[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 37 (Friday, February 25, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9226-9229]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-3679]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[R01-OAR-2004-CT-0004; A-1-FRL-7877-6]
Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated
Facilities and Pollutants: Connecticut; Plan for Controlling MWC
Emissions From Existing Municipal Waste Combustors
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves the
sections 111(d)/129 State Plan submitted by the Connecticut Department
of Environmental Protection (CT DEP) on September 16, 2004. This State
Plan is for implementing and enforcing provisions at least as
protective as the federal Emission Guidelines (EGs) applicable to
existing large and small Municipal Waste Combustion (MWC) units.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective on April 26, 2005 without
further notice unless EPA receives adverse comments by March 28, 2005.
If EPA receives such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) ID Number R01-OAR-2004-CT-0004 by one of the following
methods:
A. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
B. Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regional Material
in EDocket (RME), EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is
EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Once in the system,
select ``quick search,'' then key in the appropriate RME Docket
identification number. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
C. E-mail: [email protected].
D. Fax: (617) 918-0521.
E. Mail: ``RME ID Number R01-OAR-2004-CT-0004'', Michael Kenyon,
Chief, Air Programs Branch, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. EPA,
One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAP), Boston, Massachusetts 02114-
2023.
F. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Michael
Kenyon, Chief, Air Programs Branch, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. EPA, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAP), Boston, Massachusetts
02114-2023. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding
federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Regional Material in EDocket
(RME) ID Number R01-OAR-2004-CT-0004. 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://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, 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 Regional Material in EDocket (RME), regulations.gov, or e-mail.
The EPA RME Web site and the federal regulations.gov Web site 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 RME 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.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
Regional Material in EDocket (RME) index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. 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 RME or in hard copy at the Office of
Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New
England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA.
EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below to schedule your
review. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Courcier, Office of Ecosystem
Protection (CAP), EPA-New England, Region 1, Boston, Massachusetts
02203, telephone number (617) 918-1659, fax number (617) 918-0659, e-
mail [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
II. Why Does EPA Want To Regulate Air Emissions From MWCs?
III. When Did EPA First Publish These Requirements?
IV. Who Must Comply With the Requirements?
V. Are Any Sources Exempt From the Requirements?
VI. By What Date Must MWCs in Connecticut Achieve Compliance?
VII. What Happens if an MWC Does Not/Cannot Meet the Requirements by
the Final Compliance Date?
VIII. What Options Are Available to Operators if They Cannot Achieve
Compliance Within One Year of the Effective Date of the State Plan?
IX. What Is a State Plan?
X. What Did the State Submit as Part of Its State Plan?
XI. Why Is EPA Approving Connecticut's State Plan?
XII. Why Does EPA Need To Approve State Plans?
XIII. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
[[Page 9227]]
I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
EPA is approving the above referenced State Plan which Connecticut
submitted on September 16, 2004 for the control of air emissions from
existing large (units with an individual capacity greater than 250 tons
per day) and small (units with an individual capacity of 250 tons per
day or less) MWCs throughout the State.
EPA is publishing this approval action without prior proposal
because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial action and
anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposal to approve the State Plan
should relevant adverse comments be filed. If EPA receives no
significant, material, and adverse comments by March 28, 2005, this
action will be effective April 26, 2005.
If EPA receives significant, material, and adverse comments by the
above date, the Agency will withdraw this action before the effective
date by publishing a subsequent document in the Federal Register. EPA
will address all public comments received in a subsequent final rule
based on the parallel proposed rule published in today's Federal
Register. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time.
II. Why Does EPA Want To Regulate Air Emissions From MWCs?
When burned, municipal solid wastes emit various air pollutants,
including hydrochloric acid, dioxin/furan, toxic metals (lead, cadmium,
and mercury) and particulate matter. Mercury is highly hazardous and is
of particular concern because it persists in the environment and
bioaccumulates through the food web. Serious developmental and adult
effects in humans, primarily damage to the nervous system, have been
associated with exposures to mercury. Harmful effects in wildlife have
also been reported; these include nervous system damage and behavioral
and reproductive deficits. Human and wildlife exposure to mercury occur
mainly through eating of fish. When inhaled, mercury vapor attacks also
the lung tissue and is a cumulative poison. Short-term exposure to
mercury in certain forms can cause hallucinations and impair
consciousness. Long-term exposure to mercury in certain forms can
affect the central nervous system and cause kidney damage.
Exposure to particulate matter can aggravate existing respiratory
and cardiovascular disease and increase risk of premature death.
Hydrochloric acid is a clear colorless gas. Chronic exposure to
hydrochloric acid has been reported to cause gastritis, chronic
bronchitis, dermatitis, and photosensitization. Acute exposure to high
levels of chlorine in humans may result in chest pain, vomiting, toxic
pneumonitis, pulmonary edema, and death. At lower levels, chlorine is a
potent irritant to the eyes, the upper respiratory tract, and lungs.
Exposure to dioxin and furan can cause skin disorders, cancer, and
reproductive effects such as endometriosis. These pollutants can also
affect the immune system.
III. When Did EPA First Publish These Requirements?
The EPA originally promulgated the EGs for large and small MWCs on
December 19, 1995. However, the EGs for the small MWCs were vacated by
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in March
1997. In response to the Court's decision, EPA again proposed the small
MWC emission guidelines on August 30, 1999. On December 19, 1995 and
December 6, 2000, according to sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air
Act (Act), the EPA published the final form of the EGs applicable to
existing large and small MWCs, respectively. The EGs are at 40 CFR part
60, subparts Cb (large MWCs) and BBBB (small MWCs). See 60 FR 65382
(large) and 65 FR 76378 (small) and the Background section.
IV. Who Must Comply With the Requirements?
All large MWCs that commenced construction before December 19,
1995, and all small MWCs that commenced construction on or before
August 30, 1999 must comply with these requirements.
V. Are Any Sources Exempt From the Requirements?
The following incinerator source categories are exempt from the
federal requirements for small MWCs:
(1) Very small MWC units that combust less than 11 tons per day.
(2) Small power production facilities.
(3) Cogeneration facilities.
(4) MWC units that combust only tires.
(5) Hazardous waste combustion.
(6) Materials recovery units.
(7) Co-fired units.
(8) Plastics/rubber recycling units.
(9) Units that combust fuels made from products of plastics/rubber
recycling plants.
(10) Cement kilns.
(11) Air curtain incinerators.
Please refer to 40 CFR 60.1555 for specific definitions of these
incinerator source categories, and any record keeping or other
requirements that still may need to be met.
VI. By What Date Must MWCs in Connecticut Achieve Compliance?
All existing large MWCs must now be in compliance. The final
compliance date for large MWCs was December 19, 2000. All existing
small MWC units in the State of Connecticut must comply with these
requirements by December 6, 2005.
VII. What Happens if a Small MWC Does Not/Cannot Meet the Requirements
by the Final Compliance Date?
Any existing small MWC that fails to meet the requirements by
December 6, 2005 must shut down. The unit will not be allowed to start
up until the owner/operator installs the controls necessary to meet the
requirements.
VIII. What Options Are Available to Operators if They Cannot Achieve
Compliance Within One Year of the Effective Date of the State Plan?
If a small MWC cannot achieve compliance within one year of the
effective date of EPA approval of the State Plan, the operator must
meet any increments of progress contained in the State Plan.
IX. What Is a State Plan?
Section 111(d) of the Act requires that pollutants controlled by
the new source performance standards (NSPS) must also be controlled at
older sources in the same source category. Once an NSPS is issued, EPA
then publishes an EG applicable to the control of the same pollutant
from existing (designated) facilities. States with designated
facilities must then develop State Plans to adopt the EGs into their
body of regulations. States must also include in their State Plans
other elements, such as inventories, legal authority, and public
participation documentation, to demonstrate their ability to enforce
the State Plans.
X. What Did the State Submit as Part of Its State Plan?
The State of Connecticut submitted its Sections 111(d)/129 State
Plan to EPA for approval on August 16, 2002. The State adopted the EG
requirements into the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies
(R.C.S.A.) Section 22a-174-38, ``Municipal Waste Combustors''
[[Page 9228]]
(Section 38) on February 2, 2004 and April 1, 2004. The State Plan
contains:
1. A demonstration of the State's legal authority to implement the
State Plan.
2. R.C.S.A. Section 22a-174-38, ``Municipal Waste Combustors'' as
the enforceable mechanism.
3. An inventory of all the operating sources.
4. An emissions inventory.
5. Emission limits, at least as protective as the limits found
under Subparts Cb and DDDD, that are contained in Section 38.
6. Provisions for compliance schedules that are contained in
Section 38(m).
7. Testing, monitoring, and inspection requirements that are
contained in Section 38(i) and (j), and Sections 22a-174(c) and 22a-6.
8. Reporting and Recordkeeping requirements that are contained in
Section 38(k) and (l).
9. Operator training and qualification requirements that are
contained in Section 38(h).
10. A record of the public notice and hearing requirements that are
contained in Section V of the State Plan.
11. Provisions for state progress reports to EPA that are contained
in section IV of the State Plan.
12. A final compliance date no later than December 6, 2005.
XI. Why Is EPA Approving Connecticut's State Plan?
EPA has evaluated the MWC State Plan submitted by Connecticut for
consistency with the Act, EPA guidelines and policy. EPA has determined
that Connecticut's State Plan meets all requirements and, therefore,
EPA is approving Connecticut's Plan to implement and enforce the EGs,
as it applies to existing Large and Small MWCs.
EPA's approval of Connecticut's State Plan is based on our findings
that:
(1) CTDEP provided adequate public notice of public hearings for
the proposed rule-making that allows Connecticut to carry out and
enforce provisions that are at least as protective as the EGs for Large
and Small MWCs, and
(2) CTDEP demonstrated legal authority to adopt emission standards
and compliance schedules applicable to the designated facilities;
enforce applicable laws, regulations, standards and compliance
schedules; seek injunctive relief; obtain information necessary to
determine compliance; require record keeping; conduct inspections and
tests; require the use of monitors; require emission reports of owners
and operators; and make emission data publicly available.
A detailed discussion of EPA's evaluation of the State Plan is
included in the technical support document (TSD) located in the
official file for this action and available from the EPA contact listed
above. The State Plan meets all of the applicable approval criteria.
XII. Why Does EPA Need To Approve State Plans?
Under section 129 of the Act, EGs are not federally enforceable.
Section 129(b)(2) of the Act requires states to submit State Plans to
EPA for approval. Each state must show that its State Plan will carry
out and enforce the emission guidelines. State Plans must be at least
as protective as the EGs, and they become federally enforceable upon
EPA's approval.
The procedures for adopting and submitting State Plans are in 40
CFR part 60, subpart B. EPA originally issued the Subpart B provisions
on November 17, 1975. EPA amended subpart B on December 19, 1995, to
allow the subparts developed under section 129 to include
specifications that supersede the general provisions in subpart B
regarding the schedule for submittal of State Plans, the stringency of
the emission limitations, and the compliance schedules. See 60 FR
65414.
XIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, 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 by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a state rule
implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.
In reviewing sections 111(d)/129 State Plans, EPA's role is to
approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the
Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing
requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS),
EPA has no authority to disapprove a state plan for failure to use VCS.
It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it
reviews a state plan, to use VCS in place of a submission that
otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule
does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
The 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.
[[Page 9229]]
This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 26, 2005. Interested
parties should comment in response to the proposed rule rather than
petition for judicial review, unless the objection arises after the
comment period allowed for in the proposal. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Metals, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides, Waste
treatment and disposal, Reporting and record-keeping requirements.
Dated: February 14, 2005.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
0
40 CFR part 62 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 62--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart H--Connecticut
0
2. Section 62.1500 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(3), revising
paragraph (c) introductory text; and adding paragraph (c)(2) to read as
follows:
Plan for the Control of Designated Pollutants From Existing Facilities
(Section 111(d) Plan)
Sec. 62.1500 Identification of Plan.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) Revision to Plan to implement the Large and Small Municipal
Waste Combustors, submitted on September 16, 2004.
(c) The Plan applies to existing sources in the following
categories: * * *
(2) Small municipal waste combustors with a design combustion
capacity of 35 to 250 tons per day of municipal solid waste.
0
3. Section 62.1501 is amended by revising the undesignated center
heading and adding paragraph (a)(6) to read as follows:
Metals, Acid Gases, Organic Compounds and Nitrogen Oxides From Existing
Large and Small Municipal Waste Combustors
Sec. 62.1501 Identification of sources.
(a) * * *
(6) Connecticut Resource Recovery Authority/Covanta Projects of
Wallingford, L.P. in Wallingford.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-3679 Filed 2-24-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P