[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 7, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40770-40774]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-15204]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[OAR-2004-0068; FRL-7782-2]
RIN 2060-AK35
Standards of Performance for Industrial-Commercial-Institutional
Steam Generating Units
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule; amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: New source performance standards (NSPS) limiting emissions of
nitrogen oxides (NOX) from industrial-commercial-
institutional steam generating units capable of combusting more than
100 million British thermal units (Btu) per hour were proposed on June
19, 1984, and were promulgated on November 25, 1986. The standards
limit NOX emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels, as
well as the combustion of fossil fuels with other fuels or wastes. The
standards include provisions for facility-specific NOX
standards for steam generating units which simultaneously combust
fossil fuel and chemical by-product waste under certain conditions. The
amendments promulgate a facility-specific NOX standard for a
steam generating unit which simultaneously combusts fossil fuel and
chemical by-product waste at the Weyerhaeuser Company facility located
in New Bern, North Carolina.
DATES: The direct final rule will be effective on September 7, 2004,
without further notice, unless EPA receives significant adverse written
comments by August 6, 2004. If EPA receives such comments, it will
publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register indicating which
provisions will become effective and which provisions are being
withdrawn due to adverse comment.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2004-
0068, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET,
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred
method for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected].
Fax: (202) 566-1741.
Mail: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Please include a duplicate copy, if possible.
Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B-108,
Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
We request that a separate copy also be sent to the contact person
listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0068.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-
mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal regulations.gov Web sites are
``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal Register of May 31,
2002 (67 FR 38102).
[[Page 40771]]
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index
at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI 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 in EDOCKET or in hard
copy at the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room 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 Air Docket is (202) 566-
1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. James A. Eddinger, Combustion
Group, Emission Standards Division (C439-01), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711;
telephone number (919) 541-5426; facsimile number (919) 541-5450;
electronic mail address [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. The only regulated
entity that will be affected by the direct final rule amendment is the
Weyerhaeuser Company facility located in New Bern, North Carolina.
Comments. We are publishing the direct final rule without prior
proposal because we view it as noncontroversial and do not anticipate
adverse comments. However, in the Proposed Rules section of today's
Federal Register, we are publishing a separate document that will serve
as the proposal in the event that adverse comments are filed. If we
receive any adverse comments on a specific element of the direct final
rule, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public which amendments will become effective and which
amendments are being withdrawn due to adverse comment. We will address
all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed
rule. Any of the distinct amendments in the direct final rule for which
we do not receive adverse comment will become effective on the date set
out above. We will not institute a second comment period on the direct
final rule. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this
time.
World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
electronic copies of today's action will be posted on the Technology
Transfer Network's (TTN) policy and guidance information page http://www.epa.gov/ttn/caaa. The TTN provides information and technology
exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more information
regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at (919) 541-5384.
Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), judicial review of the direct final rule is available only on
the filing of a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit by September 7, 2004. Under section
307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an objection to the direct final rule
that was raised with reasonable specificity during the period for
public comment can be raised during judicial review. Moreover, under
section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements that are subject to
today's action may not be challenged later in civil or criminal
proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
I. Background
The objective of the NSPS, promulgated on November 25, 1986, is to
limit NOX emissions from the combustion of fossil fuel. For
steam generating units combusting by-product waste, the requirements of
the NSPS vary depending on the operation of the steam generating units.
During periods when only fossil fuel is combusted, the steam generating
unit must comply with the NOX emission limits in the NSPS
for fossil fuel. During periods when only by-product waste is
combusted, the steam generating unit may be subject to other
requirements or regulations which limit NOX emissions, but
it is not subject to NOX emission limits under the NSPS. In
addition, if the steam generating unit is subject to federally
enforceable permit conditions limiting the amount of fossil fuel
combusted in the steam generating unit to an annual capacity factor of
10 percent or less, the steam generating unit is not subject to
NOX emission limits under the NSPS when it simultaneously
combusts fossil fuel and by-product waste.
With the exception noted above, during periods when fossil fuel and
by-product waste are simultaneously combusted in a steam generating
unit, the unit must generally comply with NOX emission
limits under 40 CFR 60.44b(e) of the NSPS. Under 40 CFR 60.44b(e) the
applicable NOX emission limit depends on the nature of the
by-product waste combusted. In some situations, however, ``facility-
specific'' NOX emission limits developed under 40 CFR
60.44b(f) may apply. The order for determining which NOX
emission limit applies is as follows. A steam generating unit
simultaneously combusting fossil fuel and by-product waste is expected
to comply with the NOX emission limit under 40 CFR
60.44b(e); only in a few situations may NOX emission limits
developed under 40 CFR 60.44b(f) apply. An equation in 40 CFR 60.44b(e)
is included to determine the NOX emission limit applicable
to a steam generating unit when it simultaneously combusts fossil fuel
and by-product waste.
Only where a steam generating unit which simultaneously combusts
fossil fuel and by-product waste is unable to comply with the
NOX emission limit determined under 40 CFR 60.44b(e), might
a facility-specific NOX emission limit under 40 CFR
60.44b(f) apply. That section permits a steam generating unit to
petition the Administrator for a facility-specific NOX
emission limit. A facility-specific NOX emission limit will
be proposed and promulgated by the Administrator for the steam
generating unit, however, only where the petition is judged to be
complete. To be considered complete, a petition for a facility-specific
NOX standard under 40 CFR 60.44b(f) consists of three
components. The first component is a demonstration that the steam
generating unit is able to comply with the NOX emission
limit for fossil fuel when combusting fossil fuel alone. The purposes
of this provision are to ensure that the steam generating unit has
installed best demonstrated NOX control technology, to
identify the NOX control technology installed, and to
identify the manner in which this technology is operated to achieve
compliance with the NOX emission limit for fossil fuel.
The second component of a complete petition is a demonstration that
the NOX control technology does not enable compliance with
the NOX emission limit for fossil fuel when the steam
generating unit simultaneously combusts fossil fuel with chemical by-
product waste under the same conditions used to demonstrate compliance
on fossil fuel alone. In addition, this component of the petition must
identify what unique and specific properties of the chemical by-product
waste are responsible for preventing the steam generating unit from
complying with the NOX emission limit for fossil fuel.
The third component of a complete petition consists of data and/or
analysis to support a facility-specific NOX standard for the
steam generating unit when it simultaneously combusts fossil fuel and
chemical by-product waste and operates the NOX control
technology in
[[Page 40772]]
the same manner in which it would be operated to demonstrate and
maintain compliance with the NOX emission limit for fossil
fuel, if only fossil fuel were combusted. This component of the
petition must identify the NOX emission limit(s) and/or
operating parameter limits, and appropriate testing, monitoring,
reporting and recordkeeping requirements which will ensure operation of
the NOX control technology and minimize NOX
emissions at all times.
Upon receipt of a complete petition, the Administrator will propose
a facility-specific NOX standard for the steam generating
unit when it simultaneously combusts chemical by-product waste with
fossil fuel. The NOX standard will include the
NOX emission limit(s) and/or operating parameter limit(s) to
ensure operation of the NOX control technology at all times,
as well as appropriate testing, monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Weyerhaeuser Company has submitted a petition for a facility-
specific NOX standard for the No. 2 Power Boiler at its
kraft pulp mill in New Bern, North Carolina. The No. 2 Power Boiler
combusts residual oil and a byproduct/waste gas from a foul condensate
steam stripper. The foul condensate steam stripper was installed to
comply with the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards
for kraft pulping systems under 40 CFR part 63, subpart S. While the
No. 2 Power Boiler complies with Subpart Db of 40 CFR part 60 while
firing residual oil, the combustion of stripper off-gas along with
residual fuel oil in the No. 2 Power Boiler results in a NOX
emission rate in excess of the NSPS limit for the standard. Based on a
review of the Weyerhaeuser Company's petition for an alternative
NOX standard, EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards has determined the petition to be complete and an alternative
facility-specific standard to be appropriate. An alternative
NOX standard is provided in the final rule amendment.
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), we must
determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and
the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect, in a material way, the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been
determined that the direct final rule does not constitute a
``significant regulatory action'' because it does not meet any of the
above criteria. Consequently, this action was not submitted to OMB for
review under Executive Order 12866.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Office of Management and Budget approved the information
collection requirements contained in the standards under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., at the time the
rules were promulgated on November 25, 1986.
This action does not impose any new information collection
requirements of the standards and will have no impact on the
information collection estimate of project cost and hour burden made
and approved by OMB during the development of the standards and
guidelines. Therefore, the information collection requests have not
been revised.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for our
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 40 CFR chapter 15.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C.
601 et seq., generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure 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 the direct final rule on
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business whose
parent company has fewer than 100 or 1,000 employees, or fewer than 4
billion kilowatt (kW)-hr per year of electricity usage, depending on
the size definition for the affected North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code; (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; and
(3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise that is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of the direct final rule on
small entities, we certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The direct
final rule will not impose any requirements on small entities because
it does not impose any additional regulatory requirements.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost effective, or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objective of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal
[[Page 40773]]
governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of our regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
The EPA has determined that the direct final rule amendment
contains no 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, nor does the direct
final rule significantly or uniquely impact small governments, because
it contains no requirements that apply to such governments or impose
obligations upon them. Thus, the requirements of sections of the UMRA
do not apply to the direct final rule.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires us to
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism
implications'' are defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that 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.''
The direct final rule does not have federalism implications. It
will not have new 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. Today's action
codifies a facility-specific NOX standard. There are
minimal, if any, impacts associated with this action. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to the direct final rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000) requires us
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' The direct final rule does not have
tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not
have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to the direct final rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that we have reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives we considered.
We interpret Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. The direct final rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based on technology
performance and not on health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
The direct final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Public Law No. 104-113; 15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in our regulatory
and procurement 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, business practices) developed or adopted by one or
more voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through annual reports to OMB, with explanations when an
agency does not use available and applicable voluntary consensus
standards.
The direct final rule amendments do not involve technical
standards. Therefore, the direct final rule is not subject to NTTAA.
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. The EPA will submit a report containing
the direct final 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 direct final rule in
the Federal Register. The direct final rule is not a ``major rule'' as
defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 23, 2004.
Jeffrey R. Holmstead,
Assistant Administrator.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 60 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended to read 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.
Subpart Db--[Amended]
0
2. Section 60.49b is amended by adding paragraph (x) as follows:
Sec. 60.49b Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
* * * * *
(x) Facility-specific nitrogen oxides standard for Weyerhaeuser
Company's No. 2 Power Boiler located in New Bern, North Carolina:
(1) Standard for nitrogen oxides. (i) When fossil fuel alone is
combusted, the nitrogen oxides emission limit for fossil fuel in Sec.
60.44b(a) applies.
(ii) When fossil fuel and chemical by-product waste are
simultaneously
[[Page 40774]]
combusted, the nitrogen oxides emission limit is 215 ng/J (0.5 lb/
million Btu).
(2) Emission monitoring for nitrogen oxides. (i) The nitrogen
oxides emissions shall be determined by the compliance and performance
test methods and procedures for nitrogen oxides in Sec. 60.46b.
(ii) The monitoring of the nitrogen oxides emissions shall be
performed in accordance with Sec. 60.48b.
(3) Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. (i) The owner or
operator of the No. 2 Power Boiler shall submit a report on any
excursions from the limits required by paragraph (x)(2) of this section
to the Administrator with the quarterly report required by Sec.
60.49b(i).
(ii) The owner or operator of the No. 2 Power Boiler shall keep
records of the monitoring required by paragraph (x)(3) of this section
for a period of 2 years following the date of such record.
(iii) The owner or operator of the No. 2 Power Boiler shall perform
all the applicable reporting and recordkeeping requirements of Sec.
60.49b.
[FR Doc. 04-15204 Filed 7-6-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P