth incinerator means a circular steel furnace that 
contains a number of solid refractory hearths and a central rotating 
shaft; rabble arms that are designed to slowly rake the sludge on the 
hearth are attached to the rotating shaft. Dewatered sludge enters at 
the top and proceeds downward through the

[[Page 15423]]

furnace from hearth to hearth, pushed along by the rabble arms.
    New sewage sludge incineration unit means a SSI unit the 
construction of which is commenced after October 14, 2010 which would 
be applicable to such unit or a modified solid waste incineration unit.
    Operating day means a 24-hour period between 12:00 midnight and the 
following midnight during which any amount of sewage sludge is 
combusted at any time in the SSI unit.
    Particulate matter means filterable particulate matter emitted from 
SSI units as measured by Method 5 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-3 or 
Methods 26A or 29 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-8.
    Power input to the electrostatic precipitator means the product of 
the test-run average secondary voltage and the test-run average 
secondary amperage to the electrostatic precipitator collection plates.
    Process change means a significant permit revision, but only with 
respect to those pollutant-specific emission units for which the 
proposed permit revision is applicable, including but not limited to:
    (1) A change in the process employed at the wastewater treatment 
facility associated with the affected SSI unit (e.g., the addition of 
tertiary treatment at the facility, which changes the method used for 
disposing of process solids and processing of the sludge prior to 
incineration).
    (2) A change in the air pollution control devices used to comply 
with the emission limits for the affected SSI unit (e.g., change in the 
sorbent used for activated carbon injection).
    Sewage sludge means solid, semi-solid, or liquid residue generated 
during the treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works. Sewage 
sludge includes, but is not limited to, domestic septage; scum or 
solids removed in primary, secondary, or advanced wastewater treatment 
processes; and a material derived from sewage sludge. Sewage sludge 
does not include ash generated during the firing of sewage sludge in a 
sewage sludge incineration unit or grit and screenings generated during 
preliminary treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works.
    Sewage sludge feed rate means the rate at which sewage sludge is 
fed into the incinerator unit.
    Sewage sludge incineration (SSI) unit means an incineration unit 
combusting sewage sludge for the purpose of reducing the volume of the 
sewage sludge by removing combustible matter. Sewage sludge 
incineration unit designs include fluidized bed and multiple hearth. A 
SSI unit also includes, but is not limited to, the sewage sludge feed 
system, auxiliary fuel feed system, grate system, flue gas system, 
waste heat recovery equipment, if any, and bottom ash system. The SSI 
unit includes all ash handling systems connected to the bottom ash 
handling system. The combustion unit bottom ash system ends at the 
truck loading station or similar equipment that transfers the ash to 
final disposal. The SSI unit does not include air pollution control 
equipment or the stack.
    Shutdown means the period of time after all sewage sludge has been 
combusted in the primary chamber.
    Solid waste means any garbage, refuse, sewage sludge from a waste 
treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control 
facility and other discarded material, including solid, liquid, 
semisolid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, 
commercial, mining, agricultural operations, and from community 
activities, but does not include solid or dissolved material in 
domestic sewage, or solid or dissolved materials in irrigation return 
flows or industrial discharges which are point sources subject to 
permits under section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 
as amended (33 U.S.C. 1342), or source, special nuclear, or byproduct 
material as defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 
U.S.C. 2014).
    Standard conditions, when referring to units of measure, means a 
temperature of 68 [deg]F (20 [deg]C) and a pressure of 1 atmosphere 
(101.3 kilopascals).
    Startup means the period of time between the activation, including 
the firing of fuels (e.g., natural gas or distillate oil), of the 
system and the first feed to the unit.
    Toxic equivalency means the product of the concentration of an 
individual dioxin isomer in an environmental mixture and the 
corresponding estimate of the compound-specific toxicity relative to 
tetrachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin, referred to as the toxic equivalency 
factor for that compound. Table 4 to this subpart lists the toxic 
equivalency factors.
    Wet scrubber means an add-on air pollution control device that 
utilizes an aqueous or alkaline scrubbing liquid to collect particulate 
matter (including nonvaporous metals and condensed organics) and/or to 
absorb and neutralize acid gases.
    You means the owner or operator of a SSI unit that meets the 
criteria in Sec.  60.4770.

      Table 1 to Subpart LLLL of Part 60--Emission Limits and Standards for New Fluidized Bed Sewage Sludge
                                               Incineration Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Using these averaging
                                          You must meet this      methods and minimum        And determining
        For the air pollutant             emission limit \a\      sampling volumes or     compliance using this
                                                                       durations                  method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter...................  9.6 milligrams per dry   3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        standard cubic meter.    a minimum volume of 1    (Method 5 at 40 CFR
                                                                 dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-3;
                                                                 meters per run).         Method 26A or Method
                                                                                          29 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                                                          appendix A-8).
Hydrogen chloride....................  0.24 parts per million   3-run average (Collect   Performance test
                                        by dry volume.           a minimum volume of 1    (Method 26A at 40 CFR
                                                                 dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters per run).         8).

[[Page 15424]]

 
Carbon monoxide......................  27 parts per million by  24-hour block average    Continuous emissions
                                        dry volume.              (using 1-hour averages   monitoring system.
                                                                 of data). For            (Performance
                                                                 determining compliance   Specification 4B of
                                                                 with the carbon          this part, using a low-
                                                                 monoxide concentration   range span of 100 ppm
                                                                 limit using carbon       and a high-range span
                                                                 monoxide CEMS, the       of 1000 ppm, and a RA
                                                                 correction to 7          of 0.5 ppm instead of
                                                                 percent oxygen does      5 ppm specified in
                                                                 not apply during         section 13.2. For the
                                                                 periods of startup or    cylinder gas audit of
                                                                 shutdown. Use the        Procedure 1, +/- 15%
                                                                 measured carbon          or 0.5 whichever is
                                                                 monoxide concentration   greater).
                                                                 without correcting for
                                                                 oxygen concentration
                                                                 in averaging with
                                                                 other carbon monoxide
                                                                 concentrations
                                                                 (corrected to 7
                                                                 percent oxygen) to
                                                                 determine the 24-hour
                                                                 average value.
Dioxins/furans (total mass basis); or  0.013 nanograms per dry  3-run average (collect   Performance test
Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency       standard cubic meter     a minimum volume of 3    (Method 23 at 40 CFR
 basis) \b\.                            (total mass basis); or   dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                       0.0044 nanograms per      meters per run).         7).
                                        dry standard cubic
                                        meter (toxic
                                        equivalency basis).
Mercury..............................  0.0010 milligrams per    3-run average (For       Performance test
                                        dry standard cubic       Method 29 and ASTM       (Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                        meter.                   D6784-02 (Reapproved     part 60, appendix A-8;
                                                                 2008),\c\ collect a      Method 30B at 40 CFR
                                                                 minimum volume of 3      part 60, appendix A-8;
                                                                 dry standard cubic       or ASTM D6784-02
                                                                 meters per run. For      (Reapproved 2008).\c\
                                                                 Method 30B, collect a
                                                                 minimum sample as
                                                                 specified in Method
                                                                 30B at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                                 appendix A-8).
Oxides of nitrogen...................  30 parts per million by  3-run average (Collect   Performance test
                                        dry volume.              sample for a minimum     (Method 7 or 7E at 40
                                                                 duration of one hour     CFR part 60, appendix
                                                                 per run).                A-4).
Sulfur dioxide.......................  5.3 parts per million    3-run average (For       Performance test
                                        by dry volume.           Method 6, collect a      (Method 6 or 6C at 40
                                                                 minimum volume of 100    CFR part 40, appendix
                                                                 liters per run. For      A-4; or ANSI/ASME PTC
                                                                 Method 6C, sample for    19.10-1981.\c\
                                                                 a minimum duration of
                                                                 one hour per run).
Cadmium..............................  0.0011 milligrams per    3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        dry standard cubic       a minimum volume of 1    (Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                        meter.                   dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters per run).         8). Use GFAAS or ICP/
                                                                                          MS for the analytical
                                                                                          finish.
Lead.................................  0.00062 milligrams per   3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        dry standard cubic       a minimum volume of 3    (Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                        meter.                   dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-8.
                                                                 meters per run).         Use GFAAS or ICP/MS
                                                                                          for the analytical
                                                                                          finish.
Fugitive emissions from ash handling.  Visible emissions of     Three 1-hour             Visible emission test
                                        combustion ash from an   observation periods.     (Method 22 of appendix
                                        ash conveying system                              A-7 of this part).
                                        (including conveyor
                                        transfer points) for
                                        no more than 5 percent
                                        of the hourly
                                        observation period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ All emission limits are measured at 7 percent oxygen, dry basis at standard conditions.
\b\ You have the option to comply with either the dioxin/furan emission limit on a total mass basis or the
  dioxin/furan emission limit on a toxic equivalency basis.
\c\ Incorporated by reference, see Sec.   60.17.

[[Page 15425]]

     Table 2 to Subpart LLLL of Part 60--Emission Limits and Standards for New Multiple Hearth Sewage Sludge
                                               Incineration Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Using these averaging
                                          You must meet this      methods and minimum        And determining
        For the air pollutant             emission limit \a\      sampling volumes or     compliance using this
                                                                       durations                  method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter...................  60 milligrams per dry    3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        standard cubic meter.    a minimum volume of      (Method 5 at 40 CFR
                                                                 0.75 dry standard        part 60, appendix A-3;
                                                                 cubic meters per run).   Method 26A or Method
                                                                                          29 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                                                          appendix A-8).
Hydrogen chloride....................  1.2 parts per million    3-run average (For       Performance test
                                        by dry volume.           Method 26, collect a     (Method 26 or 26A at
                                                                 minimum volume of 200    40 CFR part 60,
                                                                 liters per run. For      appendix A-8).
                                                                 Method 26A, collect a
                                                                 minimum volume of 1
                                                                 dry standard cubic
                                                                 meters per run).
Carbon monoxide......................  52 parts per million by  24-hour block average    Continuous emissions
                                        dry volume.              (using 1-hour averages   monitoring system.
                                                                 of data).                (Performance
                                                                                          Specification 4B of
                                                                                          this part, using a low-
                                                                                          range span of 100 ppm
                                                                                          and a high-range span
                                                                                          of 1000 ppm, and a
                                                                                          relative accuracy of
                                                                                          0.5 ppm instead of 5
                                                                                          ppm specified in
                                                                                          section 13.2. For the
                                                                                          cylinder gas audit of
                                                                                          Procedure 1, +/- 15%
                                                                                          or 0.5 whichever is
                                                                                          greater).
Dioxins/furans (total mass basis); or  0.045 nanograms per dry  3-run average (collect   Performance test
Dioxins/furans (toxic equivalency       standard cubic meter     a minimum volume of 3    (Method 23 at 40 CFR
 basis) \b\.                            (total mass basis); or   dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                       0.0022 nanograms per      meters per run).         7).
                                        dry standard cubic
                                        meter (toxic
                                        equivalency basis).
Mercury..............................  0.15 milligrams per dry  3-run average (For       Performance test
                                        standard cubic meter.    Method 29 and ASTM       (Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                                                 D6784-02 (Reapproved     part 60, appendix A-8;
                                                                 2008),\c\ collect a      Method 30B at 40 CFR
                                                                 minimum volume of 1      part 60, appendix A-8;
                                                                 dry standard cubic       or ASTM D6784-02
                                                                 meters per run. For      (Reapproved 2008).\c\
                                                                 Method 30B, collect a
                                                                 minimum sample as
                                                                 specified in Method
                                                                 30B at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                                 appendix A-8).
Oxides of nitrogen...................  210 parts per million    3-run average (Collect   Performance test
                                        by dry volume.           sample for a minimum     (Method 7 or 7E at 40
                                                                 duration of one hour     CFR part 60, appendix
                                                                 per run).                A-4).
Sulfur dioxide.......................  26 parts per million by  3-run average (For       Performance test
                                        dry volume.              Method 6, collect a      (Method 6 or 6C at 40
                                                                 minimum volume of 200    CFR part 40, appendix
                                                                 liters per run. For      A-4; or ANSI/ASME PTC
                                                                 Method 6C, collect       19.10-1981.\c\
                                                                 sample for a minimum
                                                                 duration of one hour
                                                                 per run).
Cadmium..............................  0.0024 milligrams per    3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        dry standard cubic       a minimum volume of 1    (Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                        meter.                   dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-
                                                                 meters per run).         8). Use GFAAS or ICP/
                                                                                          MS for the analytical
                                                                                          finish.
Lead.................................  0.0035 milligrams per    3-run average (collect   Performance test
                                        dry standard cubic       a minimum volume of 1    (Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                        meter.                   dry standard cubic       part 60, appendix A-8.
                                                                 meters per run).         Use GFAAS or ICP/MS
                                                                                          for the analytical
                                                                                          finish.
Fugitive emissions from ash handling.  Visible emissions of     Three 1-hour             Visible emission test
                                        combustion ash from an   observation periods.     (Method 22 of appendix
                                        ash conveying system                              A-7 of this part).
                                        (including conveyor
                                        transfer points) for
                                        no more than 5 percent
                                        of the hourly
                                        observation period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ All emission limits are measured at 7 percent oxygen, dry basis at standard conditions.
\b\ You have the option to comply with either the dioxin/furan emission limit on a total mass basis or the
  dioxin/furan emission limit on a toxic equivalency basis.
\c\ Incorporated by reference, see Sec.   60.17.

[[Page 15426]]

                          Table 3 to Subpart LLLL of Part 60--Operating Parameters for New Sewage Sludge Incineration Units \a\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      And monitor using these minimum frequencies
                                    You must establish these -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  For these operating parameters        operating limits                                                                      Data averaging period for
                                                                     Data measurement              Data recording \b\                compliance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          All sewage sludge incineration units
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Combustion chamber operating       Minimum combustion         Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  12-hour block.
 temperature or afterburner         chamber operating
 temperature.                       temperature or
                                    afterburner temperature.
Fugitive emissions from ash        Site-specific operating    Not applicable...............  Not applicable...............  Not applicable.
 handling.                          requirements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Scrubber
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pressure drop across each wet      Minimum pressure drop....  Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  12-hour block.
 scrubber.
Scrubber liquid flow rate........  Minimum flow rate........  Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  12-hour block.
Scrubber liquid pH...............  Minimum pH...............  Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  3-hour block.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Fabric Filter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alarm time of the bag leak         Maximum alarm time of the bag leak detection system alarm (this operating limit is provided in Sec.   60.4850 and is
 detection system alarm.            not established on a site-specific basis).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Electrostatic precipitator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secondary voltage of the           Minimum power input to     Continuous...................  Hourly.......................  12-hour block.
 electrostatic precipitator         the electrostatic
 collection plates.                 precipitator collection
                                    plates.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secondary amperage of the
 electrostatic precipitator
 collection plates.
Effluent water flow rate at the    Minimum effluent water     Hourly.......................  Hourly.......................  12-hour block.
 outlet of the electrostatic        flow rate at the outlet
 precipitator.                      of the electrostatic
                                    precipitator.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Activated carbon injection
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mercury sorbent injection rate...  Minimum mercury sorbent    Hourly.......................  Hourly.......................  12-hour block.
                                    injection rate.
Dioxin/furan sorbent injection     Minimum dioxin/furan
 rate.                              sorbent injection rate.
Carrier gas flow rate or carrier   Minimum carrier gas flow   Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  12-hour block.
 gas pressure drop.                 rate or minimum carrier
                                    gas pressure drop.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ As specified in Sec.   60.4870, you may use a continuous emissions monitoring system or continuous automated sampling system in lieu of establishing
  certain operating limits.
\b\ This recording time refers to the minimum frequency that the continuous monitor or other measuring device initially records data. For all data
  recorded every 15 minutes, you must calculate hourly arithmetic averages. For all parameters, you use hourly averages to calculate the 12-hour or 3-
  hour block average specified in this table for demonstrating compliance. You maintain records of 1-hour averages.

      Table 4 to Subpart LLLL of Part 60--Toxic Equivalency Factors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Toxic
                    Dioxin/furan isomer                      equivalency
                                                               factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin.................             1
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin...............             1
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin..............           0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin..............           0.1
1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin..............           0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin...........          0.01
octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin..........................        0.0003
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorinated dibenzofuran.....................           0.1
2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorinated dibenzofuran...................           0.3
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorinated dibenzofuran...................          0.03
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzofuran..................           0.1
1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzofuran..................           0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorinated dibenzofuran..................           0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzofuran..................           0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorinated dibenzofuran...............          0.01
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-heptachlorinated dibenzofuran...............          0.01
octachlorinated dibenzofuran..............................        0.0003
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 15427]]

 Table 5 to Subpart LLLL of Part 60--Summary of Reporting Requirements for New Sewage Sludge Incineration Units
                                                       \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Report                   Due date                  Contents                       Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification of construction..  Prior to           1. Statement of intent to         Sec.   60.4915(a).
                                 commencing         construct.
                                 construction.     2. Anticipated date of
                                                    commencement of construction..
                                                   3. Documentation for siting
                                                    requirements..
                                                   4. Anticipated date of initial
                                                    startup..
Notification of initial         Prior to initial   1. Maximum design dry sewage      Sec.   60.4915(b).
 startup.                        startup.           sludge burning capacity.
                                                   2. Anticipated and permitted
                                                    maximum feed rate..
                                                   3. If applicable, the petition
                                                    for site-specific operating
                                                    limits..
                                                   4. Anticipated date of initial
                                                    startup..
                                                   5. Site-specific monitoring
                                                    plan..
                                                   6. The site-specific monitoring
                                                    plan for your ash handling
                                                    system..
Initial compliance report.....  No later than 60   1. Company name and address.....  Sec.   60.4915(c).
                                 days following    2. Statement by a responsible
                                 the initial        official, with that official's
                                 performance test.  name, title, and signature,
                                                    certifying the accuracy of the
                                                    content of the report..
                                                   3. Date of report...............
                                                   4. Complete test report for the
                                                    initial performance test..
                                                   5. Results of CMS \b\
                                                    performance evaluation..
                                                   6. The values for the site-
                                                    specific operating limits and
                                                    the calculations and methods,
                                                    as applicable, used to
                                                    establish each operating limit..
                                                   7. Documentation of installation
                                                    of bag leak detection system
                                                    for fabric filter..
                                                   8. Results of initial air
                                                    pollution control device
                                                    inspection, including a
                                                    description of repairs..
Annual compliance report......  No later than 12   1. Company name and address.....  Sec.  Sec.   60.4915(d).
                                 months following  2. Statement and signature by
                                 the submission     responsible official..
                                 of the initial    3. Date and beginning and ending
                                 compliance         dates of report..
                                 report;           4. If a performance test was
                                 subsequent         conducted during the reporting
                                 reports are to     period, the results of the
                                 be submitted no    test, including any new
                                 more than 12       operating limits and associated
                                 months following   calculations and the type of
                                 the previous       activated carbon used, if
                                 report.            applicable..
                                                   5. For each pollutant and
                                                    operating parameter recorded
                                                    using a CMS, the highest
                                                    recorded 3-hour average and the
                                                    lowest recorded 3-hour average,
                                                    as applicable..
                                                   6. If no deviations from
                                                    emission limits, emission
                                                    standards, or operating limits
                                                    occurred, a statement that no
                                                    deviations occurred..
                                                   7. If a fabric filter is used,
                                                    the date, time, and duration of
                                                    alarms..
                                                   8. If a performance evaluation
                                                    of a CMS was conducted, the
                                                    results, including any new
                                                    operating limits and their
                                                    associated calculations..
                                                   9. If you met the requirements
                                                    of Sec.   60.4885(a)(3) and did
                                                    not conduct a performance test,
                                                    include the dates of the last
                                                    three performance tests, a
                                                    comparison to the 50 percent
                                                    emission limit threshold of the
                                                    emission level achieved in the
                                                    last three performance tests,
                                                    and a statement as to whether
                                                    there have been any process
                                                    changes..
                                                   10. Documentation of periods
                                                    when all qualified SSI unit
                                                    operators were unavailable for
                                                    more than 8 hours but less than
                                                    2 weeks..
                                                   11. Results of annual pollutions
                                                    control device inspections,
                                                    including description of
                                                    repairs..
                                                   12. If there were no periods
                                                    during which your CMSs had
                                                    malfunctions, a statement that
                                                    there were no periods during
                                                    which your CMSs had
                                                    malfunctions..
                                                   13. If there were no periods
                                                    during which your CMSs were out
                                                    of control, a statement that
                                                    there were no periods during
                                                    which your CMSs were out of
                                                    control..
                                                   14. If there were no operator
                                                    training deviations, a
                                                    statement that there were no
                                                    such deviations..
                                                   15. Information on monitoring
                                                    plan revisions, including a
                                                    copy of any revised monitoring
                                                    plan..

[[Page 15428]]

 
Deviation report (deviations    By August 1 of a   If using a CMS: 1. Company name   Sec.   60.4915(e).
 from emission limits,           calendar year      and address.
 emission standards, or          for data          2. Statement by a responsible
 operating limits, as            collected during   official..
 specified in Sec.               the first half    3. The calendar dates and times
 60.4915(e)(1)).                 of the calendar    your unit deviated from the
                                 year; by           emission limits or operating
                                 February 1 of a    limits..
                                 calendar year     4. The averaged and recorded
                                 for data           data for those dates..
                                 collected during  5. Duration and cause of each
                                 the second half    deviation..
                                 of the calendar   6. Dates, times, and causes for
                                 year.              monitor downtime incidents..
                                                   7. A copy of the operating
                                                    parameter monitoring data
                                                    during each deviation and any
                                                    test report that documents the
                                                    emission levels..
                                                   8. For periods of CMS
                                                    malfunction or when a CMS was
                                                    out of control, you must
                                                    include the information
                                                    specified in Sec.
                                                    60.4915(e)(3)(viii)..
                                                   If not using a CMS:.............
                                                   1. Company name and address.....
                                                   2. Statement by a responsible
                                                    official..
                                                   3. The total operating time of
                                                    each affected SSI..
                                                   4. The calendar dates and times
                                                    your unit deviated from the
                                                    emission limits, emission
                                                    standard, or operating limits..
                                                   5. The averaged and recorded
                                                    data for those dates..
                                                   6. Duration and cause of each
                                                    deviation..
                                                   7. A copy of any performance
                                                    test report that showed a
                                                    deviation from the emission
                                                    limits or standards..
                                                   8. A brief description of any
                                                    malfunction, a description of
                                                    actions taken during the
                                                    malfunction to minimize
                                                    emissions, and corrective
                                                    action taken..
Notification of qualified       Within 10 days of  1. Statement of cause of          Sec.   60.4915(f).
 operator deviation (if all      deviation.         deviation.
 qualified operators are not                       2. Description of actions taken
 accessible for 2 weeks or                          to ensure that a qualified
 more).                                             operator will be available.
                                                   3. The date when a qualified
                                                    operator will be accessible..
Notification of status of       Every 4 weeks      1. Description of actions taken   Sec.   60.4915(f).
 qualified operator deviation.   following          to ensure that a qualified
                                 notification of    operator is accessible.
                                 deviation.        2. The date when you anticipate
                                                    that a qualified operator will
                                                    be accessible..
                                                   3. Request for approval to
                                                    continue operation..
Notification of resumed         Within 5 days of   1. Notification that you have     Sec.   60.4915(f).
 operation following shutdown    obtaining a        obtained a qualified operator
 (due to qualified operator      qualified          and are resuming operation.
 deviation and as specified in   operator and
 Sec.   60.4835(b)(2)(i).        resuming
                                 operation.
Notification of a force         As soon as         1. Description of the force       Sec.   60.4915(g).
 majeure.                        practicable        majeure event.
                                 following the     2. Rationale for attributing the
                                 date you first     delay in conducting the
                                 knew, or through   performance test beyond the
                                 due diligence      regulatory deadline to the
                                 should have        force majeure..
                                 known that the    3. Description of the measures
                                 event may cause    taken or to be taken to
                                 or caused a        minimize the delay..
                                 delay in          4. Identification of the date by
                                 conducting a       which you propose to conduct
                                 performance test   the performance test..
                                 beyond the
                                 regulatory
                                 deadline; the
                                 notification
                                 must occur
                                 before the
                                 performance test
                                 deadline unless
                                 the initial
                                 force majeure or
                                 a subsequent
                                 force majeure
                                 event delays the
                                 notice, and in
                                 such cases, the
                                 notification
                                 must occur as
                                 soon as
                                 practicable.
Notification of intent to       1 month before     1. Intent to start or stop use    Sec.   60.4915(h).
 start or stop use of a CMS.     starting or        of a CMS.
                                 stopping use of
                                 a CMS.
Notification of intent to       At least 30 days   1. Intent to conduct a
 conduct a performance test.     prior to the       performance test to comply with
                                 performance test.  this subpart.
Notification of intent to       At least 7 days    1. Intent to conduct a
 conduct a rescheduled           prior to the       rescheduled performance test to
 performance test.               date of a          comply with this subpart.
                                 rescheduled
                                 performance test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ This table is only a summary, see the referenced sections of the rule for the complete requirements.
\b\ CMS means continuous monitoring system.

[[Page 15429]]

Subpart MMMM--Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Existing 
Sewage Sludge Incineration Units

Sec.

Table of Contents

Introduction

60.5000 What is the purpose of this subpart?
60.5005 Am I affected by this subpart?
60.5010 Is a state plan required for all states?
60.5015 What must I include in my state plan?
60.5020 Is there an approval process for my state plan?
60.5025 What if my state plan is not approvable?
60.5030 Is there an approval process for a negative declaration 
letter?
60.5035 What compliance schedule must I include in my state plan?
60.5040 Are there any state plan requirements for this subpart that 
apply instead of the requirements specified in subpart B?
60.5045 In lieu of a state plan submittal, are there other 
acceptable option(s) for a state to meet its section 111(d)/129 
(b)(2) obligations?
60.5050 What authorities will not be delegated to state, local, or 
tribal agencies?
60.5055 Does this subpart directly affect SSI unit owners and 
operators in my state?

Applicability of State Plans

60.5060 What SSI units must I address in my state plan?
60.5065 What SSI units are exempt from my state plan?

Use of Model Rule

60.5070 What is the ``model rule'' in this subpart?
60.5075 How does the model rule relate to the required elements of 
my state plan?
60.5080 What are the principal components of the model rule?

Model Rule--Increments of Progress

60.5085 What are my requirements for meeting increments of progress 
and achieving final compliance?
60.5090 When must I complete each increment of progress?
60.5095 What must I include in the notifications of achievement of 
increments of progress?
60.5100 When must I submit the notifications of achievement of 
increments of progress?
60.5105 What if I do not meet an increment of progress?
60.5110 How do I comply with the increment of progress for submittal 
of a control plan?
60.5115 How do I comply with the increment of progress for achieving 
final compliance?
60.5120 What must I do if I close my SSI unit and then restart it?
60.5125 What must I do if I plan to permanently close my SSI unit 
and not restart it?

Model Rule--Operator Training and Qualification

60.5130 What are the operator training and qualification 
requirements?
60.5135 When must the operator training course be completed?
60.5140 How do I obtain my operator qualification?
60.5145 How do I maintain my operator qualification?
60.5150 How do I renew my lapsed operator qualification?
60.5155 What if all the qualified operators are temporarily not 
accessible?
60.5160 What site-specific documentation is required and how often 
must it be reviewed by qualified operators and plant personnel?

Model Rule--Emission Limits, Emission Standards, and Operating Limits 
and Requirements

60.5165 What emission limits and standards must I meet and by when?
60.5170 What operating limits and requirements must I meet and by 
when?
60.5175 How do I establish operating limits if I do not use a wet 
scrubber, fabric filter, electrostatic precipitator, activated 
carbon injection, or afterburner, or if I limit emissions in some 
other manner, to comply with the emission limits?
60.5180 Do the emission limits, emission standards, and operating 
limits apply during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction?
60.5181 How do I establish affirmative defense for exceedance of an 
emission limit or standard during malfunction?

Model Rule--Initial Compliance Requirements

60.5185 How and when do I demonstrate initial compliance with the 
emission limits and standards?
60.5190 How do I establish my operating limits?
60.5195 By what date must I conduct the initial air pollution 
control device inspection and make any necessary repairs?
60.5200 How do I develop a site-specific monitoring plan for my 
continuous monitoring, bag leak detection, and ash handling systems, 
and by what date must I conduct an initial performance evaluation?

Model Rule--Continuous Compliance Requirements

60.5205 How and when do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the 
emission limits and standards?
60.5210 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with my operating 
limits?
60.5215 By what date must I conduct annual air pollution control 
device inspections and make any necessary repairs?

Model Rule--Performance Testing, Monitoring, and Calibration 
Requirements

60.5220 What are the performance testing, monitoring, and 
calibration requirements for compliance with the emission limits and 
standards?
60.5225 What are the monitoring and calibration requirements for 
compliance with my operating limits?

Model Rule--Recordkeeping and Reporting

60.5230 What records must I keep?
60.5235 What reports must I submit?

Model Rule--Title V Operating Permits

60.5240 Am I required to apply for and obtain a title V operating 
permit for my existing SSI unit?
60.5245 When must I submit a title V permit application for my 
existing SSI unit?

Model Rule--Definitions

60.5250 What definitions must I know?

Tables

Table 1 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Increments of 
Progress and Compliance Schedules for Existing Sewage Sludge 
Incineration Units
Table 2 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Emission Limits and 
Standards for Existing Fluidized Bed Sewage Sludge Incineration 
Units
Table 3 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Emission Limits and 
Standards for Existing Multiple Hearth Sewage Sludge Incineration 
Units
Table 4 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Operating Parameters 
for Existing Sewage Sludge Incineration Units
Table 5 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Toxic Equivalency 
Factors
Table 6 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Summary of Reporting 
Requirements for Existing Sewage Sludge Incineration Units

Introduction

60.5000  What is the purpose of this subpart?

    This subpart establishes emission guidelines and compliance 
schedules for the control of emissions from sewage sludge incineration 
(SSI) units. The pollutants addressed by these emission guidelines are 
listed in Tables 2 and 3 to this subpart. These emission guidelines are 
developed in accordance with sections 111(d) and 129 of the Clean Air 
Act and subpart B of this part. To the extent any requirement of this 
subpart is inconsistent with the requirements of subpart A of this 
part, the requirements of this subpart will apply.

Sec.  60.5005  Am I affected by this subpart?

    (a) If you are the Administrator of an air quality program in a 
state or United States protectorate with one or more SSI units that 
commenced construction on or before October 14, 2010, you must submit a 
state plan to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that 
implements the emission guidelines contained in this subpart.
    (b) You must submit the state plan to EPA by March 21, 2012.

[[Page 15430]]

Sec.  60.5010  Is a state plan required for all states?

    No. You are not required to submit a state plan if there are no SSI 
units for which construction commenced on or before October 14, 2010 in 
your state, and you submit a negative declaration letter in place of 
the state plan.

Sec.  60.5015  What must I include in my state plan?

    (a) You must include the nine items described in paragraphs (a)(1) 
through (a)(9) of this section in your state plan.
    (1) Inventory of affected SSI units, including those that have 
ceased operation but have not been dismantled.
    (2) Inventory of emissions from affected SSI units in your state.
    (3) Compliance schedules for each affected SSI unit.
    (4) Emission limits, emission standards, operator training and 
qualification requirements, and operating limits for affected SSI units 
that are at least as protective as the emission guidelines contained in 
this subpart.
    (5) Performance testing, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.
    (6) Certification that the hearing on the state plan 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.
    (7) Provision for state progress reports to EPA.
    (8) Identification of enforceable state mechanisms that you 
selected for implementing the emission guidelines of this subpart.
    (9) Demonstration of your state's legal authority to carry out the 
sections 111(d) and 129 state plan.
    (b) Your state plan may deviate from the format and content of the 
emission guidelines contained in this subpart. However, if your state 
plan does deviate in content, you must demonstrate that your state plan 
is at least as protective as the emission guidelines contained in this 
subpart. Your state plan must address regulatory applicability, 
increments of progress for retrofit, operator training and 
qualification, emission limits and standards, performance testing, 
operating limits, monitoring, and recordkeeping and reporting.
    (c) You must follow the requirements of subpart B of this part 
(Adoption and Submittal of state plans for Designated Facilities) in 
your state plan.

Sec.  60.5020  Is there an approval process for my state plan?

    Yes. The EPA will review your state plan according to Sec.  60.27.

Sec.  60.5025  What if my state plan is not approvable?

    If you do not submit an approvable state plan (or a negative 
declaration letter) by March 21, 2013, EPA will develop a Federal plan 
according to Sec.  60.27 to implement the emission guidelines contained 
in this subpart. Owners and operators of SSI units not covered by an 
approved state plan must comply with the Federal plan. The Federal plan 
is an interim action and will be automatically withdrawn when your 
state plan is approved.

Sec.  60.5030  Is there an approval process for a negative declaration 
letter?

    No. The EPA has no formal review process for negative declaration 
letters. Once your negative declaration letter has been received, EPA 
will place a copy in the public docket and publish a notice in the 
Federal Register. If, at a later date, a SSI unit for which 
construction commenced on or before October 14, 2010 is found in your 
state, the Federal plan implementing the emission guidelines contained 
in this subpart would automatically apply to that SSI unit until your 
state plan is approved.

Sec.  60.5035  What compliance schedule must I include in my state 
plan?

    (a) For SSI units that commenced construction on or before October 
14, 2010, your state plan must include compliance schedules that 
require SSI units to achieve final compliance as expeditiously as 
practicable after approval of the state plan but not later than the 
earlier of the two dates specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of 
this section.
    (1) March 21, 2016.
    (2) Three years after the effective date of state plan approval.
    (b) For compliance schedules that extend more than 1 year following 
the effective date of state plan approval, state plans must include 
dates for enforceable increments of progress as specified in Sec.  
60.5090.

Sec.  60.5040  Are there any state plan requirements for this subpart 
that apply instead of the requirements specified in subpart B?

    Yes. Subpart B establishes general requirements for developing and 
processing section 111(d) state plans. This subpart applies instead of 
the requirements in subpart B of this part, as specified in paragraphs 
(a) and (b) of this section:
    (a) State plans developed to implement this subpart must be as 
protective as the emission guidelines contained in this subpart. State 
plans must require all SSI units to comply by the dates specified in 
Sec.  60.5035. This applies instead of the option for case-by-case less 
stringent emission standards and longer compliance schedules in Sec.  
60.24(f).
    (b) State plans developed to implement this subpart are required to 
include two increments of progress for the affected SSI units. These 
two minimum increments are the final control plan submittal date and 
final compliance date in Sec.  60.21(h)(1) and (5). This applies 
instead of the requirement of Sec.  60.24(e)(1) that would require a 
state plan to include all five increments of progress for all SSI 
units.

Sec.  60.5045  In lieu of a state plan submittal, are there other 
acceptable option(s) for a state to meet its section 111(d)/129 (b)(2) 
obligations?

    Yes, a state may meet its Clean Air Act section 111(d)/129 
obligations by submitting an acceptable written request for delegation 
of the Federal plan that meets the requirements of this section. This 
is the only other option for a state to meet its section 111(d)/129 
obligations.
    (a) An acceptable Federal plan delegation request must include the 
following:
    (1) A demonstration of adequate resources and legal authority to 
administer and enforce the Federal plan.
    (2) The items under Sec.  60.5015(a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(7).
    (3) Certification that the hearing on the state delegation request, 
similar to the hearing for a state plan submittal, 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.
    (4) A commitment to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the 
Regional Administrator that sets forth the terms, conditions, and 
effective date of the delegation and that serves as the mechanism for 
the transfer of authority. Additional guidance and information is given 
in EPA's Delegation Manual, Item 7-139, Implementation and Enforcement 
of 111(d)(2) and 111(d)/(2)/129 (b)(3) Federal plans.
    (b) A state with an already approved SSI Clean Air Act section 
111(d)/129 state plan is not precluded from receiving EPA approval of a 
delegation request for the revised Federal plan, provided the 
requirements of paragraph (a) of this section are met, and at the time 
of the delegation request, the state

[[Page 15431]]

also requests withdrawal of EPA's previous state plan approval.
    (c) A state's Clean Air Act section 111(d)/129 obligations are 
separate from its obligations under title V of the Clean Air Act.

Sec.  60.5050  What authorities will not be delegated to state, local, 
or tribal agencies?

    The authorities that will not be delegated to state, local, or 
tribal agencies are specified in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this 
section.
    (a) Approval of alternatives to the emission limits and standards 
in Tables 2 and 3 to this subpart and operating limits established 
under Sec.  60.5175 or Sec.  60.5190.
    (b) Approval of major alternatives to test methods.
    (c) Approval of major alternatives to monitoring.
    (d) Approval of major alternatives to recordkeeping and reporting.
    (e) The requirements in Sec.  60.5175.
    (f) The requirements in Sec.  60.5155(b)(2).
    (g) Performance test and data reduction waivers under Sec.  
60.8(b).

Sec.  60.5055  Does this subpart directly affect SSI unit owners and 
operators in my state?

    (a) No. This subpart does not directly affect SSI unit owners and 
operators in your state. However, SSI unit owners and operators must 
comply with the state plan you develop to implement the emission 
guidelines contained in this subpart. States may choose to incorporate 
the model rule text directly in their state plan.
    (b) If you do not submit an approvable plan to implement and 
enforce the guidelines contained in this subpart by March 21, 2012, EPA 
will implement and enforce a Federal plan, as provided in Sec.  
60.5025, to ensure that each unit within your state that commenced 
construction on or before October 14, 2010 reaches compliance with all 
the provisions of this subpart by the dates specified in Sec.  60.5035.

Applicability of State Plans

Sec.  60.5060  What SSI units must I address in my state plan?

    (a) Your state plan must address SSI units that meet all three 
criteria described in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section.
    (1) SSI units in your state that commenced construction on or 
before October 14, 2010.
    (2) SSI units that meet the definition of a SSI unit as defined in 
Sec.  60.5250.
    (3) SSI units not exempt under Sec.  60.5065.
    (b) If the owner or operator of a SSI unit makes changes that meet 
the definition of modification after September 21, 2011, the SSI unit 
becomes subject to subpart LLLL of this part and the state plan no 
longer applies to that unit.
    (c) If the owner or operator of a SSI unit makes physical or 
operational changes to a SSI unit for which construction commenced on 
or before September 21, 2011 primarily to comply with your state plan, 
subpart LLLL of this part does not apply to that unit. Such changes do 
not qualify as modifications under subpart LLLL of this part.

Sec.  60.5065  What SSI units are exempt from my state plan?

    This subpart exempts combustion units that incinerate sewage sludge 
and are not located at a wastewater treatment facility designed to 
treat domestic sewage sludge. These units may be subject to another 
subpart of this part (e.g., subpart CCCC of this part). The owner or 
operator of such a combustion unit must notify the Administrator of an 
exemption claim under this section.

Use of Model Rule

Sec.  60.5070  What is the ``model rule'' in this subpart?

    (a) The model rule is the portion of these emission guidelines 
(Sec. Sec.  60.5085 through 60.5250) that addresses the regulatory 
requirements applicable to SSI units. The model rule provides these 
requirements in regulation format. You must develop a state plan that 
is at least as protective as the model rule. You may use the model rule 
language as part of your state plan. Alternative language may be used 
in your state plan if you demonstrate that the alternative language is 
at least as protective as the model rule contained in this subpart.
    (b) In the model rule of Sec. Sec.  60.5085 through 60.5250, 
``you'' and ``Administrator'' have the meaning specified in Sec.  
60.5250.

Sec.  60.5075  How does the model rule relate to the required elements 
of my state plan?

    Use the model rule to satisfy the state plan requirements specified 
in Sec.  60.5015(a)(3) through (a)(5).

Sec.  60.5080  What are the principal components of the model rule?

    The model rule contains the nine major components listed in 
paragraphs (a) through (i) of this section.
    (a) Increments of progress toward compliance.
    (b) Operator training and qualification.
    (c) Emission limits, emission standards, and operating limits.
    (d) Initial compliance requirements.
    (e) Continuous compliance requirements.
    (f) Performance testing, monitoring, and calibration requirements.
    (g) Recordkeeping and reporting.
    (h) Definitions.
    (i) Tables.

Model Rule--Increments of Progress

Sec.  60.5085  What are my requirements for meeting increments of 
progress and achieving final compliance?

    If you plan to achieve compliance more than 1 year following the 
effective date of state plan approval, you must meet the two increments 
of progress specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
    (a) Submit a final control plan.
    (b) Achieve final compliance.

Sec.  60.5090  When must I complete each increment of progress?

    Table 1 to this subpart specifies compliance dates for each 
increment of progress.

Sec.  60.5095  What must I include in the notifications of achievement 
of increments of progress?

    Your notification of achievement of increments of progress must 
include the three items specified in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this 
section.
    (a) Notification that the increment of progress has been achieved.
    (b) Any items required to be submitted with each increment of 
progress.
    (c) Signature of the owner or operator of the SSI unit.

Sec.  60.5100  When must I submit the notifications of achievement of 
increments of progress?

    Notifications for achieving increments of progress must be 
postmarked no later than 10 business days after the compliance date for 
the increment.

Sec.  60.5105  What if I do not meet an increment of progress?

    If you fail to meet an increment of progress, you must submit a 
notification to the Administrator postmarked within 10 business days 
after the date for that increment of progress in Table 1 to this 
subpart. You must inform the Administrator that you did not meet the 
increment, and you must continue to submit reports each subsequent 
calendar month until the increment of progress is met.

Sec.  60.5110  How do I comply with the increment of progress for 
submittal of a control plan?

    For your control plan increment of progress, you must satisfy the 
two

[[Page 15432]]

requirements specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
    (a) Submit the final control plan that includes the four items 
described in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this section.
    (1) A description of the devices for air pollution control and 
process changes that you will use to comply with the emission limits 
and standards and other requirements of this subpart.
    (2) The type(s) of waste to be burned, if waste other than sewage 
sludge is burned in the unit.
    (3) The maximum design sewage sludge burning capacity.
    (4) If applicable, the petition for site-specific operating limits 
under Sec.  60.5175.
    (b) Maintain an onsite copy of the final control plan.

Sec.  60.5115  How do I comply with the increment of progress for 
achieving final compliance?

    For the final compliance increment of progress, you must complete 
all process changes and retrofit construction of control devices, as 
specified in the final control plan, so that, if the affected SSI unit 
is brought online, all necessary process changes and air pollution 
control devices would operate as designed.

Sec.  60.5120  What must I do if I close my SSI unit and then restart 
it?

    (a) If you close your SSI unit but will restart it prior to the 
final compliance date in your state plan, you must meet the increments 
of progress specified in Sec.  60.5085.
    (b) If you close your SSI unit but will restart it after your final 
compliance date, you must complete emission control retrofits and meet 
the emission limits, emission standards, and operating limits on the 
date your unit restarts operation.

Sec.  60.5125  What must I do if I plan to permanently close my SSI 
unit and not restart it?

    If you plan to close your SSI unit rather than comply with the 
state plan, submit a closure notification, including the date of 
closure, to the Administrator by the date your final control plan is 
due.

Model Rule--Operator Training and Qualification

Sec.  60.5130  What are the operator training and qualification 
requirements?

    (a) A SSI unit cannot be operated unless a fully trained and 
qualified SSI unit operator is accessible, either at the facility or 
can be at the facility within 1 hour. The trained and qualified SSI 
unit operator may operate the SSI unit directly or be the direct 
supervisor of one or more other plant personnel who operate the unit. 
If all qualified SSI unit operators are temporarily not accessible, you 
must follow the procedures in Sec.  60.5155.
    (b) Operator training and qualification must be obtained through a 
state-approved program or by completing the requirements included in 
paragraph (c) of this section.
    (c) Training must be obtained by completing an incinerator operator 
training course that includes, at a minimum, the three elements 
described in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(3) of this section.
    (1) Training on the 10 subjects listed in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) 
through (c)(1)(x) of this section.
    (i) Environmental concerns, including types of emissions.
    (ii) Basic combustion principles, including products of combustion.
    (iii) Operation of the specific type of incinerator to be used by 
the operator, including proper startup, sewage sludge feeding, and 
shutdown procedures.
    (iv) Combustion controls and monitoring.
    (v) Operation of air pollution control equipment and factors 
affecting performance (if applicable).
    (vi) Inspection and maintenance of the incinerator and air 
pollution control devices.
    (vii) Actions to prevent malfunctions or to prevent conditions that 
may lead to malfunctions.
    (viii) Bottom and fly ash characteristics and handling procedures.
    (ix) Applicable Federal, State, and local regulations, including 
Occupational Safety and Health Administration workplace standards.
    (x) Pollution prevention.
    (2) An examination designed and administered by the state-approved 
program.
    (3) Written material covering the training course topics that may 
serve as reference material following completion of the course.

Sec.  60.5135  When must the operator training course be completed?

    The operator training course must be completed by the later of the 
three dates specified in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section.
    (a) The final compliance date (Increment 2).
    (b) Six months after your SSI unit startup.
    (c) Six months after an employee assumes responsibility for 
operating the SSI unit or assumes responsibility for supervising the 
operation of the SSI unit.

Sec.  60.5140  How do I obtain my operator qualification?

    (a) You must obtain operator qualification by completing a training 
course that satisfies the criteria under Sec.  60.5130(b).
    (b) Qualification is valid from the date on which the training 
course is completed and the operator successfully passes the 
examination required under Sec.  60.5130(c)(2).

Sec.  60.5145  How do I maintain my operator qualification?

    To maintain qualification, you must complete an annual review or 
refresher course covering, at a minimum, the five topics described in 
paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section.
    (a) Update of regulations.
    (b) Incinerator operation, including startup and shutdown 
procedures, sewage sludge feeding, and ash handling.
    (c) Inspection and maintenance.
    (d) Prevention of malfunctions or conditions that may lead to 
malfunction.
    (e) Discussion of operating problems encountered by attendees.

Sec.  60.5150  How do I renew my lapsed operator qualification?

    You must renew a lapsed operator qualification before you begin 
operation of a SSI unit by one of the two methods specified in 
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section.
    (a) For a lapse of less than 3 years, you must complete a standard 
annual refresher course described in Sec.  60.5145.
    (b) For a lapse of 3 years or more, you must repeat the initial 
qualification requirements in Sec.  60.5140(a).

Sec.  60.5155  What if all the qualified operators are temporarily not 
accessible?

    If a qualified operator is not at the facility and cannot be at the 
facility within 1 hour, you must meet the criteria specified in either 
paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, depending on the length of time 
that a qualified operator is not accessible.
    (a) When a qualified operator is not accessible for more than 8 
hours, the SSI unit may be operated for less than 2 weeks by other 
plant personnel who are familiar with the operation of the SSI unit and 
who have completed a review of the information specified in Sec.  
60.5160 within the past 12 months. However, you must record the period 
when a qualified operator was not accessible and include this deviation 
in the annual report as specified under Sec.  60.5235(d).
    (b) When a qualified operator is not accessible for 2 weeks or 
more, you must take the two actions that are

[[Page 15433]]

described in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.
    (1) Notify the Administrator of this deviation in writing within 10 
days. In the notice, state what caused this deviation, what you are 
doing to ensure that a qualified operator is accessible, and when you 
anticipate that a qualified operator will be accessible.
    (2) Submit a status report to the Administrator every 4 weeks 
outlining what you are doing to ensure that a qualified operator is 
accessible, stating when you anticipate that a qualified operator will 
be accessible, and requesting approval from the Administrator to 
continue operation of the SSI unit. You must submit the first status 
report 4 weeks after you notify the Administrator of the deviation 
under paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (i) If the Administrator notifies you that your request to continue 
operation of the SSI unit is disapproved, the SSI unit may continue 
operation for 30 days, and then must cease operation.
    (ii) Operation of the unit may resume if a qualified operator is 
accessible as required under Sec.  60.5130(a). You must notify the 
Administrator within 5 days of having resumed operations and of having 
a qualified operator accessible.

Sec.  60.5160  What site-specific documentation is required and how 
often must it be reviewed by qualified operators and plant personnel?

    (a) You must maintain at the facility the documentation of the 
operator training procedures specified under Sec.  60.5230(c)(1) and 
make the documentation readily accessible to all SSI unit operators.
    (b) You must establish a program for reviewing the information 
listed in Sec.  60.5230(c)(1) with each qualified incinerator operator 
and other plant personnel who may operate the unit according to the 
provisions of Sec.  60.5155(a), according to the following schedule:
    (1) The initial review of the information listed in Sec.  
60.5230(c)(1) must be conducted within 6 months after the effective 
date of this subpart or prior to an employee's assumption of 
responsibilities for operation of the SSI unit, whichever date is 
later.
    (2) Subsequent annual reviews of the information listed in Sec.  
60.5230(c)(1) must be conducted no later than 12 months following the 
previous review.

Model Rule--Emission Limits, Emission Standards, and Operating Limits 
and Requirements

Sec.  60.5165  What emission limits and standards must I meet and by 
when?

    You must meet the emission limits and standards specified in Table 
2 or 3 to this subpart by the final compliance date under the approved 
state plan, Federal plan, or delegation, as applicable. The emission 
limits and standards apply at all times the unit is operating and 
during periods of malfunction. The emission limits and standards apply 
to emissions from a bypass stack or vent while sewage sludge is in the 
combustion chamber (i.e., until the sewage sludge feed to the combustor 
has been cut off for a period of time not less than the sewage sludge 
incineration residence time).

Sec.  60.5170  What operating limits and requirements must I meet and 
by when?

    You must meet, as applicable, the operating limits and requirements 
specified in paragraphs (a) through (d) and (h) of this section, 
according to the schedule specified in paragraph (e) of this section. 
The operating parameters for which you will establish operating limits 
for a wet scrubber, fabric filter, electrostatic precipitator, or 
activated carbon injection are listed in Table 4 to this subpart. You 
must comply with the operating requirements in paragraph (f) of this 
section and the requirements in paragraph (g) of this section for 
meeting any new operating limits, re-established in Sec.  60.5210. The 
operating limits apply at all times that sewage sludge is in the 
combustion chamber (i.e., until the sewage sludge feed to the combustor 
has been cut off for a period of time not less than the sewage sludge 
incineration residence time).
    (a) You must meet a site-specific operating limit for minimum 
operating temperature of the combustion chamber (or afterburner 
combustion chamber) that you establish in Sec.  60.5190.
    (b) If you use a wet scrubber, electrostatic precipitator, 
activated carbon injection, or afterburner to comply with an emission 
limit, you must meet the site-specific operating limits that you 
establish in Sec.  60.5190 for each operating parameter associated with 
each air pollution control device.
    (c) If you use a fabric filter to comply with the emission limits, 
you must install the bag leak detection system specified in Sec. Sec.  
60.5200(b) and 60.5225(b)(3)(i) and operate the bag leak detection 
system such that the alarm does not sound more than 5 percent of the 
operating time during a 6-month period. You must calculate the alarm 
time as specified in Sec.  60.5210(a)(2)(i).
    (d) You must meet the operating requirements in your site-specific 
fugitive emission monitoring plan, submitted as specified in Sec.  
60.5200(d) to ensure that your ash handling system will meet the 
emission standard for fugitive emissions from ash handling.
    (e) You must meet the operating limits and requirements specified 
in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section by the final compliance 
date under the approved state plan, Federal plan, or delegation, as 
applicable.
    (f) You must monitor the feed rate and moisture content of the 
sewage sludge fed to the sewage sludge incinerator, as specified in 
paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this section.
    (1) Continuously monitor the sewage sludge feed rate and calculate 
a daily average for all hours of operation during each 24-hour period. 
Keep a record of the daily average feed rate, as specified in Sec.  
60.5230(f)(3)(ii).
    (2) Take at least one grab sample per day of the sewage sludge fed 
to the sewage sludge incinerator. If you take more than one grab sample 
in a day, calculate the daily average for the grab samples. Keep a 
record of the daily average moisture content, as specified in Sec.  
60.5230(f)(3)(ii).
    (g) For the operating limits and requirements specified in 
paragraphs (a) through (d) and (h) of this section, you must meet any 
new operating limits and requirements, re-established according to 
Sec.  60.5210(d).
    (h) If you use an air pollution control device other than a wet 
scrubber, fabric filter, electrostatic precipitator, or activated 
carbon injection to comply with the emission limits in Table 2 or 3 to 
this subpart, you must meet any site-specific operating limits or 
requirements that you establish as required in Sec.  60.5175.

Sec.  60.5175  How do I establish operating limits if I do not use a 
wet scrubber, fabric filter, electrostatic precipitator, activated 
carbon injection, or afterburner, or if I limit emissions in some other 
manner, to comply with the emission limits?

    If you use an air pollution control device other than a wet 
scrubber, fabric filter, electrostatic precipitator, activated carbon 
injection, or afterburner, or limit emissions in some other manner 
(e.g., materials balance) to comply with the emission limits in Sec.  
60.5165, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of 
this section.
    (a) Meet the applicable operating limits and requirements in Sec.  
60.4850, and establish applicable operating limits according to Sec.  
60.5190.

[[Page 15434]]

    (b) Petition the Administrator for specific operating parameters, 
operating limits, and averaging periods to be established during the 
initial performance test and to be monitored continuously thereafter.
    (1) You are responsible for submitting any supporting information 
in a timely manner to enable the Administrator to consider the 
application prior to the performance test. You must not conduct the 
initial performance test until after the petition has been approved by 
the Administrator, and you must comply with the operating limits as 
written, pending approval by the Administrator. Neither submittal of an 
application, nor the Administrator's failure to approve or disapprove 
the application relieves you of the responsibility to comply with any 
provision of this subpart.
    (2) Your petition must include the five items listed in paragraphs 
(b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(v) of this section.
    (i) Identification of the specific parameters you propose to 
monitor.
    (ii) A discussion of the relationship between these parameters and 
emissions of regulated pollutants, identifying how emissions of 
regulated pollutants change with changes in these parameters, and how 
limits on these parameters will serve to limit emissions of regulated 
pollutants.
    (iii) A discussion of how you will establish the upper and/or lower 
values for these parameters that will establish the operating limits on 
these parameters, including a discussion of the averaging periods 
associated with those parameters for determining compliance.
    (iv) A discussion identifying the methods you will use to measure 
and the instruments you will use to monitor these parameters, as well 
as the relative accuracy and precision of these methods and 
instruments.
    (v) A discussion identifying the frequency and methods for 
recalibrating the instruments you will use for monitoring these 
parameters.

Sec.  60.5180  Do the emission limits, emission standards, and 
operating limits apply during periods of startup, shutdown, and 
malfunction?

    The emission limits and standards apply at all times and during 
periods of malfunction. The operating limits apply at all times that 
sewage sludge is in the combustion chamber (i.e., until the sewage 
sludge feed to the combustor has been cut off for a period of time not 
less than the sewage sludge incineration residence time). For 
determining compliance with the CO concentration limit using CO CEMS, 
the correction to 7 percent oxygen does not apply during periods of 
startup or shutdown. Use the measured CO concentration without 
correcting for oxygen concentration in averaging with other CO 
concentrations (corrected to 7 percent O2) to determine the 
24-hour average value.

Sec.  60.5181  How do I establish an affirmative defense for exceedance 
of an emission limit or standard during malfunction?

    In response to an action to enforce the numerical emission 
standards set forth in paragraph Sec.  60.5165, you may assert an 
affirmative defense to a claim for civil penalties for exceedances of 
emission limits that are caused by malfunction, as defined in Sec.  
60.2. Appropriate penalties may be assessed however, if you fail to 
meet your burden of proving all of the requirements in the affirmative 
defense. The affirmative defense shall not be available for claims for 
injunctive relief.
    (a) To establish the affirmative defense in any action to enforce 
such a limit, you must timely meet the notification requirements in 
paragraph (b) of this section, and must prove by a preponderance of 
evidence that the conditions in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(9) of 
this section are met.
    (1) The excess emissions:
    (i) Were caused by a sudden, infrequent, and unavoidable failure of 
air pollution control and monitoring equipment, process equipment, or a 
process to operate in a normal or usual manner, and (ii) Could not have 
been prevented through careful planning, proper design or better 
operation and maintenance practices, and (iii) Did not stem from any 
activity or event that could have been foreseen and avoided, or planned 
for, and
    (iv) Were not part of a recurring pattern indicative of inadequate 
design, operation, or maintenance, and
    (2) Repairs were made as expeditiously as possible when the 
applicable emission limits were being exceeded. Off-shift and overtime 
labor were used, to the extent practicable to make these repairs, and 
(3) The frequency, amount and duration of the excess emissions 
(including any bypass) were minimized to the maximum extent practicable 
during periods of such emissions, and (4) If the excess emissions 
resulted from a bypass of control equipment or a process, then the 
bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal injury, or 
severe property damage, and
    (5) All possible steps were taken to minimize the impact of the 
excess emissions on ambient air quality, the environment and human 
health, and
    (6) All emissions monitoring and control systems were kept in 
operation if at all possible consistent with safety and good air 
pollution control practices, and
    (7) All of the actions in response to the excess emissions were 
documented by properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, and
    (8) At all times, the affected facility was operated in a manner 
consistent with good practices for minimizing emissions, and
    (9) A written root cause analysis has been prepared the purpose of 
which is to determine, correct, and eliminate the primary causes of the 
malfunction and the excess emissions resulting from the malfunction 
event at issue. The analysis shall also specify, using best monitoring 
methods and engineering judgment, the amount of excess emissions that 
were the result of the malfunction.
    (b) The owner or operator of the SSI unit experiencing an 
exceedance of its emission limit(s) during a malfunction, shall notify 
the Administrator by telephone or facsimile (fax) transmission as soon 
as possible, but no later than 2 business days after the initial 
occurrence of the malfunction, if it wishes to avail itself of an 
affirmative defense to civil penalties for that malfunction. The owner 
or operator seeking to assert an affirmative defense shall also submit 
a written report to the Administrator within 45 days of the initial 
occurrence of the exceedance of the standard in Sec.  60.5165 to 
demonstrate, with all necessary supporting documentation, that it has 
met the requirements set forth in paragraph (a) of this section. The 
owner or operator may seek an extension of this deadline for up to 30 
additional days by submitting a written request to the Administrator 
before the expiration of the 45 day period. Until a request for an 
extension has been approved by the Administrator, the owner or operator 
is subject to the requirement to submit such report within 45 days of 
the initial occurrence of the exceedance.

Model Rule--Initial Compliance Requirements

Sec.  60.5185  How and when do I demonstrate initial compliance with 
the emission limits and standards?

    To demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limits and 
standards in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart, use the procedures specified 
in paragraph (a) of this section. In lieu of using the procedures 
specified in paragraph (a) of this section, you have the option to 
demonstrate initial compliance using the procedures specified in 
paragraph (b) of this section for particulate matter, hydrogen 
chloride, carbon monoxide, dioxins/furans (total mass basis or toxic

[[Page 15435]]

equivalency basis), mercury, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, cadmium, 
lead, and fugitive emissions from ash handling. You must meet the 
requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, as applicable, 
and paragraphs (c) through (e) of this section, according to the 
performance testing, monitoring, and calibration requirements in Sec.  
60.5220(a) and (b).
    (a) Demonstrate initial compliance using the performance test 
required in Sec.  60.8. You must demonstrate that your SSI unit meets 
the emission limits and standards specified in Table 2 or 3 to this 
subpart for particulate matter, hydrogen chloride, carbon monoxide, 
dioxins/furans (total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis), mercury, 
nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, cadmium, lead, and fugitive emissions 
from ash handling using the performance test. The initial performance 
test must be conducted using the test methods, averaging methods, and 
minimum sampling volumes or durations specified in Table 2 or 3 to this 
subpart and according to the testing, monitoring, and calibration 
requirements specified in Sec.  60.5220(a).
    (1) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, you must 
demonstrate that your SSI unit meets the emission limits and standards 
specified in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart by your final compliance date 
(see Table 1 to this subpart).
    (2) You may use the results from a performance test conducted 
within the 2 previous years that was conducted under the same 
conditions and demonstrated compliance with the emission limits and 
standards in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart, provided no process changes 
have been made since you conducted that performance test. However, you 
must continue to meet the operating limits established during the most 
recent performance test that demonstrated compliance with the emission 
limits and standards in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart. The performance 
test must have used the test methods specified in Table 2 or 3 to this 
subpart.
    (b) Demonstrate initial compliance using a continuous emissions 
monitoring system or continuous automated sampling system. The option 
to use a continuous emissions monitoring system for hydrogen chloride, 
dioxins/furans, cadmium, or lead takes effect on the date a final 
performance specification applicable to hydrogen chloride, dioxins/
furans, cadmium, or lead is published in the Federal Register. The 
option to use a continuous automated sampling system for dioxins/furans 
takes effect on the date a final performance specification for such a 
continuous automated sampling system is published in the Federal 
Register. Collect data as specified in Sec.  60.5220(b)(6) and use the 
following procedures:
    (1) To demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limits 
specified in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart for particulate matter, 
hydrogen chloride, carbon monoxide, dioxins/furans (total mass basis or 
toxic equivalency basis), mercury, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, 
cadmium, and lead, you may substitute the use of a continuous 
monitoring system in lieu of conducting the initial performance test 
required in paragraph (a) of this section, as follows:
    (i) You may substitute the use of a continuous emissions monitoring 
system for any pollutant specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section 
in lieu of conducting the initial performance test for that pollutant 
in paragraph (a) of this section. For determining compliance with the 
carbon monoxide concentration limit using carbon monoxide CEMS, the 
correction to 7 percent oxygen does not apply during periods of startup 
or shutdown. Use the measured carbon monoxide concentration without 
correcting for oxygen concentration in averaging with other carbon 
monoxide concentrations (corrected to 7 percent oxygen) to determine 
the 24-hour average value.
    (ii) You may substitute the use of a continuous automated sampling 
system for mercury or dioxins/furans in lieu of conducting the annual 
mercury or dioxin/furan performance test in paragraph (a) of this 
section.
    (2) If you use a continuous emissions monitoring system to 
demonstrate compliance with an applicable emission limit in Table 2 or 
3 to this subpart, as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, 
you must use the continuous emissions monitoring system and follow the 
requirements specified in Sec.  60.5220(b). You must measure emissions 
according to Sec.  60.13 to calculate 1-hour arithmetic averages, 
corrected to 7 percent oxygen (or carbon dioxide). You must demonstrate 
initial compliance using a 24-hour block average of these 1-hour 
arithmetic average emission concentrations, calculated using Equation 
19-19 in section 12.4.1 of Method 19 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7.
    (3) If you use a continuous automated sampling system to 
demonstrate compliance with an applicable emission limit in Table 2 or 
3 to this subpart, as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, 
you must:
    (i) Use the continuous automated sampling system specified in Sec.  
60.58b(p) and (q), and measure and calculate average emissions 
corrected to 7 percent oxygen (or carbon dioxide) according to Sec.  
60.58b(p) and your monitoring plan.
    (A) Use the procedures specified in Sec.  60.58b(p) to calculate 
24-hour block averages to determine compliance with the mercury 
emission limit in Table 2 to this subpart.
    (B) Use the procedures specified in Sec.  60.58b(p) to calculate 2-
week block averages to determine compliance with the dioxin/furan 
(total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis) emission limit in Table 2 
to this subpart.
    (ii) Comply with the provisions in Sec.  60.58b(q) to develop a 
monitoring plan. For mercury continuous automated sampling systems, you 
must use Performance Specification 12B of appendix B of part 75 and 
Procedure 5 of appendix F of this part.
    (4) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, you must 
complete your initial performance evaluations required under your 
monitoring plan for any continuous emissions monitoring systems and 
continuous automated sampling systems by your final compliance date 
(see Table 1 to this subpart). Your performance evaluation must be 
conducted using the procedures and acceptance criteria specified in 
Sec.  60.5200(a)(3).
    (c) To demonstrate initial compliance with the dioxins/furans toxic 
equivalency emission limit in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart, determine 
dioxins/furans toxic equivalency as follows:
    (1) Measure the concentration of each dioxin/furan tetra- through 
octachlorinated-isomer emitted using EPA Method 23 at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-7.
    (2) Multiply the concentration of each dioxin/furan (tetra- through 
octa-chlorinated) isomer by its corresponding toxic equivalency factor 
specified in Table 5 to this subpart. (3) Sum the products calculated 
in accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this section to obtain the total 
concentration of dioxins/furans emitted in terms of toxic equivalency.
    (d) Submit an initial compliance report, as specified in Sec.  
60.5235(b).
    (e) If you demonstrate initial compliance using the performance 
test specified in paragraph (a) of this section, then the provisions of 
this paragraph (e) apply. If a force majeure is about to occur, occurs, 
or has occurred for which you intend to assert a claim of force 
majeure, you must notify the Administrator in writing as specified in 
Sec.  60.5235(g). You must conduct the initial performance test as soon 
as practicable after the force majeure occurs. The Administrator will 
determine whether or not to grant the extension to the initial 
performance test

[[Page 15436]]

deadline, and will notify you in writing of approval or disapproval of 
the request for an extension as soon as practicable. Until an extension 
of the performance test deadline has been approved by the 
Administrator, you remain strictly subject to the requirements of this 
subpart.

Sec.  60.5190  How do I establish my operating limits?

    (a) You must establish the site-specific operating limits specified 
in paragraphs (b) through (h) of this section or established in Sec.  
60.5175, as applicable, during your initial performance tests required 
in Sec.  60.5185. You must meet the requirements in Sec.  60.5210(d) to 
confirm these operating limits or re-establishre-establish new 
operating limits using operating data recorded during any performance 
tests or performance evaluations required in Sec.  60.5205. You must 
follow the data measurement and recording frequencies and data 
averaging times specified in Table 4 to this subpart or as established 
in Sec.  60.5175, and you must follow the testing, monitoring, and 
calibration requirements specified in Sec. Sec.  60.5220 and 60.5225 or 
established in Sec.  60.5175. You are not required to establish 
operating limits for the operating parameters listed in Table 4 to this 
subpart for a control device if you use a continuous monitoring system 
to demonstrate compliance with the emission limits in Table 2 or 3 to 
this subpart for the applicable pollutants, as follows:
    (1) For a scrubber designed to control emissions of hydrogen 
chloride or sulfur dioxide, you are not required to establish an 
operating limit and monitor scrubber liquid flow rate or scrubber 
liquid pH if you use the continuous monitoring system specified in 
Sec. Sec.  60.4865(b) and 60.4885(b) to demonstrate compliance with the 
emission limit for hydrogen chloride or sulfur dioxide.
    (2) For a scrubber designed to control emissions of particulate 
matter, cadmium, and lead, you are not required to establish an 
operating limit and monitor pressure drop across the scrubber or 
scrubber liquid flow rate if you use the continuous monitoring system 
specified in Sec. Sec.  60.4865(b) and 60.4885(b) to demonstrate 
compliance with the emission limit for particulate matter, cadmium, and 
lead.
    (3) For an electrostatic precipitator designed to control emissions 
of particulate matter, cadmium, and lead, you are not required to 
establish an operating limit and monitor secondary voltage of the 
collection plates, secondary amperage of the collection plates, or 
effluent water flow rate at the outlet of the electrostatic 
precipitator if you use the continuous monitoring system specified in 
Sec. Sec.  60.4865(b) and 60.4885(b) to demonstrate compliance with the 
emission limit for particulate matter, lead, and cadmium.
    (4) For an activated carbon injection system designed to control 
emissions of mercury, you are not required to establish an operating 
limit and monitor sorbent injection rate and carrier gas flow rate (or 
carrier gas pressure drop) if you use the continuous monitoring system 
specified in Sec. Sec.  60.4865(b) and 60.4885(b) to demonstrate 
compliance with the emission limit for mercury.
    (5) For an activated carbon injection system designed to control 
emissions of dioxins/furans, you are not required to establish an 
operating limit and monitor sorbent injection rate and carrier gas flow 
rate (or carrier gas pressure drop) if you use the continuous 
monitoring system specified in Sec. Sec.  60.4865(b) and 60.4885(b) to 
demonstrate compliance with the emission limit for dioxins/furans 
(total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis).
    (b) Minimum pressure drop across each wet scrubber used to meet the 
particulate matter, lead, and cadmium emission limits in Table 2 or 3 
to this subpart, equal to the lowest 4-hour average pressure drop 
across each such wet scrubber measured during the most recent 
performance test demonstrating compliance with the particulate matter, 
lead, and cadmium emission limits.
    (c) Minimum scrubber liquid flow rate (measured at the inlet to 
each wet scrubber), equal to the lowest 4-hour average liquid flow rate 
measured during the most recent performance test demonstrating 
compliance with all applicable emission limits. (d) Minimum scrubber 
liquid pH for each wet scrubber used to meet the sulfur dioxide or 
hydrogen chloride emission limits in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart, 
equal to the lowest 1-hour average scrubber liquid pH measured during 
the most recent performance test demonstrating compliance with the 
sulfur dioxide and hydrogen chloride emission limits.
    (e) Minimum combustion chamber operating temperature (or minimum 
afterburner temperature), equal to the lowest 4-hour average combustion 
chamber operating temperature (or afterburner temperature) measured 
during the most recent performance test demonstrating compliance with 
all applicable emission limits.
    (f) Minimum power input to the electrostatic precipitator 
collection plates, equal to the lowest 4-hour average secondary 
electric power measured during the most recent performance test 
demonstrating compliance with the particulate matter, lead, and cadmium 
emission limits. Power input must be calculated as the product of the 
secondary voltage and secondary amperage to the electrostatic 
precipitator collection plates. Both the secondary voltage and 
secondary amperage must be recorded during the performance test. (g) 
Minimum effluent water flow rate at the outlet of the electrostatic 
precipitator, equal to the lowest 4-hour average effluent water flow 
rate at the outlet of the electrostatic precipitator measured during 
the most recent performance test demonstrating compliance with the 
particulate matter, lead, and cadmium emission limits. (h) For 
activated carbon injection, establish the site-specific operating 
limits specified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (h)(3) of this section.
    (1) Minimum mercury sorbent injection rate, equal to the lowest 4-
hour average mercury sorbent injection rate measured during the most 
recent performance test demonstrating compliance with the mercury 
emission limit.
    (2) Minimum dioxin/furan sorbent injection rate, equal to the 
lowest 4-hour average dioxin/furan sorbent injection rate measured 
during the most recent performance test demonstrating compliance with 
the dioxin/furan (total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis) emission 
limit.
    (3) Minimum carrier gas flow rate or minimum carrier gas pressure 
drop, as follows:
    (i) Minimum carrier gas flow rate, equal to the lowest 4-hour 
average carrier gas flow rate measured during the most recent 
performance test demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission 
limit.
    (ii) Minimum carrier gas pressure drop, equal to the lowest 4-hour 
average carrier gas flow rate measured during the most recent 
performance test demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission 
limit.

Sec.  60.5195  By what date must I conduct the initial air pollution 
control device inspection and make any necessary repairs?

    (a) You must conduct an air pollution control device inspection 
according to Sec.  60.5220(c) by the final compliance date under the 
approved state plan, Federal plan, or delegation, as applicable. For 
air pollution control devices installed after the final compliance 
date, you must conduct the air pollution control device inspection 
within 60 days after installation of the control device.

[[Page 15437]]

    (b) Within 10 operating days following the air pollution control 
device inspection under paragraph (a) of this section, all necessary 
repairs must be completed unless you obtain written approval from the 
Administrator establishing a date whereby all necessary repairs of the 
SSI unit must be completed.

Sec.  60.5200  How do I develop a site-specific monitoring plan for my 
continuous monitoring, bag leak detection, and ash handling systems, 
and by what date must I conduct an initial performance evaluation?

    You must develop and submit to the Administrator for approval a 
site-specific monitoring plan for each continuous monitoring system 
required under this subpart, according to the requirements in 
paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section. This requirement also 
applies to you if you petition the Administrator for alternative 
monitoring parameters under Sec.  60.13(i) and paragraph (e) of this 
section. If you use a continuous automated sampling system to comply 
with the mercury or dioxin/furan (total mass basis or toxic equivalency 
basis) emission limits, you must develop your monitoring plan as 
specified in Sec.  60.58b(q), and you are not required to meet the 
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. You must also 
submit a site-specific monitoring plan for your ash handling system, as 
specified in paragraph (d) of this section. You must submit and update 
your monitoring plans as specified in paragraphs (f) through (h) of 
this section.
    (a) For each continuous monitoring system, your monitoring plan 
must address the elements and requirements specified in paragraphs 
(a)(1) through (a)(8) of this section. You must operate and maintain 
the continuous monitoring system in continuous operation according to 
the site-specific monitoring plan.
    (1) Installation of the continuous monitoring system sampling probe 
or other interface at a measurement location relative to each affected 
process unit such that the measurement is representative of control of 
the exhaust emissions (e.g., on or downstream of the last control 
device).
    (2) Performance and equipment specifications for the sample 
interface, the pollutant concentration or parametric signal analyzer 
and the data collection and reduction systems.
    (3) Performance evaluation procedures and acceptance criteria 
(e.g., calibrations).
    (i) For continuous emissions monitoring systems, your performance 
evaluation and acceptance criteria must include, but is not limited to, 
the following:
    (A) The applicable requirements for continuous emissions monitoring 
systems specified in Sec.  60.13.
    (B) The applicable performance specifications (e.g., relative 
accuracy tests) in appendix B of this part.
    (C) The applicable procedures (e.g., quarterly accuracy 
determinations and daily calibration drift tests) in appendix F of this 
part.
    (D) A discussion of how the occurrence and duration of out-of-
control periods will affect the suitability of CEMS data, where out-of-
control has the meaning given in section (a)(7)(i) of this section.
    (ii) For continuous parameter monitoring systems, your performance 
evaluation and acceptance criteria must include, but is not limited to, 
the following:
    (A) If you have an operating limit that requires the use of a flow 
monitoring system, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs 
(a)(3)(ii)(A)(1) through (4) of this section.
    (1) Install the flow sensor and other necessary equipment in a 
position that provides a representative flow.
    (2) Use a flow sensor with a measurement sensitivity of no greater 
than 2 percent of the expected process flow rate.
    (3) Minimize the effects of swirling flow or abnormal velocity 
distributions due to upstream and downstream disturbances.
    (4) Conduct a flow monitoring system performance evaluation in 
accordance with your monitoring plan at the time of each performance 
test but no less frequently than annually.
    (B) If you have an operating limit that requires the use of a 
pressure monitoring system, you must meet the requirements in 
paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(B)(1) through (6) of this section.
    (1) Install the pressure sensor(s) in a position that provides a 
representative measurement of the pressure (e.g., particulate matter 
scrubber pressure drop).
    (2) Minimize or eliminate pulsating pressure, vibration, and 
internal and external corrosion.
    (3) Use a pressure sensor with a minimum tolerance of 1.27 
centimeters of water or a minimum tolerance of 1 percent of the 
pressure monitoring system operating range, whichever is less.
    (4) Perform checks at least once each process operating day to 
ensure pressure measurements are not obstructed (e.g., check for 
pressure tap pluggage daily).
    (5) Conduct a performance evaluation of the pressure monitoring 
system in accordance with your monitoring plan at the time of each 
performance test but no less frequently than annually.
    (6) If at any time the measured pressure exceeds the manufacturer's 
specified maximum operating pressure range, conduct a performance 
evaluation of the pressure monitoring system in accordance with your 
monitoring plan and confirm that the pressure monitoring system 
continues to meet the performance requirements in your monitoring plan. 
Alternatively, install and verify the operation of a new pressure 
sensor.
    (C) If you have an operating limit that requires a pH monitoring 
system, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(C)(1) 
through (4) of this section.
    (1) Install the pH sensor in a position that provides a 
representative measurement of scrubber effluent pH.
    (2) Ensure the sample is properly mixed and representative of the 
fluid to be measured.
    (3) Conduct a performance evaluation of the pH monitoring system in 
accordance with your monitoring plan at least once each process 
operating day.
    (4) Conduct a performance evaluation (including a two-point 
calibration with one of the two buffer solutions having a pH within 1 
of the operating limit pH level) of the pH monitoring system in 
accordance with your monitoring plan at the time of each performance 
test but no less frequently than quarterly.
    (D) If you have an operating limit that requires the use of a 
temperature measurement device, you must meet the requirements in 
paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(D)(1) through (4) of this section.
    (1) Install the temperature sensor and other necessary equipment in 
a position that provides a representative temperature.
    (2) Use a temperature sensor with a minimum tolerance of 2.8 
degrees Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit), or 1.0 percent of the 
temperature value, whichever is larger, for a noncryogenic temperature 
range.
    (3) Use a temperature sensor with a minimum tolerance of 2.8 
degrees Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit), or 2.5 percent of the 
temperature value, whichever is larger, for a cryogenic temperature 
range.
    (4) Conduct a temperature measurement device performance evaluation 
at the time of each performance test but no less frequently than 
annually.
    (E) If you have an operating limit that requires a secondary 
electric power monitoring system for an electrostatic precipitator, you 
must meet the

[[Page 15438]]

requirements in paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(E)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Install sensors to measure (secondary) voltage and current to 
the electrostatic precipitator collection plates.
    (2) Conduct a performance evaluation of the electric power 
monitoring system in accordance with your monitoring plan at the time 
of each performance test but no less frequently than annually.
    (F) If you have an operating limit that requires the use of a 
monitoring system to measure sorbent injection rate (e.g., weigh belt, 
weigh hopper, or hopper flow measurement device), you must meet the 
requirements in paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(F)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Install the system in a position(s) that provides a 
representative measurement of the total sorbent injection rate.
    (2) Conduct a performance evaluation of the sorbent injection rate 
monitoring system in accordance with your monitoring plan at the time 
of each performance test but no less frequently than annually.
    (4) Ongoing operation and maintenance procedures in accordance with 
the general requirements of Sec.  60.11(d).
    (5) Ongoing data quality assurance procedures in accordance with 
the general requirements of Sec.  60.13.
    (6) Ongoing recordkeeping and reporting procedures in accordance 
with the general requirements of Sec.  60.7(b), (c), (c)(1), (c)(4), 
(d), (e), (f) and (g).
    (7) Provisions for periods when the continuous monitoring system is 
out of control, as follows:
    (i) A continuous monitoring system is out of control if the 
conditions of paragraph (a)(7)(i)(A) or (a)(7)(i)(B) of this section 
are met.
    (A) The zero (low-level), mid-level (if applicable), or high-level 
calibration drift exceeds two times the applicable calibration drift 
specification in the applicable performance specification or in the 
relevant standard.
    (B) The continuous monitoring system fails a performance test audit 
(e.g., cylinder gas audit), relative accuracy audit, relative accuracy 
test audit, or linearity test audit.
    (ii) When the continuous monitoring system is out of control as 
specified in paragraph (a)(7)(i) of this section, you must take the 
necessary corrective action and must repeat all necessary tests that 
indicate that the system is out of control. You must take corrective 
action and conduct retesting until the performance requirements are 
below the applicable limits. The beginning of the out-of-control period 
is the hour you conduct a performance check (e.g., calibration drift) 
that indicates an exceedance of the performance requirements 
established under this part. The end of the out-of-control period is 
the hour following the completion of corrective action and successful 
demonstration that the system is within the allowable limits.
    (8) Schedule for conducting initial and periodic performance 
evaluations of your continuous monitoring systems.
    (b) If a bag leak detection system is used, your monitoring plan 
must include a description of the following items:
    (1) Installation of the bag leak detection system in accordance 
with paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section.
    (i) Install the bag leak detection sensor(s) in a position(s) that 
will be representative of the relative or absolute particulate matter 
loadings for each exhaust stack, roof vent, or compartment (e.g., for a 
positive pressure fabric filter) of the fabric filter.
    (ii) Use a bag leak detection system certified by the manufacturer 
to be capable of detecting particulate matter emissions at 
concentrations of 10 milligrams per actual cubic meter or less.
    (2) Initial and periodic adjustment of the bag leak detection 
system, including how the alarm set-point will be established. Use a 
bag leak detection system equipped with a system that will sound an 
alarm when the system detects an increase in relative particulate 
matter emissions over a preset level. The alarm must be located where 
it is observed readily and any alert is detected and recognized easily 
by plant operating personnel.
    (3) Evaluations of the performance of the bag leak detection 
system, performed in accordance with your monitoring plan and 
consistent with the guidance provided in Fabric Filter Bag Leak 
Detection Guidance, EPA-454/R-98-015, September 1997 (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  60.17).
    (4) Operation of the bag leak detection system, including quality 
assurance procedures.
    (5) Maintenance of the bag leak detection system, including a 
routine maintenance schedule and spare parts inventory list.
    (6) Recordkeeping (including record retention) of the bag leak 
detection system data. Use a bag leak detection system equipped with a 
device to continuously record the output signal from the sensor. (c) 
You must conduct an initial performance evaluation of each continuous 
monitoring system and bag leak detection system, as applicable, in 
accordance with your monitoring plan and to Sec.  60.13(c). For the 
purpose of this subpart, the provisions of Sec.  60.13(c) also apply to 
the bag leak detection system. You must conduct the initial performance 
evaluation of each continuous monitoring system within 60 days of 
installation of the monitoring system
    (d) You must submit a monitoring plan specifying the ash handling 
system operating procedures that you will follow to ensure that you 
meet the fugitive emissions limit specified in Table 2 or 3 to this 
subpart.
    (e) You may submit an application to the Administrator for approval 
of alternate monitoring requirements to demonstrate compliance with the 
standards of this subpart, subject to the provisions of paragraphs 
(e)(1) through (e)(6) of this section.
    (1) The Administrator will not approve averaging periods other than 
those specified in this section, unless you document, using data or 
information, that the longer averaging period will ensure that 
emissions do not exceed levels achieved over the duration of three 
performance test runs.
    (2) If the application to use an alternate monitoring requirement 
is approved, you must continue to use the original monitoring 
requirement until approval is received to use another monitoring 
requirement.
    (3) You must submit the application for approval of alternate 
monitoring requirements no later than the notification of performance 
test. The application must contain the information specified in 
paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (e)(3)(iii) of this section:
    (i) Data or information justifying the request, such as the 
technical or economic infeasibility, or the impracticality of using the 
required approach.
    (ii) A description of the proposed alternative monitoring 
requirement, including the operating parameter to be monitored, the 
monitoring approach and technique, the averaging period for the limit, 
and how the limit is to be calculated.
    (iii) Data or information documenting that the alternative 
monitoring requirement would provide equivalent or better assurance of 
compliance with the relevant emission standard.
    (4) The Administrator will notify you of the approval or denial of 
the application within 90 calendar days after receipt of the original 
request, or within 60 calendar days of the receipt of any supplementary 
information, whichever is later. The Administrator will not approve an 
alternate monitoring application unless it would provide

[[Page 15439]]

equivalent or better assurance of compliance with the relevant emission 
standard. Before disapproving any alternate monitoring application, the 
Administrator will provide the following:
    (i) Notice of the information and findings upon which the intended 
disapproval is based.
    (ii) Notice of opportunity for you to present additional supporting 
information before final action is taken on the application. This 
notice will specify how much additional time is allowed for you to 
provide additional supporting information.
    (5) You are responsible for submitting any supporting information 
in a timely manner to enable the Administrator to consider the 
application prior to the performance test. Neither submittal of an 
application, nor the Administrator's failure to approve or disapprove 
the application relieves you of the responsibility to comply with any 
provision of this subpart.
    (6) The Administrator may decide at any time, on a case-by-case 
basis, that additional or alternative operating limits, or alternative 
approaches to establishing operating limits, are necessary to 
demonstrate compliance with the emission standards of this subpart.
    (f) You must submit your monitoring plans required in paragraphs 
(a) and (b) of this section at least 60 days before your initial 
performance evaluation of your continuous monitoring system(s).
    (g) You must submit your monitoring plan for your ash handling 
system, as required in paragraph (d) of this section, at least 60 days 
before your initial compliance test date.
    (h) You must update and resubmit your monitoring plan if there are 
any changes or potential changes in your monitoring procedures or if 
there is a process change, as defined in Sec.  60.5250.

Model Rule--Continuous Compliance Requirements

Sec.  60.5205  How and when do I demonstrate continuous compliance with 
the emission limits and standards?

    To demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limits and 
standards specified in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart, use the procedures 
specified in paragraph (a) of this section. In lieu of using the 
procedures specified in paragraph (a) of this section, you have the 
option to demonstrate initial compliance using the procedures specified 
in paragraph (b) of this section for particulate matter, hydrogen 
chloride, carbon monoxide, dioxins/furans (total mass basis or toxic 
equivalency basis), mercury, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, cadmium, 
lead, and fugitive emissions from ash handling. You must meet the 
requirements of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, as applicable, 
and paragraphs (c) through (e) of this section, according to the 
performance testing, monitoring, and calibration requirements in Sec.  
60.5220(a) and (b). You may also petition the Administrator for 
alternative monitoring parameters as specified in paragraph (f) of this 
section.
    (a) Demonstrate continuous compliance using a performance test. 
Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(3) and (e) of this section, 
following the date that the initial performance test for each pollutant 
in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart is completed, you must conduct a 
performance test for each such pollutant on an annual basis (between 11 
and 13 calendar months following the previous performance test). The 
performance test must be conducted using the test methods, averaging 
methods, and minimum sampling volumes or durations specified in Table 2 
or 3 to this subpart and according to the testing, monitoring, and 
calibration requirements specified in Sec.  60.5220(a).
    (1) You may conduct a repeat performance test at any time to 
establish new values for the operating limits to apply from that point 
forward. The Administrator may request a repeat performance test at any 
time.
    (2) You must repeat the performance test within 60 days of a 
process change, as defined in Sec.  60.5250.
    (3) Except as specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this 
section, you can conduct performance tests less often for a given 
pollutant, as specified in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (iii) of this 
section.
    (i) You can conduct performance tests less often if your 
performance tests for the pollutant for at least 2 consecutive years 
show that your emissions are at or below 75 percent of the emission 
limit specified in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart, and there are no 
changes in the operation of the affected source or air pollution 
control equipment that could increase emissions. In this case, you do 
not have to conduct a performance test for that pollutant for the next 
2 years. You must conduct a performance test during the third year and 
no more than 37 months after the previous performance test.(ii) If your 
SSI unit continues to meet the emission limit for the pollutant, you 
may choose to conduct performance tests for the pollutant every third 
year if your emissions are at or below 75 percent of the emission 
limit, and if there are no changes in the operation of the affected 
source or air pollution control equipment that could increase 
emissions, but each such performance test must be conducted no more 
than 37 months after the previous performance test.
    (iii) If a performance test shows emissions exceeded 75 percent of 
the emission limit for a pollutant, you must conduct annual performance 
tests for that pollutant until all performance tests over 2 consecutive 
years show compliance.
    (b) Demonstrate continuous compliance using a continuous emissions 
monitoring system or continuous automated sampling system. The option 
to use a continuous emissions monitoring system for hydrogen chloride, 
dioxins/furans, cadmium, or lead takes effect on the date a final 
performance specification applicable to hydrogen chloride, dioxins/
furans, cadmium, or lead is published in the Federal Register. The 
option to use a continuous automated sampling system for dioxins/furans 
takes effect on the date a final performance specification for such a 
continuous automated sampling system is published in the Federal 
Register. Collect data as specified in Sec.  60.5220(b)(6) and use the 
following procedures:
    (1) To demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limits 
for particulate matter, hydrogen chloride, carbon monoxide, dioxins/
furans (total mass basis or toxic equivalency basis), mercury, nitrogen 
oxides, sulfur dioxide, cadmium, and lead, you may substitute the use 
of a continuous monitoring system in lieu of conducting the annual 
performance test required in paragraph (a) of this section, as follows:
    (i) You may substitute the use of a continuous emissions monitoring 
system for any pollutant specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section 
in lieu of conducting the annual performance test for that pollutant in 
paragraph (a) of this section. For determining compliance with the 
carbon monoxide concentration limit using carbon monoxide CEMS, the 
correction to 7 percent oxygen does not apply during periods of startup 
or shutdown. Use the measured carbon monoxide concentration without 
correcting for oxygen concentration in averaging with other carbon 
monoxide concentrations (corrected to 7 percent oxygen) to determine 
the 24-hour average value.
    (ii) You may substitute the use of a continuous automated sampling 
system for mercury or dioxins/furans in lieu of conducting the annual 
mercury or dioxin/furan performance test in paragraph (a) of this 
section.

[[Page 15440]]

    (2) If you use a continuous emissions monitoring system to 
demonstrate compliance with an applicable emission limit in paragraph 
(b)(1) of this section, you must use the continuous emissions 
monitoring system and follow the requirements specified in Sec.  
60.5220(b). You must measure emissions according to Sec.  60.13 to 
calculate 1-hour arithmetic averages, corrected to 7 percent oxygen (or 
carbon dioxide). You must demonstrate initial compliance using a 24-
hour block average of these 1-hour arithmetic average emission 
concentrations, calculated using Equation 19-19 in section 12.4.1 of 
Method 19 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7.
    (3) If you use a continuous automated sampling system to 
demonstrate compliance with an applicable emission limit in paragraph 
(b)(1) of this section, you must:
    (i) Use the continuous automated sampling system specified in Sec.  
60.58b(p) and (q), and measure and calculate average emissions 
corrected to 7 percent oxygen (or carbon dioxide) according to Sec.  
60.58b(p) and your monitoring plan.
    (A) Use the procedures specified in Sec.  60.58b(p) to calculate 
24-hour averages to determine compliance with the mercury emission 
limit in Table 2 to this subpart.
    (B) Use the procedures specified in Sec.  60.58b(p) to calculate 2-
week averages to determine compliance with the dioxin/furan (total mass 
basis or toxic equivalency basis) emission limits in Table 2 to this 
subpart.
    (ii) Update your monitoring plan as specified in Sec.  60.4880(e). 
For mercury continuous automated sampling systems, you must use 
Performance Specification 12B of appendix B of part 75 and Procedure 5 
of appendix F of this part.
    (4) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, you must 
complete your periodic performance evaluations required in your 
monitoring plan for any continuous emissions monitoring systems and 
continuous automated sampling systems, according to the schedule 
specified in your monitoring plan. If you were previously determining 
compliance by conducting an annual performance test (or according to 
the less frequent testing for a pollutant as provided in paragraph 
(a)(3) of this section), you must complete the initial performance 
evaluation required under your monitoring plan in Sec.  60.5200 for the 
continuous monitoring system prior to using the continuous emissions 
monitoring system to demonstrate compliance or continuous automated 
sampling system. Your performance evaluation must be conducted using 
the procedures and acceptance criteria specified in Sec.  
60.5200(a)(3).
    (c) To demonstrate compliance with the dioxins/furans toxic 
equivalency emission limit in paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, you 
must determine dioxins/furans toxic equivalency as follows:
    (1) Measure the concentration of each dioxin/furan tetra- through 
octachlorinated-isomer emitted using Method 23 at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-7.
    (2) For each dioxin/furan (tetra- through octachlorinated) isomer 
measured in accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of this section, multiply 
the isomer concentration by its corresponding toxic equivalency factor 
specified in Table 5 to this subpart.
    (3) Sum the products calculated in accordance with paragraph (c)(2) 
of this section to obtain the total concentration of dioxins/furans 
emitted in terms of toxic equivalency.
    (d) You must submit an annual compliance report as specified in 
Sec.  60.5235(c). You must submit a deviation report as specified in 
Sec.  60.5235(d) for each instance that you did not meet each emission 
limit in Table 2 to this subpart.
    (e) If you demonstrate continuous compliance using a performance 
test, as specified in paragraph (a) of this section, then the 
provisions of this paragraph (e) apply. If a force majeure is about to 
occur, occurs, or has occurred for which you intend to assert a claim 
of force majeure, you must notify the Administrator in writing as 
specified in Sec.  60.5235(g). You must conduct the performance test as 
soon as practicable after the force majeure occurs. The Administrator 
will determine whether or not to grant the extension to the performance 
test deadline, and will notify you in writing of approval or 
disapproval of the request for an extension as soon as practicable. 
Until an extension of the performance test deadline has been approved 
by the Administrator, you remain strictly subject to the requirements 
of this subpart.
    (f) After any initial requests in Sec.  60.5200 for alternative 
monitoring requirements for initial compliance, you may subsequently 
petition the Administrator for alternative monitoring parameters as 
specified in Sec. Sec.  60.13(i) and 60.5200(e).

Sec.  60.5210  How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with my 
operating limits?

    You must continuously monitor your operating parameters as 
specified in paragraph (a) of this section and meet the requirements of 
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, according to the monitoring and 
calibration requirements in Sec.  60.5225. You must confirm and re-
establish your operating limits as specified in paragraph (d) of this 
section.
    (a) You must continuously monitor the operating parameters 
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section using the 
continuous monitoring equipment and according to the procedures 
specified in Sec.  60.5225 or established in Sec.  60.5175. To 
determine compliance, you must use the data averaging period specified 
in Table 4 to this subpart (except for alarm time of the baghouse leak 
detection system) unless a different averaging period is established 
under Sec.  60.5175.
    (1) You must demonstrate that the SSI unit meets the operating 
limits established according to Sec. Sec.  60.5175 and 60.5190 and 
paragraph (d) of this section for each applicable operating parameter.
    (2) You must demonstrate that the SSI unit meets the operating 
limit for bag leak detection systems as follows:
    (i) For a bag leak detection system, you must calculate the alarm 
time as follows:
    (A) If inspection of the fabric filter demonstrates that no 
corrective action is required, no alarm time is counted.
    (B) If corrective action is required, each alarm time shall be 
counted as a minimum of 1 hour.
    (C) If you take longer than 1 hour to initiate corrective action, 
each alarm time (i.e., time that the alarm sounds) is counted as the 
actual amount of time taken by you to initiate corrective action.
    (ii) Your maximum alarm time is equal to 5 percent of the operating 
time during a 6-month period, as specified in Sec.  60.5170(c).
    (b) Operation above the established maximum, below the established 
minimum, or outside the allowable range of the operating limits 
specified in paragraph (a) of this section constitutes a deviation from 
your operating limits established under this subpart, except during 
performance tests conducted to determine compliance with the emission 
and operating limits or to establish new operating limits. You must 
submit the deviation report specified in Sec.  60.5235(d) for each 
instance that you did not meet one of your operating limits established 
under this subpart.
    (c) You must submit the annual compliance report specified in Sec.  
60.5235(c) to demonstrate continuous compliance.

[[Page 15441]]

    (d) You must confirm your operating limits according to paragraph 
(d)(1) of this section or re-establish operating limits according to 
paragraph (d)(2) of this section. Your operating limits must be 
established so as to assure ongoing compliance with the emission 
limits. These requirements also apply to your operating requirements in 
your fugitive emissions monitoring plan specified in Sec.  60.5170(d).
    (1) Your operating limits must be based on operating data recorded 
during any performance test required in Sec.  60.5205(a) or any 
performance evaluation required in Sec.  60.5205(b)(4).
    (2) You may conduct a repeat performance test at any time to 
establish new values for the operating limits to apply from that point 
forward.

Sec.  60.5215  By what date must I conduct annual air pollution control 
device inspections and make any necessary repairs?

    (a) You must conduct an annual inspection of each air pollution 
control device used to comply with the emission limits, according to 
Sec.  60.5220(c), no later than 12 months following the previous annual 
air pollution control device inspection.
    (b) Within 10 operating days following an air pollution control 
device inspection, all necessary repairs must be completed unless you 
obtain written approval from the Administrator establishing a date 
whereby all necessary repairs of the affected SSI unit must be 
completed.

Model Rule--Performance Testing, Monitoring, and Calibration 
Requirements

Sec.  60.5220  What are the performance testing, monitoring, and 
calibration requirements for compliance with the emission limits and 
standards?

    You must meet, as applicable, the performance testing requirements 
specified in paragraph (a) of this section, the monitoring requirements 
specified in paragraph (b) of this section, the air pollution control 
device inspections requirements specified in paragraph (c) of this 
section, and the bypass stack provisions specified in paragraph (d) of 
this section.
    (a) Performance testing requirements.
    (1) All performance tests must consist of a minimum of three test 
runs conducted under conditions representative of normal operations, as 
specified in Sec.  60.8(c). Emissions in excess of the emission limits 
or standards during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction are 
considered deviations from the applicable emission limits or standards.
    (2) You must document that the dry sludge burned during the 
performance test is representative of the sludge burned under normal 
operating conditions by:
    (i) Maintaining a log of the quantity of sewage sludge burned 
during the performance test by continuously monitoring and recording 
the average hourly rate that sewage sludge is fed to the incinerator.
    (ii) Maintaining a log of the moisture content of the sewage sludge 
burned during the performance test by taking grab samples of the sewage 
sludge fed to the incinerator for each 8 hour period that testing is 
conducted.
    (3) All performance tests must be conducted using the test methods, 
minimum sampling volume, observation period, and averaging method 
specified in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart.
    (4) Method 1 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A must be used to select 
the sampling location and number of traverse points.
    (5) Method 3A or 3B at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2 must be used 
for gas composition analysis, including measurement of oxygen 
concentration. Method 3A or 3B at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2 must be 
used simultaneously with each method.
    (6) All pollutant concentrations must be adjusted to 7 percent 
oxygen using Equation 1 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21MR11.020

Where:

Cadj = Pollutant concentration adjusted to 7 percent 
oxygen.
Cmeas = Pollutant concentration measured on a dry basis.
(20.9 - 7) = 20.9 percent oxygen - 7 percent oxygen (defined oxygen 
correction basis).
20.9 = Oxygen concentration in air, percent.
%O2 = Oxygen concentration measured on a dry basis, 
percent.

    (7) Performance tests must be conducted and data reduced in 
accordance with the test methods and procedures contained in this 
subpart unless the Administrator does one of the following.
    (i) Specifies or approves, in specific cases, the use of a method 
with minor changes in methodology.
    (ii) Approves the use of an equivalent method.
    (iii) Approves the use of an alternative method the results of 
which he has determined to be adequate for indicating whether a 
specific source is in compliance.
    (iv) Waives the requirement for performance tests because you have 
demonstrated by other means to the Administrator's satisfaction that 
the affected SSI unit is in compliance with the standard.
    (v) Approves shorter sampling times and smaller sample volumes when 
necessitated by process variables or other factors. Nothing in this 
paragraph is construed to abrogate the Administrator's authority to 
require testing under section 114 of the Clean Air Act.
    (8) You must provide the Administrator at least 30 days prior 
notice of any performance test, except as specified under other 
subparts, to afford the Administrator the opportunity to have an 
observer present. If after 30 days notice for an initially scheduled 
performance test, there is a delay (due to operational problems, etc.) 
in conducting the scheduled performance test, you must notify the 
Administrator as soon as possible of any delay in the original test 
date, either by providing at least 7 days prior notice of the 
rescheduled date of the performance test, or by arranging a rescheduled 
date with the Administrator by mutual agreement.
    (9) You must provide, or cause to be provided, performance testing 
facilities as follows:
    (i) Sampling ports adequate for the test methods applicable to the 
SSI unit, as follows:
    (A) Constructing the air pollution control system such that 
volumetric flow rates and pollutant emission rates can be accurately 
determined by applicable test methods and procedures.
    (B) Providing a stack or duct free of cyclonic flow during 
performance tests, as demonstrated by applicable test methods and 
procedures.
    (ii) Safe sampling platform(s).
    (iii) Safe access to sampling platform(s).
    (iv) Utilities for sampling and testing equipment.
    (10) Unless otherwise specified in this subpart, each performance 
test must consist of three separate runs using the applicable test 
method. Each run must be conducted for the time and under the 
conditions specified in the applicable standard. Compliance with each

[[Page 15442]]

emission limit must be determined by calculating the arithmetic mean of 
the three runs. In the event that a sample is accidentally lost or 
conditions occur in which one of the three runs must be discontinued 
because of forced shutdown, failure of an irreplaceable portion of the 
sample train, extreme meteorological conditions, or other 
circumstances, beyond your control, compliance may, upon the 
Administrator's approval, be determined using the arithmetic mean of 
the results of the two other runs.
    (11) During each test run specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this 
section, you must operate your sewage sludge incinerator at a minimum 
of 85 percent of your maximum permitted capacity.
    (b) Continuous monitor requirements. You must meet the following 
requirements, as applicable, when using a continuous monitoring system 
to demonstrate compliance with the emission limits in Table 2 or 3 to 
this subpart. The option to use a continuous emissions monitoring 
system for hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans, cadmium, or lead takes 
effect on the date a final performance specification applicable to 
hydrogen chloride, dioxins/furans, cadmium, or lead is published in the 
Federal Register. If you elect to use a continuous emissions monitoring 
system instead of conducting annual performance testing, you must meet 
the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(6) of this section. 
If you elect to use a continuous automated sampling system instead of 
conducting annual performance testing, you must meet the requirements 
of paragraph (b)(7) of this section. The option to use a continuous 
automated sampling system for dioxins/furans takes effect on the date a 
final performance specification for such a continuous automated 
sampling system is published in the Federal Register.
    (1) You must notify the Administrator 1 month before starting use 
of the continuous emissions monitoring system.
    (2) You must notify the Administrator 1 month before stopping use 
of the continuous emissions monitoring system, in which case you must 
also conduct a performance test within prior to ceasing operation of 
the system.
    (3) You must install, operate, calibrate, and maintain an 
instrument for continuously measuring and recording the emissions to 
the atmosphere in accordance with the following:
    (i) Section 60.13 of subpart A of this part.
    (ii) The following performance specifications of appendix B of this 
part, as applicable:
    (A) For particulate matter, Performance Specification 11 of 
appendix B of this part.
    (B) For hydrogen chloride, Performance Specification 15 of appendix 
B of this part.
    (C) For carbon monoxide, Performance Specification 4B of appendix B 
of this part with spans appropriate to the applicable emission limit.
    (D) [Reserved]
    (E) For mercury, Performance Specification 12A of appendix B of 
this part.
    (F) For nitrogen oxides, Performance Specification 2 of appendix B 
of this part.
    (G) For sulfur dioxide, Performance Specification 2 of appendix B 
of this part.
    (iii) For continuous emissions monitoring systems, the quality 
assurance procedures (e.g., quarterly accuracy determinations and daily 
calibration drift tests) of appendix F of this part specified in 
paragraphs (b)(3)(iii)(A) through (b)(3)(iii)(G) of this section. For 
each pollutant, the span value of the continuous emissions monitoring 
system is two times the applicable emission limit, expressed as a 
concentration.
    (A) For particulate matter, Procedure 2 in appendix F of this part.
    (B) For hydrogen chloride, Procedure 1 in appendix F of this part 
except that the Relative Accuracy Test Audit requirements of Procedure 
1 shall be replaced with the validation requirements and criteria of 
sections 11.1.1 and 12.0 of Performance Specification 15 of appendix B 
of this part.
    (C) For carbon monoxide, Procedure 1 in appendix F of this part.
    (D) [Reserved]
    (E) For mercury, Procedures 5 in appendix F of this part.
    (F) For nitrogen oxides, Procedure 1 in appendix F of this part.
    (G) For sulfur dioxide, Procedure 1 in appendix F of this part.
    (iv) If your monitoring system has a malfunction or out-of-control 
period, you must complete repairs and resume operation of your 
monitoring system as expeditiously as possible.
    (4) During each relative accuracy test run of the continuous 
emissions monitoring system using the performance specifications in 
paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section, emission data for each regulated 
pollutant and oxygen (or carbon dioxide as established in (b)(5) of 
this section) must be collected concurrently (or within a 30- to 60-
minute period) by both the continuous emissions monitoring systems and 
the test methods specified in paragraph (b)(4)(i) through (b)(4)(viii) 
of this section. Relative accuracy testing must be at representative 
operating conditions while the SSI unit is charging sewage sludge.
    (i) For particulate matter, Method 5 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-
3 or Method 26A or 29 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-8 shall be used.
    (ii) For hydrogen chloride, Method 26 or 26A at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-8, shall be used, as specified in Tables 1 and 2 to this 
subpart.
    (iii) For carbon monoxide, Method 10, 10A, or 10B at 40 CFR part 
60, appendix A-4, shall be used.
    (iv) For dioxins/furans, Method 23 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7, 
shall be used.
    (v) For mercury, cadmium, and lead, Method 29 at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-8, shall be used. Alternatively for mercury, either Method 
30B at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-8 or ASTM D6784-02 (Reapproved 2008) 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  60.17), may be used.
    (vi) For nitrogen oxides, Method 7 or 7E at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-4, shall be used.
    (vii) For sulfur dioxide, Method 6 or 6C at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-4, or as an alternative ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  60.17) must be used. For sources 
that have actual inlet emissions less than 100 parts per million dry 
volume, the relative accuracy criterion for the inlet of the sulfur 
dioxide continuous emissions monitoring system should be no greater 
than 20 percent of the mean value of the method test data in terms of 
the units of the emission standard, or 5 parts per million dry volume 
absolute value of the mean difference between the method and the 
continuous emissions monitoring system, whichever is greater.
    (viii) For oxygen (or carbon dioxide as established in (b)(5) of 
this section), Method 3A or 3B at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2, or as 
an alternative ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  60.17), as applicable, must be used.
    (5) You may request that compliance with the emission limits be 
determined using carbon dioxide measurements corrected to an equivalent 
of 7 percent oxygen. If carbon dioxide is selected for use in diluent 
corrections, the relationship between oxygen and carbon dioxide levels 
must be established during the initial performance test according to 
the procedures and methods specified in paragraphs (b)(5)(i)

[[Page 15443]]

through (b)(5)(iv) of this section. This relationship may be re-
established during subsequent performance tests.
    (i) The fuel factor equation in Method 3B at 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-2 must be used to determine the relationship between oxygen 
and carbon dioxide at a sampling location. Method 3A or 3B at 50 CFR 
part 60, appendix A-2, or as an alternative ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  60.17), as applicable, must be 
used to determine the oxygen concentration at the same location as the 
carbon dioxide monitor.
    (ii) Samples must be taken for at least 30 minutes in each hour.
    (iii) Each sample must represent a 1-hour average.
    (iv) A minimum of three runs must be performed.
    (6) You must operate the continuous monitoring system and collect 
data with the continuous monitoring system as follows:
    (i) You must collect data using the continuous monitoring system at 
all times the affected SSI unit is operating and at the intervals 
specified in paragraph (b)(6)(ii) of this section, except for periods 
of monitoring system malfunctions that occur during periods specified 
in Sec.  60.5200(a)(7)(i), repairs associated with monitoring system 
malfunctions, and required monitoring system quality assurance or 
quality control activities (including, as applicable, calibration 
checks and required zero and span adjustments). Any such periods that 
you do not collect data using the continuous monitoring system 
constitute a deviation from the monitoring requirements and must be 
reported in a deviation report.
    (ii) You must collect continuous emissions monitoring system data 
in accordance with Sec.  60.13(e)(2).
    (iii) Any data collected during monitoring system malfunctions, 
repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions, or required 
monitoring system quality assurance or control activities must not be 
included in calculations used to report emissions or operating levels. 
Any such periods must be reported in a deviation report.
    (iv) Any data collected during periods when the monitoring system 
is out of control as specified in Sec.  60.4880(a)(7)(i), repairs 
associated with periods when the monitoring system is out of control, 
or required monitoring system quality assurance or control activities 
conducted during out-of-control periods must not be included in 
calculations used to report emissions or operating levels. Any such 
periods that do not coincide with a monitoring system malfunction as 
defined in Sec.  60.5250, constitute a deviation from the monitoring 
requirements and must be reported in a deviation report.
    (v) You must use all the data collected during all periods except 
those periods specified in paragraphs (b)(6)(iii) and (b)(6)(iv) of 
this section in assessing the operation of the control device and 
associated control system.
    (7) If you elect to use a continuous automated sampling system 
instead of conducting annual performance testing, you must:
    (i) Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous 
automated sampling system according to the site-specific monitoring 
plan developed in Sec.  60.58b(p)(1) through (p)(6), (p)(9), (p)(10), 
and (q).
    (ii) Collect data according to Sec.  60.58b(p)(5) and paragraph 
(b)(6) of this section.
    (c) Air pollution control device inspections. You must conduct air 
pollution control device inspections that include, at a minimum, the 
following:
    (1) Inspect air pollution control device(s) for proper operation.
    (2) Generally observe that the equipment is maintained in good 
operating condition.
    (3) Develop a site-specific monitoring plan according to the 
requirements in Sec.  60.5200. This requirement also applies to you if 
you petition the EPA Administrator for alternative monitoring 
parameters under Sec.  60.13(i). (d) Bypass stack. Use of the bypass 
stack at any time that sewage sludge is being charged to the SSI unit 
is an emissions standards deviation for all pollutants listed in Table 
2 or 3 to this subpart. The use of the bypass stack during a 
performance test invalidates the performance test.

Sec.  60.5225  What are the monitoring and calibration requirements for 
compliance with my operating limits?

    (a) You must install, operate, calibrate, and maintain the 
continuous parameter monitoring systems according to the requirements 
in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Meet the following general requirements for flow, pressure, pH, 
and operating temperature measurement devices:
    (i) You must collect data using the continuous monitoring system at 
all times the affected SSI unit is operating and at the intervals 
specified in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, except for periods 
of monitoring system malfunctions that occur during periods specified 
defined in Sec.  60.5200(a)(7)(i), repairs associated with monitoring 
system malfunctions, and required monitoring system quality assurance 
or quality control activities (including, as applicable, calibration 
checks and required zero and span adjustments). Any such periods that 
you do not collect data using the continuous monitoring system 
constitute a deviation from the monitoring requirements and must be 
reported in a deviation report.
    (ii) You must collect continuous parameter monitoring system data 
in accordance with Sec.  60.13(e)(2).
    (iii) Any data collected during monitoring system malfunctions, 
repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions, or required 
monitoring system quality assurance or control activities must not be 
included in calculations used to report emissions or operating levels. 
Any such periods must be reported in your annual deviation report.
    (iv) Any data collected during periods when the monitoring system 
is out of control as specified in Sec.  60.5200(a)(7)(i) must not be 
included in calculations used to report emissions or operating levels. 
Any such periods that do not coincide with a monitoring system 
malfunction, as defined in Sec.  60.5250, constitute a deviation from 
the monitoring requirements and must be reported in a deviation report.
    (v) You must use all the data collected during all periods except 
those periods specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (a)(1)(iv) of 
this section in assessing the operation of the control device and 
associated control system.
    (vi) Record the results of each inspection, calibration, and 
validation check.
    (2) Operate and maintain your continuous monitoring system 
according to your monitoring plan required under Sec.  60.4880. 
Additionally:
    (i) For carrier gas flow rate monitors (for activated carbon 
injection), during the performance test conducted pursuant to Sec.  
60.4885, you must demonstrate that the system is maintained within +/-5 
percent accuracy, according to the procedures in appendix A to part 75 
of this chapter.
    (ii) For carrier gas pressure drop monitors (for activated carbon 
injection), during the performance test conducted pursuant to Sec.  
60.4885, you must demonstrate that the system is maintained within +/-5 
percent accuracy.
    (b) You must operate and maintain your bag leak detection system in 
continuous operation according to your monitoring plan required under 
Sec.  60.4880. Additionally:
    (1) For positive pressure fabric filter systems that do not duct 
all

[[Page 15444]]

compartments of cells to a common stack, a bag leak detection system 
must be installed in each baghouse compartment or cell.
    (2) Where multiple bag leak detectors are required, the system's 
instrumentation and alarm may be shared among detectors.
    (3) You must initiate procedures to determine the cause of every 
alarm within 8 hours of the alarm, and you must alleviate the cause of 
the alarm within 24 hours of the alarm by taking whatever corrective 
action(s) are necessary. Corrective actions may include, but are not 
limited to the following:
    (i) Inspecting the fabric filter for air leaks, torn or broken bags 
or filter media, or any other condition that may cause an increase in 
particulate matter emissions.
    (ii) Sealing off defective bags or filter media.
    (iii) Replacing defective bags or filter media or otherwise 
repairing the control device.
    (iv) Sealing off a defective fabric filter compartment.
    (v) Cleaning the bag leak detection system probe or otherwise 
repairing the bag leak detection system.
    (vi) Shutting down the process producing the particulate matter 
emissions.
    (c) You must operate and maintain the continuous parameter 
monitoring systems specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section 
in continuous operation according to your monitoring plan required 
under Sec.  60.4880.
    (d) If your SSI unit has a bypass stack, you must install, 
calibrate (to manufacturers' specifications), maintain, and operate a 
device or method for measuring the use of the bypass stack including 
date, time, and duration.

Model Rule--Recordkeeping and Reporting

Sec.  60.5230  What records must I keep?

    You must maintain the items (as applicable) specified in paragraphs 
(a) through (n) of this section for a period of at least 5 years. All 
records must be available on site in either paper copy or computer-
readable format that can be printed upon request, unless an alternative 
format is approved by the Administrator.
    (a) Date. Calendar date of each record.
    (b) Increments of progress. Copies of the final control plan and 
any additional notifications, reported under Sec.  60.5235.
    (c) Operator Training. Documentation of the operator training 
procedures and records specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of 
this section. You must make available and readily accessible at the 
facility at all times for all SSI unit operators the documentation 
specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
    (1) Documentation of the following operator training procedures and 
information:
    (i) Summary of the applicable standards under this subpart.
    (ii) Procedures for receiving, handling, and feeding sewage sludge.
    (iii) Incinerator startup, shutdown, and malfunction preventative 
and corrective procedures.
    (iv) Procedures for maintaining proper combustion air supply 
levels.
    (v) Procedures for operating the incinerator and associated air 
pollution control systems within the standards established under this 
subpart.
    (vi) Monitoring procedures for demonstrating compliance with the 
incinerator operating limits.
    (vii) Reporting and recordkeeping procedures.
    (viii) Procedures for handling ash.
    (ix) A list of the materials burned during the performance test, if 
in addition to sewage sludge.
    (x) For each qualified operator and other plant personnel who may 
operate the unit according to the provisions of Sec.  60.5155(a), the 
phone and/or pager number at which they can be reached during operating 
hours.
    (2) Records showing the names of SSI unit operators and other plant 
personnel who may operate the unit according to the provisions of Sec.  
60.5155(a), as follows:
    (i) Records showing the names of SSI unit operators and other plant 
personnel who have completed review of the information in paragraph 
(c)(1) of this section as required by Sec.  60.5160(b), including the 
date of the initial review and all subsequent annual reviews.
    (ii) Records showing the names of the SSI operators who have 
completed the operator training requirements under Sec.  60.5130, met 
the criteria for qualification under Sec.  60.5140, and maintained or 
renewed their qualification under Sec.  60.5145 or Sec.  60.5150. 
Records must include documentation of training, including the dates of 
their initial qualification and all subsequent renewals of such 
qualifications.
    (3) Records showing the periods when no qualified operators were 
accessible for more than 8 hours, but less than 2 weeks, as required in 
Sec.  60.5155(a).
    (4) Records showing the periods when no qualified operators were 
accessible for 2 weeks or more along with copies of reports submitted 
as required in Sec.  60.5155(b).
    (d) Air pollution control device inspections. Records of the 
results of initial and annual air pollution control device inspections 
conducted as specified in Sec. Sec.  60.5195 and 60.5220(c), including 
any required maintenance and any repairs not completed within 10 days 
of an inspection or the timeframe established by the Administrator.
    (e) Performance test reports.
    (1) The results of the initial, annual, and any subsequent 
performance tests conducted to determine compliance with the emission 
limits and standards and/or to establish operating limits, as 
applicable.
    (2) Retain a copy of the complete performance test report, 
including calculations.
    (3) Keep a record of the hourly dry sludge feed rate measured 
during performance test runs as specified in Sec.  60.5220(a)(2)(i).
    (4) Keep any necessary records to demonstrate that the performance 
test was conducted under conditions representative of normal 
operations, including a record of the moisture content measured as 
required in Sec.  60.5220(a)(2)(ii) for each grab sample taken of the 
sewage sludge burned during the performance test.
    (f) Continuous monitoring data. Records of the following data, as 
applicable:
    (1) For continuous emissions monitoring systems, all 1-hour average 
concentrations of particulate matter, hydrogen chloride, carbon 
monoxide, dioxins/furans total mass basis, mercury, nitrogen oxides, 
sulfur dioxide, cadmium, and lead emissions.
    (2) For continuous automated sampling systems, all average 
concentrations measured for mercury and dioxins/furans total mass basis 
at the frequencies specified in your monitoring plan.
    (3) For continuous parameter monitoring systems:
    (i) All 1-hour average values recorded for the following operating 
parameters, as applicable:
    (A) Combustion chamber operating temperature (or afterburner 
temperature).
    (B) If a wet scrubber is used to comply with the rule, pressure 
drop across each wet scrubber system and liquid flow rate to each wet 
scrubber used to comply with the emission limit in Table 2 or 3 to this 
subpart for particulate matter, cadmium, or lead, and scrubber liquid 
flow rate and scrubber liquid pH for each wet scrubber used to comply 
with an emission limit in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart for sulfur 
dioxide or hydrogen chloride.

[[Page 15445]]

    (C) If an electrostatic precipitator is used to comply with the 
rule, secondary voltage of the electrostatic precipitator collection 
plates and secondary amperage of the electrostatic precipitator 
collection plates, and effluent water flow rate at the outlet of the 
wet electrostatic precipitator.
    (D) If activated carbon injection is used to comply with the rule, 
sorbent flow rate and carrier gas flow rate or pressure drop, as 
applicable.
    (ii) All daily average values recorded for the feed rate and 
moisture content of the sewage sludge fed to the sewage sludge 
incinerator, monitored and calculated as specified in Sec.  60.5170(f).
    (iii) If a fabric filter is used to comply with the rule, the date, 
time, and duration of each alarm and the time corrective action was 
initiated and completed, and a brief description of the cause of the 
alarm and the corrective action taken. You must also record the percent 
of operating time during each 6-month period that the alarm sounds, 
calculated as specified in Sec.  60.5210.
    (iv) For other control devices for which you must establish 
operating limits under Sec.  60.5175, you must maintain data collected 
for all operating parameters used to determine compliance with the 
operating limits, at the frequencies specified in your monitoring plan.
    (g) Other records for continuous monitoring systems. You must keep 
the following records, as applicable:
    (1) Keep records of any notifications to the Administrator in Sec.  
60.4915(h)(1) of starting or stopping use of a continuous monitoring 
system for determining compliance with any emissions limit.
    (2) Keep records of any requests under Sec.  60.5220(b)(5) that 
compliance with the emission limits be determined using carbon dioxide 
measurements corrected to an equivalent of 7 percent oxygen.
    (3) If activated carbon injection is used to comply with the rule, 
the type of sorbent used and any changes in the type of sorbent used.
    (h) Deviation Reports. Records of any deviation reports submitted 
under Sec.  60.5235(e) and (f).
    (i) Equipment specifications and operation and maintenance 
requirements. Equipment specifications and related operation and 
maintenance requirements received from vendors for the incinerator, 
emission controls, and monitoring equipment.
    (j) Inspections, calibrations, and validation checks of monitoring 
devices. Records of inspections, calibration, and validation checks of 
any monitoring devices as required under Sec. Sec.  60.5220 and 
60.5225.
    (k) Monitoring plan and performance evaluations for continuous 
monitoring systems. Records of the monitoring plans required under 
Sec.  60.5200, and records of performance evaluations required under 
Sec.  60.5205(b)(5).(l) Less frequent testing. If, consistent with 
60.5205(a)(3), you elect to conduct performance tests less frequently 
than annually, you must keep annual records that document that your 
emissions in the two previous consecutive years were at or below 75 
percent of the applicable emission limit in Table 1 or 2 to this 
subpart, and document that there were no changes in source operations 
or air pollution control equipment that would cause emissions of the 
relevant pollutant to increase within the past 2 years.
    (m) Use of bypass stack. Records indicating use of the bypass 
stack, including dates, times, and durations as required under Sec.  
60.5225(d).
    (n) If a malfunction occurs, you must keep a record of the 
information submitted in your annual report in Sec.  60.5235(c)(16).

Sec.  60.5235  What reports must I submit?

    You must submit the reports specified in paragraphs (a) through (i) 
of this section. See Table 6 to this subpart for a summary of these 
reports.
    (a) Increments of progress report. If you plan to achieve 
compliance more than 1 year following the effective date of state plan 
approval, you must submit the following reports, as applicable:
    (1) A final control plan as specified in Sec. Sec.  60.5085(a) and 
60.5110.
    (2) You must submit your notification of achievement of increments 
of progress no later than 10 business days after the compliance date 
for the increment as specified in Sec. Sec.  60.5095 and 60.5100.
    (3) If you fail to meet an increment of progress, you must submit a 
notification to the Administrator postmarked within 10 business days 
after the date for that increment, as specified in Sec.  60.5105.
    (4) If you plan to close your SSI unit rather than comply with the 
state plan, submit a closure notification as specified in Sec.  
60.5125.
    (b) Initial compliance report. You must submit the following 
information no later than 60 days following the initial performance 
test.
    (1) Company name, physical address, and mailing address.
    (2) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's name, 
title, and signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of the 
report.
    (3) Date of report.
    (4) The complete test report for the initial performance test 
results obtained by using the test methods specified in Table 2 or 3 to 
this subpart.
    (5) If an initial performance evaluation of a continuous monitoring 
system was conducted, the results of that initial performance 
evaluation.
    (6) The values for the site-specific operating limits established 
pursuant to Sec. Sec.  60.5170 and 60.5175 and the calculations and 
methods, as applicable, used to establish each operating limit.
    (7) If you are using a fabric filter to comply with the emission 
limits, documentation that a bag leak detection system has been 
installed and is being operated, calibrated, and maintained as required 
by Sec.  60.5170(b).
    (8) The results of the initial air pollution control device 
inspection required in Sec.  60.5195, including a description of 
repairs.
    (9) The site-specific monitoring plan required under Sec.  60.5200, 
at least 60 days before your initial performance evaluation of your 
continuous monitoring system.
    (10) The site-specific monitoring plan for your ash handling system 
required under Sec.  60.5200, at least 60 days before your initial 
performance test to demonstrate compliance with your fugitive ash 
emission limit.
    (c) Annual compliance report. You must submit an annual compliance 
report that includes the items listed in paragraphs (c)(1) through 
(c)(16) of this section for the reporting period specified in paragraph 
(c)(3) of this section. You must submit your first annual compliance 
report no later than 12 months following the submission of the initial 
compliance report in paragraph (b) of this section. You must submit 
subsequent annual compliance reports no more than 12 months following 
the previous annual compliance report. (You may be required to submit 
these reports (or additional compliance information) more frequently by 
the title V operating permit required in Sec.  60.5240.)
    (1) Company name, physical address, and mailing address.
    (2) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's name, 
title, and signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of the 
report.
    (3) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the reporting 
period.
    (4) If a performance test was conducted during the reporting 
period, the results of that performance test.
    (i) If operating limits were established during the performance 
test, include the value for each operating limit and, as applicable, 
the method used to establish each operating limit, including 
calculations.

[[Page 15446]]

    (ii) If activated carbon is used during the performance test, 
include the type of activated carbon used.
    (5) For each pollutant and operating parameter recorded using a 
continuous monitoring system, the highest average value and lowest 
average value recorded during the reporting period, as follows:
    (i) For continuous emission monitoring systems and continuous 
automated sampling systems, report the highest and lowest 24-hour 
average emission value.
    (ii) For continuous parameter monitoring systems, report the 
following values:
    (A) For all operating parameters except scrubber liquid pH, the 
highest and lowest 12-hour average values.
    (B) For scrubber liquid pH, the highest and lowest 3-hour average 
values.
    (6) If there are no deviations during the reporting period from any 
emission limit, emission standard, or operating limit that applies to 
you, a statement that there were no deviations from the emission 
limits, emission standard, or operating limits.
    (7) Information for bag leak detection systems recorded under Sec.  
60.5230(f)(3)(iii).
    (8) If a performance evaluation of a continuous monitoring system 
was conducted, the results of that performance evaluation. If new 
operating limits were established during the performance evaluation, 
include your calculations for establishing those operating limits.
    (9) If you elect to conduct performance tests less frequently as 
allowed in Sec.  60.5205(a)(3) and did not conduct a performance test 
during the reporting period, you must include the dates of the last two 
performance tests, a comparison of the emission level you achieved in 
the last two performance tests to the 75 percent emission limit 
threshold specified in Sec.  60.5205(a)(3), and a statement as to 
whether there have been any process changes and whether the process 
change resulted in an increase in emissions.
    (10) Documentation of periods when all qualified sewage sludge 
incineration unit operators were unavailable for more than 8 hours, but 
less than 2 weeks.
    (11) Results of annual air pollution control device inspections 
recorded under Sec.  60.5230(d) for the reporting period, including a 
description of repairs.
    (12) If there were no periods during the reporting period when your 
continuous monitoring systems had a malfunction, a statement that there 
were no periods during which your continuous monitoring systems had a 
malfunction.
    (13) If there were no periods during the reporting period when a 
continuous monitoring system was out of control, a statement that there 
were no periods during which your continuous monitoring systems were 
out of control.
    (14) If there were no operator training deviations, a statement 
that there were no such deviations during the reporting period.
    (15) If you did not make revisions to your site-specific monitoring 
plan during the reporting period, a statement that you did not make any 
revisions to your site-specific monitoring plan during the reporting 
period. If you made revisions to your site-specific monitoring plan 
during the reporting period, a copy of the revised plan.
    (16) If you had a malfunction during the reporting period, the 
compliance report must include the number, duration, and a brief 
description for each type of malfunction that occurred during the 
reporting period and that caused or may have caused any applicable 
emission limitation to be exceeded. The report must also include a 
description of actions taken by an owner or operator during a 
malfunction of an affected source to minimize emissions in accordance 
with Sec.  60.11(d), including actions taken to correct a malfunction.
    (d) Deviation reports.
    (1) You must submit a deviation report if:
    (i) Any recorded operating parameter level, based on the averaging 
time specified in Table 4 to this subpart, is above the maximum 
operating limit or below the minimum operating limit established under 
this subpart.
    (ii) The bag leak detection system alarm sounds for more than 5 
percent of the operating time for the 6-month reporting period.
    (iii) Any recorded 24-hour block average emissions level is above 
the emission limit, if a continuous monitoring system is used to comply 
with an emission limit.
    (iv) There are visible emissions of combustion ash from an ash 
conveying system for more than 5 percent of the hourly observation 
period.
    (v) A performance test was conducted that deviated from any 
emission limit in Table 2 or 3 to this subpart.
    (vi) A continuous monitoring system was out of control.
    (vii) You had a malfunction (e.g., continuous monitoring system 
malfunction) that caused or may have caused any applicable emission 
limit to be exceeded.
    (2) The deviation report must be submitted by August 1 of that year 
for data collected during the first half of the calendar year (January 
1 to June 30), and by February 1 of the following year for data you 
collected during the second half of the calendar year (July 1 to 
December 31).
    (3) For each deviation where you are using a continuous monitoring 
system to comply with an associated emission limit or operating limit, 
report the items described in paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through (d)(3)(viii) 
of this section.
    (i) Company name, physical address, and mailing address.
    (ii) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's 
name, title, and signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of 
the report.
    (iii) The calendar dates and times your unit deviated from the 
emission limits, emission standards, or operating limits requirements.
    (iv) The averaged and recorded data for those dates.
    (v) Duration and cause of each deviation from the following:
    (A) Emission limits, emission standards, operating limits, and your 
corrective actions.
    (B) Bypass events and your corrective actions.
    (vi) Dates, times, and causes for monitor downtime incidents.
    (vii) A copy of the operating parameter monitoring data during each 
deviation and any test report that documents the emission levels.
    (viii) If there were periods during which the continuous monitoring 
system malfunctioned or was out of control, you must include the 
following information for each deviation from an emission limit or 
operating limit:
    (A) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.
    (B) The date, time, and duration that each continuous monitoring 
system was inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level 
checks.
    (C) The date, time, and duration that each continuous monitoring 
system was out of control, including start and end dates and hours and 
descriptions of corrective actions taken.
    (D) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and 
whether each deviation occurred during a period of malfunction, during 
a period when the system as out of control, or during another period.
    (E) A summary of the total duration of the deviation during the 
reporting period, and the total duration as a percent of the total 
source operating time during that reporting period.
    (F) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the 
reporting

[[Page 15447]]

period into those that are due to control equipment problems, process 
problems, other known causes, and other unknown causes.
    (G) A summary of the total duration of continuous monitoring system 
downtime during the reporting period, and the total duration of 
continuous monitoring system downtime as a percent of the total 
operating time of the SSI unit at which the continuous monitoring 
system downtime occurred during that reporting period.
    (H) An identification of each parameter and pollutant that was 
monitored at the SSI unit.
    (I) A brief description of the SSI unit.
    (J) A brief description of the continuous monitoring system.
    (K) The date of the latest continuous monitoring system 
certification or audit.
    (L) A description of any changes in continuous monitoring system, 
processes, or controls since the last reporting period.
    (4) For each deviation where you are not using a continuous 
monitoring system to comply with the associated emission limit or 
operating limit, report the following items:.
    (i) Company name, physical address, and mailing address.
    (ii) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's 
name, title, and signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of 
the report.
    (iii) The total operating time of each affected source during the 
reporting period.
    (iv) The calendar dates and times your unit deviated from the 
emission limits, emission standards, or operating limits requirements.
    (v) The averaged and recorded data for those dates.
    (vi) Duration and cause of each deviation from the following:
    (A) Emission limits, emission standards, operating limits, and your 
corrective actions.
    (B) Bypass events and your corrective actions.
    (vii) A copy of any performance test report that showed a deviation 
from the emission limits or standards.
    (viii) A brief description of any malfunction reported in paragraph 
(d)(1)(vii) of this section, including a description of actions taken 
during the malfunction to minimize emissions in accordance with Sec.  
60.11(d) and to correct the malfunction.
    (e) Qualified operator deviation.
    (1) If all qualified operators are not accessible for 2 weeks or 
more, you must take the two actions in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) and 
(e)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (i) Submit a notification of the deviation within 10 days that 
includes the three items in paragraphs (e)(1)(i)(A) through 
(e)(1)(i)(C) of this section.
    (A) A statement of what caused the deviation.
    (B) A description of actions taken to ensure that a qualified 
operator is accessible.
    (C) The date when you anticipate that a qualified operator will be 
available.
    (ii) Submit a status report to the Administrator every 4 weeks that 
includes the three items in paragraphs (e)(1)(ii)(A) through 
(e)(1)(ii)(C) of this section.
    (A) A description of actions taken to ensure that a qualified 
operator is accessible.
    (B) The date when you anticipate that a qualified operator will be 
accessible.
    (C) Request for approval from the Administrator to continue 
operation of the SSI unit.
    (2) If your unit was shut down by the Administrator, under the 
provisions of Sec.  60.5155(b)(2)(i), due to a failure to provide an 
accessible qualified operator, you must notify the Administrator within 
five days of meeting Sec.  60.5155(b)(2)(ii) that you are resuming 
operation.
    (f) Notification of a force majeure. If a force majeure is about to 
occur, occurs, or has occurred for which you intend to assert a claim 
of force majeure:
    (1) You must notify the Administrator, in writing as soon as 
practicable following the date you first knew, or through due 
diligence, should have known that the event may cause or caused a delay 
in conducting a performance test beyond the regulatory deadline, but 
the notification must occur before the performance test deadline unless 
the initial force majeure or a subsequent force majeure event delays 
the notice, and in such cases, the notification must occur as soon as 
practicable.
    (2) You must provide to the Administrator a written description of 
the force majeure event and a rationale for attributing the delay in 
conducting the performance test beyond the regulatory deadline to the 
force majeure; describe the measures taken or to be taken to minimize 
the delay; and identify a date by which you propose to conduct the 
performance test.
    (g) Other notifications and reports required. You must submit other 
notifications as provided by Sec.  60.7 and as follows:
    (1) You must notify the Administrator 1 month before starting or 
stopping use of a continuous monitoring system for determining 
compliance with any emission limit.
    (2) You must notify the Administrator at least 30 days prior to any 
performance test conducted to comply with the provisions of this 
subpart, to afford the Administrator the opportunity to have an 
observer present.
    (3) As specified in Sec.  60.5220(a)(8), you must notify the 
Administrator at least 7 days prior to the date of a rescheduled 
performance test for which notification was previously made in 
paragraph (g)(2) of this section.
    (h) Report submission form.
    (1) Submit initial, annual, and deviation reports electronically or 
in paper format, postmarked on or before the submittal due dates.
    (2) As of January 1, 2012 and within 60 days after the date of 
completing each performance test, as defined in Sec.  63.2, conducted 
to demonstrate compliance with this subpart, you must submit relative 
accuracy test audit (i.e., reference method) data and performance test 
(i.e., compliance test) data, except opacity data, electronically to 
EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) by using the Electronic Reporting 
Tool (ERT) (see http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html/) or 
other compatible electronic spreadsheet. Only data collected using test 
methods compatible with ERT are subject to this requirement to be 
submitted electronically into EPA's WebFIRE database.
    (i) Changing report dates. If the Administrator agrees, you may 
change the semiannual or annual reporting dates. See Sec.  60.19(c) for 
procedures to seek approval to change your reporting date.

Model Rule--Title V Operating Permits

Sec.  60.5240  Am I required to apply for and obtain a Title V 
operating permit for my existing SSI unit?

    Yes, if you are subject to an applicable EPA-approved and effective 
CAA section 111(d)/129 state or tribal plan or an applicable and 
effective Federal plan, you are required to apply for and obtain a 
Title V operating permit for your existing SSI unit unless you meet the 
relevant requirements for an exemption specified in Sec.  60.5065.

Sec.  60.5245  When must I submit a title V permit application for my 
existing SSI unit?

    (a) If your existing SSI unit is not subject to an earlier permit 
application deadline, a complete title V permit application must be 
submitted on or before the earlier of the dates specified in paragraphs 
(a)(1) through (a)(3) of this section. (See sections 129 (e), 503(c), 
503(d), and 502(a) of the Clean Air Act and 40 CFR 70.5(a)(1)(i) and 40 
CFR 71.5(a)(1)(i)).
    (1) 12 months after the effective date of any applicable EPA-
approved Clean

[[Page 15448]]

Air Act section 111(d)/129 state or tribal plan.
    (2) 12 months after the effective date of any applicable Federal 
plan.
    (3) March 21, 2014.
    (b) For any existing unit not subject to an earlier permit 
application deadline, the application deadline of 36 months after the 
promulgation of this subpart applies regardless of whether or when any 
applicable Federal plan is effective, or whether or when any applicable 
Clean Air Act section 111(d)/129 state or tribal plan is approved by 
EPA and becomes effective.
    (c) If your existing unit is subject to title V as a result of some 
triggering requirement(s) other than those specified in paragraphs (a) 
and (b) of this section (for example, a unit may be a major source or 
part of a major source), then your unit may be required to apply for a 
title V permit prior to the deadlines specified in paragraphs (a) and 
(b). If more than one requirement triggers a source's obligation to 
apply for a title V permit, the 12-month timeframe for filing a title V 
permit application is triggered by the requirement which first causes 
the source to be subject to title V. (See section 503(c) of the Clean 
Air Act and 40 CFR 70.3(a) and (b), 40 CFR 70.5(a)(1)(i), 40 CFR 
71.3(a) and (b), and 40 CFR 71.5(a)(1)(i).)
    (d) A ``complete'' title V permit application is one that has been 
determined or deemed complete by the relevant permitting authority 
under section 503(d) of the Clean Air Act and 40 CFR 70.5(a)(2) or 40 
CFR 71.5(a)(2). You must submit a complete permit application by the 
relevant application deadline in order to operate after this date in 
compliance with Federal law. (See sections 503(d) and 502(a) of the 
Clean Air Act and 40 CFR 70.7(b) and 40 CFR 71.7(b).)

Model Rule-Definitions

Sec.  60.5250  What definitions must I know?

    Terms used but not defined in this subpart are defined in the Clean 
Air Act and Sec.  60.2.
    Administrator means:
    (1) For units covered by the Federal plan, the Administrator of the 
EPA or his/her authorized representative.
    (2) For units covered by an approved state plan, the director of 
the state air pollution control agency or his/her authorized 
representative.
    Affected source means a sewage sludge incineration unit as defined 
in Sec.  60.5250.
    Affirmative defense means, in the context of an enforcement 
proceeding, a response or defense put forward by a defendant, regarding 
which the defendant has the burden of proof, and the merits of which 
are independently and objectively evaluated in a judicial or 
administrative proceeding.
    Auxiliary fuel means natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, fuel 
oil, or diesel fuel.
    Bag leak detection system means an instrument that is capable of 
monitoring particulate matter loadings in the exhaust of a fabric 
filter (i.e., baghouse) in order to detect bag failures. A bag leak 
detection system includes, but is not limited to, an instrument that 
operates on triboelectric, light scattering, light transmittance, or 
other principle to monitor relative particulate matter loadings.
    Bypass stack means a device used for discharging combustion gases 
to avoid severe damage to the air pollution control device or other 
equipment.
    Calendar year means 365 consecutive days starting on January 1 and 
ending on December 31.
    Continuous automated sampling system means the total equipment and 
procedures for automated sample collection and sample recovery/analysis 
to determine a pollutant concentration or emission rate by collecting a 
single integrated sample(s) or multiple integrated sample(s) of the 
pollutant (or diluent gas) for subsequent on- or off-site analysis; 
integrated sample(s) collected are representative of the emissions for 
the sample time as specified by the applicable requirement.
    Continuous emissions monitoring system means a monitoring system 
for continuously measuring and recording the emissions of a pollutant 
from an affected facility.
    Continuous monitoring system (CMS) means a continuous emissions 
monitoring system, continuous automated sampling system, continuous 
parameter monitoring system or other manual or automatic monitoring 
that is used for demonstrating compliance with an applicable regulation 
on a continuous basis as defined by this subpart. The term refers to 
the total equipment used to sample and condition (if applicable), to 
analyze, and to provide a permanent record of emissions or process 
parameters.
    Continuous parameter monitoring system means a monitoring system 
for continuously measuring and recording operating conditions 
associated with air pollution control device systems (e.g., operating 
temperature, pressure, and power).
    Deviation means any instance in which an affected source subject to 
this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this 
subpart, including but not limited to any emission limit, operating 
limit, or operator qualification and accessibility requirements.
    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to 
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is 
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to 
obtain such a permit.
    Dioxins/furans means tetra- through octa-chlorinated dibenzo-p-
dioxins and dibenzofurans.
    Electrostatic precipitator or wet electrostatic precipitator means 
an air pollution control device that uses both electrical forces and, 
if applicable, water to remove pollutants in the exit gas from a sewage 
sludge incinerator stack.
    Existing sewage sludge incineration unit means a sewage sludge 
incineration unit the construction of which is commenced on or before 
October 14, 2010.
    Fabric filter means an add-on air pollution control device used to 
capture particulate matter by filtering gas streams through filter 
media, also known as a baghouse.
    Fluidized bed incinerator means an enclosed device in which organic 
matter and inorganic matter in sewage sludge are combusted in a bed of 
particles suspended in the combustion chamber gas.
    Malfunction means any sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably 
preventable failure of air pollution control and monitoring equipment, 
process equipment, or a process to operate in a normal or usual manner. 
Failures that are caused, in part, by poor maintenance or careless 
operation are not malfunctions.
    Modification means a change to an existing SSI unit later than 
September 21, 2011 and that meets one of two criteria:
    (1) The cumulative cost of the changes over the life of the unit 
exceeds 50 percent of the original cost of building and installing the 
SSI unit (not including the cost of land) updated to current costs 
(current dollars). To determine what systems are within the boundary of 
the SSI unit used to calculate these costs, see the definition of SSI 
unit.
    (2) Any physical change in the SSI unit or change in the method of 
operating it that increases the amount of any air pollutant emitted for 
which section 129 or section 111 of the Clean Air Act has established 
standards.
    Modified sewage sludge incineration unit means an existing SSI unit 
that

[[Page 15449]]

undergoes a modification, as defined in this section.
    Multiple hearth incinerator means a circular steel furnace that 
contains a number of solid refractory hearths and a central rotating 
shaft; rabble arms that are designed to slowly rake the sludge on the 
hearth are attached to the rotating shaft. Dewatered sludge enters at 
the top and proceeds downward through the furnace from hearth to 
hearth, pushed along by the rabble arms.
    Operating day means a 24-hour period between 12:00 midnight and the 
following midnight during which any amount of sewage sludge is 
combusted at any time in the SSI unit.
    Particulate matter means filterable particulate matter emitted from 
SSI units as measured by Method 5 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-3 or 
Methods 26A or 29 at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-8.
    Power input to the electrostatic precipitator means the product of 
the test-run average secondary voltage and the test-run average 
secondary amperage to the electrostatic precipitator collection plates.
    Process change means a significant permit revision, but only with 
respect to those pollutant-specific emission units for which the 
proposed permit revision is applicable, including but not limited to:
    (1) A change in the process employed at the wastewater treatment 
facility associated with the affected SSI unit (e.g., the addition of 
tertiary treatment at the facility, which changes the method used for 
disposing of process solids and processing of the sludge prior to 
incineration).
    (2) A change in the air pollution control devices used to comply 
with the emission limits for the affected SSI unit (e.g., change in the 
sorbent used for activated carbon injection).
    Sewage sludge means solid, semi-solid, or liquid residue generated 
during the treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works. Sewage 
sludge includes, but is not limited to, domestic septage; scum or 
solids removed in primary, secondary, or advanced wastewater treatment 
processes; and a material derived from sewage sludge. Sewage sludge 
does not include ash generated during the firing of sewage sludge in a 
sewage sludge incineration unit or grit and screenings generated during 
preliminary treatment of domestic sewage in a treatment works.
    Sewage sludge feed rate means the rate at which sewage sludge is 
fed into the incinerator unit.
    Sewage sludge incineration (SSI) unit means an incineration unit 
combusting sewage sludge for the purpose of reducing the volume of the 
sewage sludge by removing combustible matter. Sewage sludge 
incineration unit designs include fluidized bed and multiple hearth. A 
SSI unit also includes, but is not limited to, the sewage sludge feed 
system, auxiliary fuel feed system, grate system, flue gas system, 
waste heat recovery equipment, if any, and bottom ash system. The SSI 
unit includes all ash handling systems connected to the bottom ash 
handling system. The combustion unit bottom ash system ends at the 
truck loading station or similar equipment that transfers the ash to 
final disposal. The SSI unit does not include air pollution control 
equipment or the stack.
    Shutdown means the period of time after all sewage sludge has been 
combusted in the primary chamber.
    Solid waste means any garbage, refuse, sewage sludge from a waste 
treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control 
facility and other discarded material, including solid, liquid, 
semisolid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, 
commercial, mining, agricultural operations, and from community 
activities, but does not include solid or dissolved material in 
domestic sewage, or solid or dissolved materials in irrigation return 
flows or industrial discharges which are point sources subject to 
permits under section 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 
as amended (33 U.S.C. 1342), or source, special nuclear, or byproduct 
material as defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 
U.S.C. 2014).
    Standard conditions, when referring to units of measure, means a 
temperature of 68 [deg]F (20 [deg]C) and a pressure of 1 atmosphere 
(101.3 kilopascals).
    Startup means the period of time between the activation, including 
the firing of fuels (e.g., natural gas or distillate oil), of the 
system and the first feed to the unit.
    Toxic equivalency means the product of the concentration of an 
individual dioxin isomer in an environmental mixture and the 
corresponding estimate of the compound-specific toxicity relative to 
tetrachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin, referred to as the toxic equivalency 
factor for that compound. Table 5 to this subpart lists the toxic 
equivalency factors.
    Wet scrubber means an add-on air pollution control device that 
utilizes an aqueous or alkaline scrubbing liquid to collect particulate 
matter (including nonvaporous metals and condensed organics) and/or to 
absorb and neutralize acid gases.
    You means the owner or operator of an affected SSI unit.

 Table 1 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Increments of Progress
 and Compliance Schedules for Existing Sewage Sludge Incineration Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Comply with these increments of progress        By these dates \a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increment 1--Submit final control plan....  (Dates to be specified in
                                             state plan)
Increment 2--Final compliance.............  (Dates to be specified in
                                             state plan) \b\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Site-specific schedules can be used at the discretion of the state.
\b\ The date can be no later than 3 years after the effective date of
  state plan approval or March 21, 2016 for SSI units that commenced
  construction on or before October 14, 2010.

 Table 2 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Emission Limits and Standards for Existing Fluidized Bed Sewage
                                            Sludge Incineration Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Using these averaging
                                   You must meet this          methods and minimum          And determining
    For the air pollutant          emission limit \a\          sampling volumes or       compliance using this
                                                                    durations                    method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter...........  18 milligrams per dry       3-run average (collect a    Performance test (Method
                                standard cubic meter.       minimum volume of 1 dry     5 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            standard cubic meters       appendix A-3; Method 26A
                                                            sample per run).            or Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                                                                        part 60, appendix A-8).
Hydrogen chloride............  0.51 parts per million by   3-run average (Collect a    Performance test (Method
                                dry volume.                 minimum volume of 1 dry     26A at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            standard cubic meters per   appendix A-8).
                                                            run).

[[Page 15450]]

 
Carbon monoxide..............  64 parts per million by     3-run average (collect      Performance test (Method
                                dry volume.                 sample for a minimum        10, 10A, or 10B at 40
                                                            duration of one hour per    CFR part 60, appendix A-
                                                            run).                       4).
Dioxins/furans (total mass     1.2 nanograms per dry       3-run average (collect a    Performance test (Method
 basis); or                     standard cubic meter        minimum volume of 1 dry     23 at 40 CFR part 60,
Dioxins/furans (toxic           (total mass basis); or      standard cubic meters per   appendix A-7).
 equivalency basis) \b\.       0.10 nanograms per dry       run).
                                standard cubic meter
                                (toxic equivalency basis).
Mercury......................  0.037 milligrams per dry    3-run average (For Method   Performance test (Method
                                standard cubic meter.       29 and ASTM D6784-02        29 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            (Reapproved 2008) \c\,      appendix A-8; Method 30B
                                                            collect a minimum volume    at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            of 1 dry standard cubic     appendix A-8; or ASTM
                                                            meters per run. For         D6784-02 (Reapproved
                                                            Method 30B, collect a       2008).\c\
                                                            minimum sample as
                                                            specified in Method 30B
                                                            at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            appendix A-8).
Oxides of nitrogen...........  150 parts per million by    3-run average (Collect      Performance test (Method
                                dry volume.                 sample for a minimum        7 or 7E at 40 CFR part
                                                            duration of one hour per    60, appendix A-4).
                                                            run).
Sulfur dioxide...............  15 parts per million by     3-run average (For Method   Performance test (Method
                                dry volume.                 6, collect a minimum        6 or 6C at 40 CFR part
                                                            volume of 60 liters per     40, appendix A-4; or
                                                            run. For Method 6C,         ANSI/ASME PTC-19.10-
                                                            collect sample for a        1981.\c\
                                                            minimum duration of one
                                                            hour per run).
Cadmium......................  0.0016 milligrams per dry   3-run average (collect a    Performance test (Method
                                standard cubic meter.       minimum volume of 1 dry     29 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            standard cubic meters per   appendix A-8). Use GFAAS
                                                            run).                       or ICP/MS for the
                                                                                        analytical finish.
Lead.........................  0.0074 milligrams per dry   3-run average (collect a    Performance test (Method
                                standard cubic meter.       minimum volume of 1 dry     29 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            standard cubic meters       appendix A-8. Use GFAAS
                                                            sample per run).            or ICP/MS for the
                                                                                        analytical finish.
Fugitive emissions from ash    Visible emissions of        Three 1-hour observation    Visible emission test
 handling.                      combustion ash from an      periods.                    (Method 22 of appendix A-
                                ash conveying system                                    7 of this part).
                                (including conveyor
                                transfer points) for no
                                more than 5 percent of
                                the hourly observation
                                period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ All emission limits are measured at 7 percent oxygen, dry basis at standard conditions.
\b\ You have the option to comply with either the dioxin/furan emission limit on a total mass basis or the
  dioxin/furan emission limit on a toxic equivalency basis.
\c\ Incorporated by reference, see Sec.   60.17.

   Table 3 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Emission Limits and Standards for Existing Multiple Hearth
                                        Sewage Sludge Incineration Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Using these averaging
                                   You must meet this         methods and  minimum          And determining
    For the air pollutant          emission limit \a\          sampling volumes or       compliance using this
                                                                    durations                    method
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter...........  80 milligrams per dry       3-run average (collect a    Performance test (Method
                                standard cubic meter.       minimum volume of 0.75      5 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            dry standard cubic meters   appendix A-3; Method 26A
                                                            per run).                   or Method 29 at 40 CFR
                                                                                        part 60, appendix A-8).
Hydrogen chloride............  1.2 parts per million by    3-run average (For Method   Performance test (Method
                                dry volume.                 26, collect a minimum       26 or 26A at 40 CFR part
                                                            volume of 200 liters per    60, appendix A-8).
                                                            run. For Method 26A,
                                                            collect a minimum volume
                                                            of 1 dry standard cubic
                                                            meters per run).
Carbon monoxide..............  3,800 parts per million by  3-run average (collect      Performance test (Method
                                dry volume.                 sample for a minimum        10, 10A, or 10B at 40
                                                            duration of one hour per    CFR part 60, appendix A-
                                                            run).                       4).
Dioxins/furans (total mass     5.0 nanograms per dry       3-run average (collect a    Performance test (Method
 basis).                        standard cubic meter; or    minimum volume of 1 dry     23 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            standard cubic meters per   appendix A-7).
                                                            run).
Dioxins/furans (toxic          0.32 nanograms per dry
 equivalency basis) \b\.        standard cubic meter.

[[Page 15451]]

 
Mercury......................  0.28 milligrams per dry     3-run average (For Method   Performance test (Method
                                standard cubic meter.       29 and ASTM D6784-02        29 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            (Reapproved 2008),\c\       appendix A-8; Method 30B
                                                            collect a minimum volume    at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            of 1 dry standard cubic     appendix A-8; or ASTM
                                                            meters per run. For         D6784-02 (Reapproved
                                                            Method 30B, collect a       2008)).\c\
                                                            minimum sample as
                                                            specified in Method 30B
                                                            at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            appendix A-8).
Oxides of nitrogen...........  220 parts per million by    3-run average (Collect      Performance test (Method
                                dry volume.                 sample for a minimum        7 or 7E at 40 CFR part
                                                            duration of one hour per    60, appendix A-4).
                                                            run).
Sulfur dioxide...............  26 parts per million by     3-run average (For Method   Performance test (Method
                                dry volume.                 6, collect a minimum        6 or 6C at 40 CFR part
                                                            volume of 200 liters per    40, appendix A-4; or
                                                            run. For Method 6C,         ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-
                                                            collect sample for a        1981).\c\
                                                            minimum duration of one
                                                            hour per run).
Cadmium......................  0.095 milligrams per dry    3-run average (collect a    Performance test (Method
                                standard cubic meter.       minimum volume of 1 dry     29 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            standard cubic meters per   appendix A-8).
                                                            run).
Lead.........................  0.30 milligrams per dry     3-run average (collect a    Performance test (Method
                                standard cubic meter.       minimum volume of 1 dry     29 at 40 CFR part 60,
                                                            standard cubic meters per   appendix A-8).
                                                            run).
Fugitive emissions from ash    Visible emissions of        Three 1-hour observation    Visible emission test
 handling.                      combustion ash from an      periods.                    (Method 22 of appendix A-
                                ash conveying system                                    7 of this part).
                                (including conveyor
                                transfer points) for no
                                more than 5 percent of
                                the hourly observation
                                period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ All emission limits are measured at 7 percent oxygen, dry basis at standard conditions.
\b\ You have the option to comply with either the dioxin/furan emission limit on a total mass basis or the
  dioxin/furan emission limit on a toxic equivalency basis.
\c\ Incorporated by reference, see Sec.   60.17.

                  Table 4 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Operating Parameters for Existing Sewage Sludge Incineration Units a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      And monitor using these minimum frequencies
                                    You must establish these -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  For these operating parameters        operating limits                                                                     Data averaging  period for
                                                                     Data measurement              Data recording \b\                compliance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          All sewage sludge incineration units
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Combustion chamber operating       Minimum combustion         Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  12-hour block.
 temperature (not required if       chamber operating
 afterburner temperature is         temperature or
 monitored).                        afterburner temperature.
Fugitive emissions from ash        Site-specific operating    Not applicable...............  No applicable................  Not applicable.
 handling.                          requirements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Scrubber
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pressure drop across each wet      Minimum pressure drop....  Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  12-hour block.
 scrubber.
Scrubber liquid flow rate........  Minimum flow rate........  Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  12-hour block.
Scrubber liquid pH...............  Minimum pH...............  Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  3-hour block.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Fabric Filter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alarm time of the bag leak         Maximum alarm time of the bag leak detection system alarm (this operating limit is provided in Sec.   60.4850 and is
 detection system alarm.            not established on a site-specific basis)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Electrostatic precipitator
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secondary voltage of the           Minimum power input to     Continuous...................  Hourly.......................  12-hour block.
 electrostatic precipitator         the electrostatic
 collection plates.                 precipitator collection
                                    plates.
Secondary amperage of the
 electrostatic precipitator
 collection plates.

[[Page 15452]]

 
Effluent water flow rate at the    Minimum effluent water     Hourly.......................  Hourly.......................  12-hour block.
 outlet of the electrostatic        flow rate at the outlet
 precipitator.                      of the electrostatic
                                    precipitator.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Activated carbon injection
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mercury sorbent injection rate...  Minimum mercury sorbent    Hourly.......................  Hourly.......................  12-hour block.
                                    injection rate.
Dioxin/furan sorbent injection     Minimum dioxin/furan
 rate.                              sorbent injection rate.
Carrier gas flow rate or carrier   Minimum carrier gas flow   Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  12-hour block.
 gas pressure drop.                 rate or minimum carrier
                                    gas pressure drop.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Afterburner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Temperature of the afterburner     Minimum temperature of     Continuous...................  Every 15 minutes.............  12-hour block.
 combustion chamber.                the afterburner
                                    combustion chamber.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ As specified in Sec.   60.5190, you may use a continuous emissions monitoring system or continuous automated sampling system in lieu of establishing
  certain operating limits.
\b\ This recording time refers to the minimum frequency that the continuous monitor or other measuring device initially records data. For all data
  recorded every 15 minutes, you must calculate hourly arithmetic averages. For all parameters, you use hourly averages to calculate the 12-hour or 3-
  hour block average specified in this table for demonstrating compliance. You maintain records of 1-hour averages.

    Table 5 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Toxic Equivalency
                                 Factors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Toxic
                    Dioxin/furan isomer                      equivalency
                                                               factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin.................             1
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin...............             1
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin..............           0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin..............           0.1
1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin..............           0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin...........          0.01
octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin..........................        0.0003
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorinated dibenzofuran.....................           0.1
2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorinated dibenzofuran...................           0.3
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorinated dibenzofuran...................          0.03
1,2,3,4,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzofuran..................           0.1
1,2,3,6,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzofuran..................           0.1
1,2,3,7,8,9-hexachlorinated dibenzofuran..................           0.1
2,3,4,6,7,8-hexachlorinated dibenzofuran..................           0.1
1,2,3,4,6,7,8-heptachlorinated dibenzofuran...............          0.01
1,2,3,4,7,8,9-heptachlorinated dibenzofuran...............          0.01
octachlorinated dibenzofuran..............................        0.0003
------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Table 6 to Subpart MMMM of Part 60--Model Rule--Summary of Reporting Requirements for Existing Sewage Sludge
                                              Incineration Units a
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Report                     Due date                    Contents                     Reference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increments of progress report....  No later than 10     1. Final control plan including     Sec.   60.5235(a).
                                    business days        air pollution control device
                                    after the            descriptions, process changes,
                                    compliance date      type of waste to be burned, and
                                    for the increment.   the maximum design sewage sludge
                                                         burning capacity.
                                                        2. Notification of any failure to
                                                         meet an increment of progress..
                                                        3. Notification of any closure....
Initial compliance report........  No later than 60     1. Company name and address.......  Sec.   60.5235(b).
                                    days following the  2. Statement by a responsible
                                    initial              official, with that official's
                                    performance test.    name, title, and signature,
                                                         certifying the accuracy of the
                                                         content of the report.
                                                        3. Date of report.................
                                                        4. Complete test report for the
                                                         initial performance test.
                                                        5. Results of CMS \b\ performance
                                                         evaluation.

[[Page 15453]]

 
                                                        6. The values for the site-
                                                         specific operating limits and the
                                                         calculations and methods used to
                                                         establish each operating limit.
                                                        7. Documentation of installation
                                                         of bag leak detection system for
                                                         fabric filter.
                                                        8. Results of initial air
                                                         pollution control device
                                                         inspection, including a
                                                         description of repairs.
                                                        9. The site-specific monitoring
                                                         plan required under Sec.
                                                         60.5200.
                                                        10. The site-specific monitoring
                                                         plan for your ash handling system
                                                         required under Sec.   60.5200.
Annual compliance report.........  No later than 12     1. Company name and address.......  Sec.   60.5235(c).
                                    months following    2. Statement and signature by
                                    the submission of    responsible official..
                                    the initial         3. Date and beginning and ending
                                    compliance report;   dates of report..
                                    subsequent reports  4. If a performance test was
                                    are to be            conducted during the reporting
                                    submitted no more    period, the results of the test,
                                    than 12 months       including any new operating
                                    following the        limits and associated
                                    previous report.     calculations and the type of
                                                         activated carbon used, if
                                                         applicable..
                                                        5. For each pollutant and
                                                         operating parameter recorded
                                                         using a CMS, the highest recorded
                                                         3-hour average and the lowest
                                                         recorded 3-hour average, as
                                                         applicable.
                                                        6. If no deviations from emission
                                                         limits, emission standards, or
                                                         operating limits occurred, a
                                                         statement that no deviations
                                                         occurred.
                                                        7. If a fabric filter is used, the
                                                         date, time, and duration of
                                                         alarms.
                                                        8. If a performance evaluation of
                                                         a CMS was conducted, the results,
                                                         including any new operating
                                                         limits and their associated
                                                         calculations.
                                                        9. If you met the requirements of
                                                         Sec.   60.5205(a)(3) and did not
                                                         conduct a performance test,
                                                         include the dates of the last
                                                         three performance tests, a
                                                         comparison to the 50 percent
                                                         emission limit threshold of the
                                                         emission level achieved in the
                                                         last three performance tests, and
                                                         a statement as to whether there
                                                         have been any process changes.
                                                        10. Documentation of periods when
                                                         all qualified SSI unit operators
                                                         were unavailable for more than 8
                                                         hours but less than 2 weeks.
                                                        11. Results of annual pollutions
                                                         control device inspections,
                                                         including description of repairs.
                                                        12. If there were no periods
                                                         during which your CMSs had
                                                         malfunctions, a statement that
                                                         there were no periods during
                                                         which your CMSs had malfunctions.
                                                        13. If there were no periods
                                                         during which your CMSs were out
                                                         of control, a statement that
                                                         there were no periods during
                                                         which your CMSs were out of
                                                         control.
                                                        14. If there were no operator
                                                         training deviations, a statement
                                                         that there were no such
                                                         deviations.
                                                        15. Information on monitoring plan
                                                         revisions, including a copy of
                                                         any revised monitoring plan.
Deviation report (deviations from  By August 1 of a     If using a CMS:...................  Sec.   60.5235(d).
 emission limits, emission          calendar year for   1. Company name and address.......
 standards, or operating limits,    data collected      2. Statement by a responsible
 as specified in Sec.               during the first     official..
 60.5235(e)(1)).                    half of the         3. The calendar dates and times
                                    calendar year; by    your unit deviated from the
                                    February 1 of a      emission limits or operating
                                    calendar year for    limits..
                                    data collected      4. The averaged and recorded data
                                    during the second    for those dates..
                                    half of the         5. Duration and cause of each
                                    calendar year.       deviation..
                                                        6. Dates, times, and causes for
                                                         monitor downtime incidents.
                                                        7. A copy of the operating
                                                         parameter monitoring data during
                                                         each deviation and any test
                                                         report that documents the
                                                         emission levels.
                                                        8. For periods of CMS malfunction
                                                         or when a CMS was out of control,
                                                         you must include the information
                                                         specified in Sec.
                                                         60.5235(d)(3)(viii).
                                                        If not using a CMS:...............
                                                        1. Company name and address.......
                                                        2. Statement by a responsible
                                                         official.
                                                        3. The total operating time of
                                                         each affected SSI.
                                                        4. The calendar dates and times
                                                         your unit deviated from the
                                                         emission limits, emission
                                                         standard, or operating limits.
                                                        5. The averaged and recorded data
                                                         for those dates.

[[Page 15454]]

 
                                                        6. Duration and cause of each
                                                         deviation.
                                                        7. A copy of any performance test
                                                         report that showed a deviation
                                                         from the emission limits or
                                                         standards.
                                                        8. A brief description of any
                                                         malfunction, a description of
                                                         actions taken during the
                                                         malfunction to minimize
                                                         emissions, and corrective action
                                                         taken.
Notification of qualified          Within 10 days of    1. Statement of cause of deviation  Sec.   60.5235(e).
 operator deviation (if all         deviation.          2. Description of actions taken to
 qualified operators are not                             ensure that a qualified operator
 accessible for 2 weeks or more).                        will be available..
                                                        3. The date when a qualified
                                                         operator will be accessible..
Notification of status of          Every 4 weeks        1. Description of actions taken to  Sec.   60.5235(e).
 qualified operator deviation.      following            ensure that a qualified operator
                                    notification of      is accessible.
                                    deviation.          2. The date when you anticipate
                                                         that a qualified operator will be
                                                         accessible..
                                                        3. Request for approval to
                                                         continue operation..
Notification of resumed operation  Within five days of  1. Notification that you have       Sec.   60.5235(e).
 following shutdown (due to         obtaining a          obtained a qualified operator and
 qualified operator deviation and   qualified operator   are resuming operation.
 as specified in Sec.               and resuming
 60.5155(b)(2)(i).                  operation.
Notification of a force majeure..  As soon as           1. Description of the force         Sec.   60.5235(f).
                                    practicable          majeure event.
                                    following the date  2. Rationale for attributing the
                                    you first knew, or   delay in conducting the
                                    through due          performance test beyond the
                                    diligence should     regulatory deadline to the force
                                    have known that      majeure.
                                    the event may       3. Description of the measures
                                    cause or caused a    taken or to be taken to minimize
                                    delay in             the delay..
                                    conducting a        4. Identification of the date by
                                    performance test     which you propose to conduct the
                                    beyond the           performance test..
                                    regulatory
                                    deadline; the
                                    notification must
                                    occur before the
                                    performance test
                                    deadline unless
                                    the initial force
                                    majeure or a
                                    subsequent force
                                    majeure event
                                    delays the notice,
                                    and in such cases,
                                    the notification
                                    must occur as soon
                                    as practicable.
Notification of intent to start    1 month before       1. Intent to start or stop use of   Sec.   60.5235(g).
 or stop use of a CMS.              starting or          a CMS.
                                    stopping use of a
                                    CMS.
Notification of intent to conduct  At least 30 days     1. Intent to conduct a performance
 a performance test.                prior to the         test to comply with this subpart.
                                    performance test.
Notification of intent to conduct  At least 7 days      1. Intent to conduct a rescheduled
 a rescheduled performance test.    prior to the date    performance test to comply with
                                    of a rescheduled     this subpart.
                                    performance test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ This table is only a summary, see the referenced sections of the rule for the complete requirements.
\b\ CMS means continuous monitoring system.

[FR Doc. 2011-4491 Filed 3-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P