[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 19, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65387-65436]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30257]



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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60

[AD-FRL-5327-5]

RIN 2060-AD00


Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission 
Guidelines for Existing Sources

Municipal Waste Combustors
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action adds standards of performance for new municipal 
waste combustor (MWC) units and emission guidelines for existing MWC's. 
The standards and guidelines implement sections 111 and 129 of the 
Clean Air Act and are based on the Administrator's determination that 
MWC's cause, or contribute significantly to, air pollution that may 
reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. The 
standards and guidelines apply to MWC units at plants with aggregate 
capacities to combust greater than 35 megagrams per day (Mg/day) 
(approximately 40 tons per day) of municipal solid waste (MSW) and 
require sources to achieve emission levels reflecting the maximum 
degree of reduction in emissions of air pollutants that the 
Administrator determined is achievable, taking into consideration the 
cost of achieving such emission reduction, and any non-air-quality 
health and environmental impacts and energy requirements. The 
promulgated standards and guidelines establish emission levels for MWC 
organics (dioxins/furans), MWC metals (cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), mercury 
(Hg), particulate matter (PM), and opacity), MWC acid gases (hydrogen 
chloride (HCl) and sulfur dioxide (SO2)), nitrogen oxides 
(NOX), and MWC fugitive ash emissions. Some of the pollutants 
being regulated are considered to be carcinogens and at sufficient 
concentrations can cause toxic effects following exposure. The 
standards and guidelines also establish requirements for MWC operating 
practices (carbon monoxide (CO), load, flue gas temperature at the PM 
control device inlet, and operator training/certification). 
Additionally, the standards for new MWC plants also require a siting 
analysis and materials separation plan.

DATES: Effective Dates. June 19, 1996 for the standards for new sources 
(Secs. 60.50b through 60.59b) and December 19, 1995 for the emission 
guidelines for existing sources (Secs. 60.30b through 60.39b). The 
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the 
regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of 
June 19, 1996 for the standards for new sources. See table 3 of this 
preamble for a summary of the retrofit schedules for existing MWC 
sources. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for a discussion of the schedule 
for judicial review.
    Comments. Comments on the Information Collection Request (ICR) 
document associated with the final standards for new sources are 
requested, as discussed in section VI.B of this preamble. Comments on 
the ICR document must be received on or before February 20, 1996. Refer 
to Section VI.B for further information on this request for comment.

ADDRESSES: Comments. As noted above, comments on the ICR document 

[[Page 65388]]
associated with the final standards for new source are requested. See 
section VI.B and the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble 
for further information on obtaining a copy of the ICR document and 
addresses for submitting comments on the ICR document.
    Background Information. The principal background information for 
the final standards and guidelines includes: (1) A background 
information document (BID) entitled, ``Municipal Waste Combustion: 
Background Information for Promulgated Standards and Guidelines--
Summary of Public Comments and Responses'' (EPA-453/R-95-0136), which 
contains a summary of all the significant public comments submitted 
regarding the proposed standards and guidelines, the EPA's response to 
these comments, and a summary of the changes made to the standards and 
guidelines as a result of the comments; and (2) several technical 
documents listed under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, including all of the 
background information documents that supported the proposal and 
promulgation of the subpart Ea standards and subpart Ca guidelines. A 
document entitled ``FACT SHEET: New Municipal Waste Combustors--Subpart 
Eb Standards,'' which succinctly summarizes the final standards, and a 
document entitled ``FACT SHEET: Existing Municipal Waste Combustors--
Subpart Cb Emission Guidelines,'' which succinctly summarizes the 
guidelines, are also available. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 
instructions and addresses for obtaining these documents.
    Docket. Docket Nos. A-90-45 and A-89-08, containing supporting 
information used in developing the standards and guidelines, are 
available for public inspection and copying between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 
p.m., Monday through Friday except for Federal holidays at the 
following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air and 
Radiation Docket and Information Center (Mail Code 6102), 401 M Street 
SW, Washington DC 20460 [phone: (202) 260-7548]. The docket is located 
at the above address in room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor, 
central mall). A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Walter Stevenson at (919) 541-5264 
or Mr. Fred Porter at (919) 541-5251, Combustion Group, Emission 
Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background Information.

    On December 20, 1989, the EPA proposed standards and guidelines for 
MWC's in subparts Ea and Ca of 40 CFR 60, respectively. The subparts Ea 
and Ca were promulgated on February 11, 1991 and were developed under 
authority of paragraph (b) of section 111 of the Clean Air Act of 1977. 
The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act required the EPA to review 
these emission standards and guidelines and determine if they were 
fully consistent with the requirements of section 129. The EPA reviewed 
the subpart Ea standards and subpart Ca guidelines and concluded that 
they were not fully consistent with the requirements of section 129. 
Therefore, the EPA proposed to revise the standards and guidelines in a 
September 20, 1994 proposal to make the standards and guidelines fully 
consistent with the requirements of section 129. Municipal waste 
combustors that begin construction after September 20, 1994 or that 
begin modification or reconstruction after June 19, 1996 and that meet 
all other applicability criteria are subject to the revised standards 
(subpart Eb). Municipal waste combustors that were constructed on or 
before September 20, 1994 and that meet all other applicability 
criteria are subject to the revised guidelines (subpart Cb). Municipal 
waste combustors that were constructed after December 20, 1989 and on 
or before September 20, 1994 and that meet all other applicability 
criteria are subject to both the subpart Ea standards (1991 standards 
for new sources) and the subpart Cb guidelines (1995 retrofit 
guidelines for existing sources). In this final rule, the EPA is 
withdrawing the subpart Ca guidelines (1991 guidelines for existing 
sources). In a separate action in today's Federal Register the EPA is 
publishing a direct final rule amending the text of subpart Ea.
    This Federal Register final rule discusses: (1) The standards for 
new MWC's, (2) the guidelines for existing MWC's, (3) the withdrawal of 
the 1991 subpart Ca guidelines for existing MWC's, and (4) a request 
for public comment on the ICR document. This preamble and regulatory 
text are available on the EPA's Technology Transfer Network (TTN) 
electronic bulletin board. Also available on the EPA's TTN are FACT 
SHEETS, which summarize the final standards and guidelines. They are 
suggested reading for persons requiring an overview of the standards 
and guidelines. The FACT SHEETS can also be obtained by calling Donna 
Collins at (919) 541-5578. The TTN contains 18 electronic bulletin 
boards, and the following 5 items are included in the Clean Air Act 
Amendments (CAAA) bulletin board under menu item ``Recently Signed 
Rules'' in file ``MWC2.ZIP'':
    (1) ``FACT SHEET: New Municipal Waste Combustors--Subpart Eb 
Standards (1995).''
    (2) ``FACT SHEET: Existing Municipal Waste Combustors--Subpart Cb 
Emission Guidelines (1995).''
    (3) Federal Register notice for this promulgation: ``Standards of 
Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for 
Existing Sources: Municipal Waste Combustors'' (this document).
    (4) ``Municipal Waste Combustion: Background Information for 
Promulgated Standards and Guidelines--Summary of Public Comments and 
Responses,'' EPA-453/R-95-0136.
    (5) Information Collection Request document for these standards for 
new sources: ``Standard Form 83 Supporting Statement for ICR No. 
1506.5--1995 Standards for New Municipal Waste Combustors (Subpart 
Eb),'' September 29, 1995.
    The TTN is accessible 24 hours per day, 7 days per week except 
Monday morning from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. when the system is updated. 
The service is free except for the cost of the phone call. Dial (919) 
541-5742 to access the TTN. The TTN is compatible with up to a 14,400 
bits-per-second (bps) modem. An alternative way to access the TTN is by 
``telenet,'' using access code ``ttnbbs.rtpnc.epa.gov''. Further 
instructions for accessing the TTN can be obtained by calling the help 
desk at (919) 541-5384.
    Documents in the Docket. The background information for today's 
promulgation includes all of the documents that supported the proposal 
and promulgation of the subpart Ea standards and subpart Ca guidelines 
(docket No. A-90-45 and docket No. A-89-08). Key background information 
documents used in developing the subpart Ea standards, the subpart Ca 
guidelines, and today's promulgated standards and guidelines are as 
follows:
    (1) ``Municipal Waste Combustors--Background Information for 
Proposed Standards: 111(b) Model Plant Description and Cost Report,'' 
EPA-450/3-89-27b, August 1989;
    (2) ``Municipal Waste Combustors--Background Information for 
Proposed Standards: Post-Combustion Technology Performance,'' EPA-450/
3-89-27c, August 1989;
    (3) ``Municipal Waste Combustion Assessment: Combustion Control at 

[[Page 65389]]
    Existing Facilities,'' EPA-600/8-89-057, August 1989;
    (4) ``Municipal Waste Combustion Assessment, Technical Basis for 
Good Combustion Practices,'' EPA-600/8-89-063, August 1989;
    (5) ``Municipal Waste Combustors--Background Information for 
Proposed Standards: Control of NOX Emissions,'' EPA-450/3-89-27d, 
August 1989;
    (6) ``Municipal Waste Combustors--Background Information for 
Proposed Standards: Cost Procedures,'' EPA-450/3-89-27a, August 1989;
    (7) ``Economic Impact Analysis for Proposed Emission Standards and 
Guidelines for Municipal Waste Combustors,'' EPA-450/3-91-029, March 
1994;
    (8) ``Municipal Waste Combustors--Background Information for 
Proposed Guidelines for Existing Facilities,'' EPA-450/3-89-27e, August 
1989;
    (9) ``Municipal Waste Combustion: Background Information for 
Promulgated Standards and Guidelines--Summary of Public Comments and 
Responses,'' EPA-453/R-95-0136, 1995.
    These documents and additional technical information are contained 
in dockets A-90-45 and A-89-08. Docket materials are available for 
inspection and copying as described in the ADDRESSES section of this 
preamble.
    Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, 
judicial review of the actions taken by this notice is available by 
filing of a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days of today's publication of 
this rule. Under section 307(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act, the 
requirements that are in today's notice may not be challenged later in 
the civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce these 
requirements (42 U.S.C. 7607(b)).
    Preamble Outline. The following outline is provided to aid in 
locating information in the introductory text (preamble) to the final 
standards and guidelines.

I. Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Measurement Units

A. Acronyms
B. Abbreviations and Measurement Units

II. Background and Withdrawal of the 1991 Subpart Ca Emission 
Guidelines

III. Summary of Considerations in Developing the 1995 Standards for New 
Sources and Guidelines for Existing Sources

A. Purpose of the Standards and Guidelines
B. Technical Basis of the Standards and Guidelines
C. Stakeholders and Public Involvement

IV. Standards of Performance for New Sources (1995)--Summary of the 
Standards, Impacts of the Standards, and Significant Issues and Changes 
to the Proposed Standards

A. Summary of the Standards
B. Significant Issues and Changes to the Proposed Standards
    1. Applicability
    2. Emission Limits for MWC Metals, Acid Gases, Organics, 
Nitrogen Oxides, and Ash Fugitive Emissions
    3. Good Combustion Practices
    4. Operator Training and Certification
    5. Air Curtain Incinerators
    6. Siting Analysis/Materials Separation Plan
    7. Compliance and Performance Testing
    8. Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
C. Impacts of the Standards

V. Guidelines for Existing Sources (1995)--Summary of the Guidelines, 
Impacts of the Guidelines, and Significant Issues and Changes to the 
Proposed Guidelines

A. Summary of the Guidelines
B. Significant Issues and Changes to the Proposed Guidelines
    1. Designated Facilities
    2. Emission Limits for MWC Metals, Acid Gases, Organics, 
Nitrogen Oxides, and Fugitive Ash Emissions
    3. Good Combustion Practices
    4. Operator Training and Certification
    5. Air Curtain Incinerators
    6. Compliance and Performance Testing
    7. Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Compliance 
Schedules
C. Impacts of the Guidelines

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Executive Order 12866
D. Unfunded Mandates Act
E. Executive Order 12875
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act
G. Clean Air Act Procedural Requirements

I. Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Measurement Units

    The following definitions, acronyms, and measurement units are 
provided to clarify the preamble to the final standards and guidelines.

A. Acronyms

ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
BID Background Information Document
CEMS continuous emissions monitoring system(s)
COMS continuous opacity monitoring system(s) dioxins/furans 
polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans
DSI dry sorbent injection
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ESP electrostatic precipitator
FF fabric filter
GCP good combustion practices
ICR information collection request
MACT maximum achievable control technology
MSW municipal solid waste
MWC municipal waste combustor
MWI medical waste incinerator
NSR New Source Review
NOX nitrogen oxides
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning Standards
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PM particulate matter
RDF refuse-derived fuel
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
SD spray dryer
SNCR selective noncatalytic reduction
TEQ basis 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin toxic equivalent 
based on the 1989 international toxic equivalency factors

B. Abbreviations and Measurement Units

 deg.C=degrees Celsius (degrees Fahrenheit= deg.C*9/5+32)
Cd=cadmium
CO=carbon monoxide
CO2=carbon dioxide
dscf=dry standard cubic feet (at 14.7 pounds per square inch, 68 
deg.F)
dscm=dry standard cubic meters (at 14 pounds per square inch, 68 
deg.F)
g=gram (454 grams per pound)
g/yr=grams per year
gr=grains (7,000 grains per pound)
HCl=hydrogen chloride
Hg=mercury
kg=kilogram (0.454 kilograms per pound)
kg/yr=kilograms per year
m3=cubic meter (35.3 cubic feet per cubic meter)
mg=milligrams (10-3 grams)
Mg=megagram (1.1 tons)
Mg/d=megagrams per day
Mg/yr=megagrams per year
ng=nanogram (10-9 grams)
Pb=lead
ppmv=parts per million by volume
SO2=sulfur dioxide
tons/d=tons per day
tons/yr=tons per year
total mass basis (dioxins/furans=total mass of tetra- through octa-
chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibzofurans

II. Background and Withdrawal of the 1991 Subpart Ca Emission 
Guidelines

    By the mid-1980's, several studies had been performed to determine 
whether MWC emissions should be regulated and, if so, under what 
section of the Clean Air Act. As set forth in the Advanced Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (52 FR 25399, July 7, 1987), the EPA decided to 
regulate air emissions from MWC's under section 111 of the Clean Air 
Act, and to base the 

[[Page 65390]]
regulation on best demonstrated technology, as required by section 111. 
On December 20, 1989, the EPA proposed standards for new MWC's and 
guidelines for existing MWC's (54 FR 52251 and 54 FR 52209, 
respectively). On November 15, 1990, 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air 
Act were enacted and added section 129 to the Clean Air Act. Section 
129 of the Clean Air Act specifies that revised standards and 
guidelines must be developed for MWC's in accordance with the 
requirements of both section 111 and new section 129. Section 129 
further specifies that revised standards and guidelines be developed 
for both large and small MWC plants and that the revised standards and 
guidelines must reflect more restrictive performance levels. Section 
129 includes a schedule for revising the 1991 standards and guidelines.
    When the EPA did not comply with the section 129 schedule, the 
Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Integrated 
Waste Services Association filed complaints with the U.S. District 
Court for the Eastern District of New York. The resulting consent 
decree required the EPA Administrator to sign a notice of proposed 
rulemaking not later than September 1, 1994 and a notice of 
promulgation not later than October 31, 1995 (Nos. CV-92-2093, CV-93-
0284, and CV-93-5144). The proposal notice for the standards and 
guidelines was signed as scheduled and published on September 20, 1994 
(59 FR 48198 and 59 FR 48228, respectively). This notice responds to 
the requirement for the Administrator to sign the final standards and 
guidelines by October 31, 1995.
    The standards and guidelines promulgated on February 11, 1991 (56 
FR 5488 and 56 FR 5514, respectively) apply to only large MWC's 
(capacities above 225 Mg/day) and reflect best demonstrated technology. 
Today's notice promulgates revised standards and guidelines that are 
fully consistent with sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air Act and 
extend coverage of the revised standards and guidelines to MWC units 
located at MWC plants with aggregate plant capacity above 35 Mg/day.
    Today's promulgated standards for new sources are more stringent 
than the standards promulgated on February 11, 1991. Today's 
promulgated standards will apply to plants for which construction 
commenced after September 20, 1994 or for which reconstruction or 
modification commenced after June 19, 1996. The guidelines will apply 
to all MWC's constructed prior to September 20, 1994. The February 11, 
1991 subpart Ea standards will remain in effect for plants constructed, 
modified, or reconstructed between December 20, 1989 and September 20, 
1994. Sources subject to the February 11, 1991 subpart Ea standards are 
also subject to the guidelines being promulgated today under subpart 
Cb. In some cases, the promulgated subpart Cb guidelines are more 
stringent than the existing subpart Ea standards. The control 
technologies being used to meet the emission limits included in the 
1991 subpart Ea standards will be able to comply with the promulgated 
subpart Cb guidelines, except supplemental controls would be required 
to reduce Hg emissions and fugitive ash emissions. The direct final 
rule also being published in today's Federal Register will provide 
consistency between the subpart Ea and Cb rules.
    Today's promulgated guidelines under subpart Cb for existing 
sources are more stringent than the guidelines promulgated under 
subpart Ca on February 11, 1991. Today's promulgated guidelines will 
apply to MWC's for which construction commenced on or before September 
20, 1994. Today's promulgated guidelines are based on maximum 
achievable control technology, or MACT, and will require MWC plants to 
purchase and install different types of air pollution control equipment 
than the best demonstrated technology-based guidelines promulgated in 
1991 under subpart Ca. In consideration of public comments, which 
supported the withdrawal of subpart Ca, and to satisfy the MACT 
requirements of section 129 of the Clean Air Act, the EPA is 
withdrawing the 1991 subpart Ca guidelines as a part of today's action.

III. Summary of Considerations in Developing the 1995 Standards for New 
Sources and Guidelines for Existing Sources

A. Purpose of the Standards and Guidelines

    Under sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air Act, the EPA is 
required to develop and adopt performance standards and guidelines for 
MWC's. Congress specifically added section 129 to the Clean Air Act to 
address public concerns about MWC's and other solid waste combustion 
units. Under section 111, performance standards and guidelines must be 
developed for new and existing stationary sources that may contribute 
to air pollution and that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger 
public health or welfare. Under section 129 of the Clean Air Act, the 
standards and guidelines adopted for MWC's must be based on MACT.
    Independent of Clean Air Act requirements, the general public is 
concerned about emissions from all sources including MWC's. This is 
understandable considering (1) about two-thirds of the MWC population 
is located in air quality nonattainment areas with high population 
densities, and (2) the EPA's 1994 MWC Dioxin Survey identified a 
limited number of older poorly controlled MWC's with atypically high 
dioxin/furan emissions (interim corrective actions have been taken at 
these MWC's).
    The MWC industry has aggressively controlled new MWC plants built 
since 1990, and almost half of the existing population currently is 
equipped with high efficiency air pollution control equipment. The 
other older half of the population has control equipment with lower 
efficiency. As mentioned earlier, health effects are associated with 
many of the pollutants emitted from MWC's, and the standards and 
guidelines being promulgated today will bring all MWC units up to the 
same high performance level.
    The EPA estimates that in the United States, there are about 307 
operating MWC units at 128 plants, providing a total U.S. MSW 
combustion capacity of about 94,000 Mg/day. Approximately 16 percent of 
MSW generated in the United States is combusted.
    Emissions from MWC's contain organics (dioxins/furans), metals (Cd, 
Pb, Hg, PM, and opacity), acid gases (Hcl and SO2), and NOX. 
These pollutants can have adverse effects on both public health and 
welfare. The EPA recently released a draft report reassessing the 
health effects of human exposure to dioxins/furans. In the draft 
report, which is currently undergoing review, MWC's are identified as 
one source of dioxin/furan emissions. Other MWC emissions of principal 
concern include Pb, Cd, and Hg. Acid gas and NOX emissions 
contribute to acid rain when emissions of SO2 and NOX are 
chemically transformed in the atmosphere into sulfuric and nitric acids 
and return to earth as wet deposition such as rain, fog, or snow, or as 
dry deposition such as fine particles or gases. Acid deposition damages 
lakes and harms forests and buildings. Nitrogen oxides also contribute 
to low-level ozone and urban area smog formation.
    Today's standards and guidelines are set forth as emission limits 
and will significantly reduce MWC emissions. 

[[Page 65391]]


B. Technical Basis of Standards and Guidelines

    Section 129(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act requires the revised 
standards for new MWC's and revised guidelines for existing MWC's to 
reflect the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of designated air 
pollutants, taking into consideration the cost of achieving such 
emission reduction, and any non-air-quality health and environmental 
impacts and energy requirements that the Administrator determines are 
achievable for a particular category of sources. (This control level is 
commonly referred to as the ``maximum achievable control technology, or 
``MACT''.) Section 129 also provides that standards for new sources may 
not be less stringent than the emissions control achieved in practice 
by the best controlled similar unit. This is commonly referred to as 
the ``MACT floor'' for new MWC units. Additionally, section 129 
provides that the emission limitations in the guidelines for existing 
MWC's may not be less stringent than the average emission limitations 
achieved by the best performing 12 percent of units in the category. 
This is commonly referred to as the ``MACT floor'' for existing MWC 
units. Emission control options less stringent than the MACT floor can 
not be considered in developing section 129 standards and guidelines.
    Technical data on the number and size of MWC's, control 
technologies in use, permit emission limits, and emission test data 
were used to determine the MACT floor for new and existing MWC's and to 
define control alternatives. The types of data EPA considered in 
selecting final standards and guidelines included the following: (1) 
Over 100 MWC plant-specific questionnaires; (2) emissions information 
from literature, and State and local agencies; and (3) EPA and industry 
test reports. Overall, the EPA used performance test data from over 60 
MWC plants to develop the standards and guidelines. After proposal, the 
EPA reviewed additional data submitted with public comments on the 
proposal and data that EPA gathered from States and industry. Based on 
the new information, the EPA reviewed both the proposed MACT 
determinations for new and existing MWC's and the regulatory 
alternatives. The reassessment of the standards and guidelines in light 
of the new data resulted in the EPA revising the MACT emission rates 
for some pollutants.
    The most significant changes to the standards and guidelines since 
proposal are summarized in sections IV.B and V.B., respectively, of 
this preamble. The rationales for these changes as well as other 
changes are summarized in the preamble and discussed in more detail in 
the BID. In keeping with the Administrator's ``reinventing government'' 
initiative, several of the changes to the guidelines and standards were 
made to streamline the regulations and provide increased flexibility 
while optimizing environmental control by using common sense 
initiatives. Examples of these changes include the following: (1) 
Reduced dioxin/furan testing for MWC plants with low dioxin/furan 
emission levels; (2) NOX guidelines for large MWC plants that 
allow plants to use an emissions averaging plan to demonstrate 
compliance for two or more existing MWC units located at the same 
facility; (3) clarification of siting requirements for new MWC's; (4) 
providing additional time for MWC operators to obtain operator training 
and certification; (5) replacing quarterly reporting with annual 
reporting (semiannual reporting if noncompliance); (6) revised text to 
clarify that the regulations do not apply to MWC plants with combustion 
capacity less than 35 Mg/day; (7) exemption for plants firing small 
amounts of MSW (10 Mg/day or less); (8) exemption for combustion of 
clean wood; and (9) allowing certain records to be maintained in either 
electronic or paper format without duplication. All of these changes 
are discussed further in sections IV and V of this preamble, and 
represent changes that improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the 
standards and guidelines without any reduction in environmental 
protection.

C. Stakeholders and Public Involvement

    Prior to proposal, in accordance with section 117 of the Clean Air 
Act, the EPA consulated with advisory committees, independent experts, 
Federal departments and agencies, and owners, operators, and 
manufacturers of MWC's. Numerous discussions were held with 
governmental entities, industry representatives, and environmental 
groups including, but not limited to, the following groups: the U.S. 
Conference of Majors, the National League of Cities, the National 
Association of Counties, the Municipal Waste Management Association, 
the Solid Waste Association of North America, the Integrated Waste 
Services Association, the Sierra Club, and the Natural Resources 
Defense Council.
    The standards and guidelines being adopted today were proposed in 
the Federal Register on September 20, 1994 (59 FR 48198 and 59 FR 
48228, respectively). The preambles for the proposed standards and 
guidelines describe the rationale for the proposed standards and 
guidelines. After proposal, the EPA provided interested persons the 
opportunity to comment through a written comment period. The public 
comment period was from September 20, 1994 to November 21, 1994. 
Comments were received from private citizens, industry representatives, 
environmental groups, and governmental entities. The comments have been 
carefully considered, and changes have been made in the standards and 
guidelines where appropriate. Sections IV and V of this preamble 
discuss the major revisions to the standards and guidelines to address 
the commenters' concerns.

IV. Standards of Performance for New Sources (1995)--Summary of the 
Standards, Impacts of the Standards, and Significant Issues and Changes 
to the Proposed Standards

    This section presents a summary of the final standards, including 
identification of the source category and pollutants being regulated, 
and presentation of the final emission limits and their associated 
performance testing, monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements. This section also discusses the most significant changes 
to the proposed standards. Also discussed are the impacts of the final 
standards.

A. Summary of the Standards

    The final standards (subpart Eb) apply to each new MWC unit located 
at an MWC facility that has an aggregate plant capacity to combust over 
35 Mg/day of MSW, for which construction commenced after September 20, 
1994 or modification or reconstruction commenced after June 19, 1996. 
Municipal waste combustors that commenced construction on or before 
September 20, 1994 are not covered under the subpart Eb standards. 
Municipal waste combustors constructed on or before September 20, 1994 
are considered existing sources and are subject to the guidelines that 
are addressed in section V of this notice.
    An MWC is defined as any setting or equipment that combusts MSW 
including air curtain incinerators. Municipal solid waste combustion 
includes the direct combustion of MSW or the combustion of MSW gases 
from pyrolysis or gasification. The MWC unit includes any type of 
setting or equipment including combustion equipment with or without 
heat recovery.

[[Page 65392]]

    Municipal solid waste is defined as a mixture or a single-item 
waste stream of household, commercial, and/or institutional discards. 
This would include materials such as paper, yard waste, plastics, 
leather, rubber, glass, metals, and other combustible and 
noncombustible materials. The final MSW definition is revised slightly 
from proposal to make it clear that MSW does not include used motor 
oil; sewage sludge; wood pallets; construction, renovation, and 
demolition wastes (including but not limited to railroad ties and 
telephone poles); clean wood; industrial process or manufacturing 
wastes; medical waste; or motor vehicles. Although these wastes are not 
MSW, they can be intermixed with MSW and can be combusted in MWC 
plants. The regulations do not prohibit their combustion. The 
definition of MSW includes RDF, which is municipal solid waste that is 
shredded (or pelletized) before combustion. Any medical, industrial, or 
other type of waste combustor plant with capability to combust greater 
than 35 Mg/day of MSW and is in compliance with a federally enforceable 
permit to combust less than 10 Mg/day of MSW is not covered by this 
standard. Furthermore, cofired MWC plants that combust less than 30 
percent MSW (on a calendar quarter basis) are exempt. A summary of the 
final standards is presented in table 1. In table 1, significant 
revisions made since proposal are marked with an asterisk (*) and are 
discussed in section IV.B.

       Table 1.--Summary of Standards for new MWC's (Subpart Eb)a       
   [* indicates a significant change since proposal and the change is   
                       discussed in this preamble]                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability                                                           
The final standards apply to new MWC                                    
 units located at plants with                                           
 capacities to combust greater than 35                                  
 Mg/day of residential, commercial, and/                                
 or institutional discards. Industrial                                  
 manufacturing discards are not covered                                 
 by the standards. Any medical,                                         
 industrial manufacturing, municipal,                                   
 or other type of waste combustor plant                                 
 with capacity to combust greater than                                  
 35 Mg/day of MSW and with a federally                                  
 enforceable permit to combust less                                     
 than 10 Mg/day of MSW is not covered.*                                 
                                                                        
Plant Size (MSW combustion capacity)     Requirement.                   
35 Mg/day*..................  Not covered by standards.      
>Mg/day but 225 Mg/day        Subject to provisions listed   
 (referred to as small MWC plants).       below.                        
>225 Mg/day (referred to as large MWC    Subject to provisions listed   
 plants).                                 below.                        
Good Combustion Practices                                               
 Applies to large and small MWC plants.                         
 A site-specific operator training manual is required to be     
 developed and made available for MWC personnel.                        
 The EPA or State MWC operator training course must be completed
 by the MWC chief facility operator, shift supervisors, and control room
 operators.                                                             
 The ASME (or State-equivalent) operator certification must be  
 obtained by the MWC chief facility operator (mandatory), shift         
 supervisors (mandatory), and control room operators (optional).*       
 The MWC load level is required to be measured and not to exceed
 110 percent of the maximum load level measured during the most recent  
 dioxin/furan performance test.                                         
 The PM control device inlet flue gas temperature is required to
 be measured and not to exceed the temperature 17  deg.C above the      
 maximum temperature measured during the most recent dioxin/furan       
 performance test.                                                      
 The CO level is required to be measured using CEMS, and the    
 concentration in the flue gas is required not to exceed the following: 
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                                        
                                                              Averaging 
              MWC type                      CO level             time   
                                                               (hours)  
Modular starved-air and excess-air.  50 ppmv...............            4
Mass burn waterwall and refractory.  100 ppmv..............            4
Mass burn rotary refractory........  100 ppmv..............            4
Fluidized-bed combustion...........  100 ppmv..............            4
Pulverized coal/RDF mixed fuel-      150 ppmv*.............            4
 fired.                                                                 
Spreader stoker coal/RDF mixed fuel- 150 ppmv*.............           24
 fired.                                                                 
RDF stoker.........................  150 ppmv..............           24
Mass burn rotary waterwall.........  100 ppmv..............           24
MWC Organic Emissions (measured as                                      
 total mass dioxins/furans):                                            
 Dioxins/furans                                                 
 (performance test by EPA Reference                                     
 Method 23)                                                             
Large and small MWC plants.........  13 ng/dscm total mass              
                                      (mandatory) or 7 ng/              
                                      dscm total mass                   
                                      (optional to qualify              
                                      for less frequent                 
                                      testing).*b.                      

[[Page 65393]]
                                                                        
 Basis for dioxin/furan      GCP and SD/FF/carbon               
 limit                                injection.                        
MWC Metal Emissions:                                                    
 PM (performance test by                                        
 EPA Reference Method 5)                                                
  Large and small MWC plants.......  24 mg/dscm (0.010 gr/              
                                      dscf).*                           
 Opacity (performance test                                      
 by EPA Reference Method 9)                                             
  Large and small MWC plants.......  10 percent (6-minute               
                                      average)                          
 Cd (performance test by                                        
 EPA Reference Method 29)                                               
  Large and small MWC plants.......  0.020 mg/dscm (8.7 gr/             
                                      million dscf).*                   
 Pb (performance test by                                        
 EPA Reference Method 29)                                               
  Large and small MWC plants.......  0.20 mg/dscm (87 gr/               
                                      million dscf).*                   
 Hg (performance test by                                        
 EPA Reference Method 29)                                               
  Large and small MWC plants.......  0.080 mg/dscm (35 gr/              
                                      million dscf) or 85-              
                                      percent reduction in              
                                      Hg emissions                      
 Basis for PM, opacity, Cd,                                     
 Pb, and Hg limits                                                      
  Large and small MWC plants.......  See basis for dioxin/              
                                      furan limit                       
MWC Acid Gas Emissions:                                                 
 SO2 (performance test by                                       
 CEMS)                                                                  
  Large and small MWC plants.......  30 ppmv or 80-percent              
                                      reduction in SO2                  
                                      emissions                         
 HCl (performance test by                                       
 EPA Reference Method 26)                                               
  Large and small MWC plants.......  25 ppmv or 95-percent              
                                      reduction in HCl                  
                                      emissions                         
 Basis for SO2 and HCl       See basis for dioxin/              
 limits                               furan limit..                     
Nitrogen Oxides Emissions:                                              
 NOx (performance test by                                       
 CEMS)                                                                  
                                                                        
  Large MWC plants.................  150 ppmv, except 180               
                                      ppmv is allowed for               
                                      the first year of                 
                                      operation.*                       
  Small MWC plants.................  No NOX control                     
                                      requirement                       
                                                                        
 Basis for NOX limit                                            
                                                                        
  Large MWC plants.................  SNCR                               
  Small MWC plants.................  No NOX control                     
                                      requirement.                      

[[Page 65394]]
                                                                        
Fugitive Ash Emissions:                                                 
 Fugitive emissions                                             
 (performance test by EPA Reference                                     
 Method 22)                                                             
  Large and small MWC plants.......  Visible emissions less             
                                      than 5 percent of the             
                                      time from the ash                 
                                      transfer system                   
                                      except during                     
                                      maintenance and                   
                                      repair activities.*.              
   Basis for fugitive        Wet ash handling or                
   emissions limit.                   enclosed ash handling.            
Siting Requirements:                                                    
   Large and small MWC       (1) Siting analysis*,              
   plants.                            (2) materials                     
                                      separation plan, and              
                                      (3) public meetings               
                                      (including response               
                                      to comments)                      
Performance Testing and Monitoring                                      
 Requirements:                                                          
   Reporting frequency.....  Annual (semiannual if              
                                      violation).*                      
   Load, flue gas            Continuous monitoring,             
   temperature.                       4-hour block                      
                                      arithmetic average.               
   CO......................  CEMS, 4-hour block or              
                                      24-hour daily                     
                                      arithmetic average,               
                                      as applicable.                    
 Dioxins/furans, PM, Cd,                                        
 Pb, HC1, and Hg                                                        
  Large MWC plants.................  Annual stack test (see             
                                      reduced testing                   
                                      option for low                    
                                      emitters of dioxins/              
                                      furans).*                         
  Small MWC plants.................  Annual or third year               
                                      stack test.*                      
   Opacity.................  COMS (6-minute                     
                                      average) and annual               
                                      stack test.                       
   SO2.....................  CEMS, 24-hour daily                
                                      geometric mean.                   

[[Page 65395]]
                                                                        
   NOX (large MWC plants     CEMS, 24-hour daily                
   only).                             arithmetic average.               
   Fugitive ash emissions..  Annual test.                       
*=a significant change since proposal, and the change is discussed in   
  this preamble.                                                        
a All concentration levels in the table are corrected to 7 percent O2,  
  dry basis.                                                            
b Although not part of the dioxin/furan limit, the limit of 13 ng/dscm  
  total mass is equal to about 0.1 to 0.3 ng/dscm TEQ. The optional     
  reduced testing limit of 7 ng/dscm total mass is equal to about 0.1 to
  0.2 ng/dscm TEQ.                                                      


    B. Significant Issues and Changes to the Proposed Standards (Issues 
were marked with the ``*'' symbol in table 1)
    The most significant changes to the standards since proposal are 
discussed below. Additional rationales for these changes, as well as 
other changes being made are provided in the promulgation BID (EPA-453/
R-95-0136). Some of the changes made that are not discussed below 
include GCP requirements, monitoring requirements, and reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.
1. Applicability
    At proposal, an MWC plant of 35 Mg/day capacity that cofired 30 
percent (10 Mg/day) or less MSW would have been exempt from the 
standards. This 30 percent cofiring provision was retained in the final 
rule. Additionally, a 10 Mg/day exemption has been added to the final 
rule to exempt all combustion units independent of size that fire only 
a small amount of MSW. In the final standards, any medical, industrial 
manufacturing, or other type of waste combustor capable of combusting 
more than 35 Mg/day MSW but actually combusting less than 10 Mg/day of 
MSW is not subject to this rule, provided it submits an initial report 
containing a copy of the plant's federally enforceable permit limiting 
the amount of MSW that may be combusted by the plant to less than 10 
Mg/day and keeps records on the daily weight of MSW fired.
    At proposal, a cofired combustor was defined as a unit combusting a 
fuel feed stream where 30 percent or less was comprised of MSW, as 
measured on a 24-hour daily basis. Several commenters expressed concern 
about a cofired status determination being made on a daily basis. For 
example, some facilities that burn biomass material including yard 
waste would have difficulty making a determination of cofired status on 
a daily basis. Biomass material including yard waste (which is MSW) and 
clean wood (which is not MSW) are often collected together and stored 
on- or off-site for a period of time and intermixed before being 
combusted. In such cases, it is difficult or impossible to determine 
what percentage of the waste combusted daily was yard waste. After 
considering the public comments, the EPA determined that the definition 
of cofired combustor should be revised to allow for measuring the 
percent MSW burned on a calendar quarterly basis. This change is 
consistent with current waste refuse storage and recordkeeping 
procedures.
    Also under the proposal, MWC plants of 25 to 35 Mg/day capacity 
were required to submit an initial notification of construction, but 
they were not subject to the proposed standards or guidelines. Only MWC 
plants greater than 35 Mg/day capacity were covered by the proposal. As 
part of the Administrator's ``reinventing government'' initiative, the 
initial notification requirement for MWC plants between 25 and 35 Mg/
day capacity was removed from the final rule to minimize the reporting 
requirement for smaller plants. This change reduced reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements for both the MWC and the EPA, but did not 
reduce the level of environmental protection provided by the standards 
and guidelines being adopted today.
    Under the proposed standards, clean wood was included in the 
definition of MSW. Several commenters disagreed with this decision to 
cover clean wood under the MWC standards. Under the final rule, clean 
wood is not considered to be MSW. Clean wood includes untreated wood or 
untreated wood products including clean untreated lumber, tree stumps 
(whole or chipped), and tree limbs (whole or chipped). Clean wood is 
exempt from the definition of MSW because available data indicate that 
combustion of clean wood results in low emission of dioxins/furans, Hg, 
and other pollutants. Clean wood is predominantly an agricultural, 
industrial, or other nonmunicipal solid waste; regulation of the 
combustion of these types of wastes is currently being addressed under 
a separate rulemaking. Clean wood does not include yard waste, which is 
covered by the final MWC standards; yard waste includes grass, grass 
clippings, bushes, shrubs, and clippings from bushes and shrubs that 
are generated by residential, commercial/retail, institutional, or 
nonmanufacturing industrial sources as part of maintenance activities 
associated with yards or other private or public lands.
2. Emission Limits for MWC Metals, Acid Gases, Organics, Nitrogen 
Oxides, and Ash Fugitive Emissions
    Many commenters expressed concern as to whether the proposed 
emission limits for all regulated pollutants are actually achievable by 
an MWC. These commenters noted that no single MWC existed with all the 
controls proposed as MACT (SD/FF/SNCR and carbon injection) and the 
standards may not be achievable. Since proposal, the EPA has obtained 
data from 12 new MWC units at 5 MWC plants that have recently begun 
operation and all are equipped with the full set of controls proposed 
as MACT (SD/FF/SNCR and carbon injection). Data from these plants show 
that all proposed emission limits for all pollutants are simultaneously 
being achieved. Therefore, the EPA remains convinced that properly 
designed, constructed, maintained, and operated MWC plants can comply 
with all pollutant emission limits included in the final standards.
    For new sources, the MACT floor for each regulated pollutant was 
established as the emission level achievable by the best controlled 
source. To determine new source MACT for proposal, the EPA evaluated 
the performance of SD/FF/SNCR/carbon injection. Since proposal, the EPA 
obtained additional information regarding the performance of the 
control technologies determined to be MACT (SD/FF/SNCR/carbon 
injection). Based on the new information and a reevaluation of the data 
used for proposal, the EPA revised the achievable performance levels 
for PM, Cd, Pb, Hg, dioxins/furans, and NOX. Changes to the MACT 
floor levels and the selected MACT standards resulting from these 
reevaluations are discussed below. 

[[Page 65396]]

a. MWC Acid Gases. The MACT floor levels and selected MACT emission 
limits for MWC acid gases are the same as proposed.
    b. MWC Metals. Based on comments and data received since proposal, 
the EPA reassessed the achievable performance levels for PM, Cd, and Pb 
by SD/FF systems. Based on this reassessment of available data, the 
selected PM, Cd, and Pb MACT emission limits were revised. For both 
large and small plants, the PM MACT floor and selected MACT limit were 
revised to 24 mg/dscm (proposal was 15 mg/dscm). The Cd MACT floor and 
selected MACT limit were revised to 0.020 mg/dscm (proposal was 0.010 
mg/dscm). The Pb MACT floor and selected MACT limit were revised to 
0.20 mg/dscm (proposal was 0.10 mg/dscm). The selected MACT limits for 
all three pollutants were revised because, based on available data, 
emission levels more stringent than these levels are not considered to 
be continuously achievable.
    The final MACT limits for Hg emissions for large and small plants 
remain at the same levels as proposed (0.080 mg/dscm or an 85 percent 
reduction in Hg emissions); however, the MACT floor level was revised. 
At proposal, the MACT floor for Hg was based on use of an SD/FF system 
combined with GCP. Carbon injection was not commercially operational at 
any MWC. At proposal, MACT for Hg was based on use of an SD/FF system 
in combination with carbon injection. This MACT selection was based on 
evaluation of emission reductions, costs, and other factors, as 
described in the proposal preamble (59 FR 48198, September 20, 1994). 
Several commenters questioned the selection of an Hg MACT limit based 
on carbon injection when carbon injection was not commercially 
operated. Since proposal, data have become available for 12 new MWC 
units initiating operation using carbon injection commercially, and all 
were meeting the proposed Hg limits. Since carbon injection is now in 
commercial operation, the EPA revised the final MACT floor for Hg to be 
based on SD/FF in combination with carbon injection and GCP.
    c. MWC Organics. The final emission limits for dioxins/furans for 
new MWC's remain at the same level as proposed; however, the technology 
basis for the floor level of control has been changed. As discussed in 
section IV.B.2.b regarding MWC metals (Hg), the EPA reviewed new data 
received since proposal and concluded that SD/FF combined with GCP and 
carbon injection is the best emission control technology being used by 
MWC's for Hg and dioxin/furan control, and is, therefore, the basis of 
the final MACT floor. The data gathered prior to proposal as well as 
data for new units operating with these controls show that a dioxin/
furan level of 13 ng/dscm is achievable. The final MACT emission limit 
for dioxins/furans for new units at both large and small plants is 
equal to the MACT floor and remains at 13 ng/dscm (total mass basis).
    The format of the final dioxin/furan emission limit changed from 
the proposed format. The EPA proposed a dual format for the dioxin/
furan emission limit (total or TEQ) and requested comments on the use 
of this dual format. No commenters agreed with the dual format as 
proposed. The EPA has selected total mass dioxin/furan emissions in the 
final standards. The TEQ format is not used. There is no indication 
that TEQ's would be a better measure of emissions control performance 
than total dioxins/furans. Furthermore, most test data on which the 
standards are based were expressed as total dioxins/furans. 
Additionally, because there have been different methods for calculating 
TEQ over time and the ratio of total dioxins/furans to TEQ dioxins/
furans varies among MWC's, there would be additional uncertainty in 
using a TEQ data base. Refer to the promulgation preamble (56 FR 5504) 
for the 1991 subpart Ea standards for additional discussion.
    Although not part of the dioxin/furan limit, the limit of 13 ng/
dscm total mass is equal to about 0.1 to 0.3 ng/dscm TEQ.
    In addition to the final dioxin/furan limit of 13 ng/dscm, a 
provision has been added to the final standards allowing less frequent 
dioxin/furan testing for new plants achieving dioxin/furan emission 
levels lower than 7 ng/dscm. Data for new MWC's using SD/FF/SNCR/carbon 
injection technology suggest this is a realistic goal for many new 
MWC's and will encourage MWC's to optimize performance of pollution 
control systems. Refer to section IV.B.7 for a description of the 
alternative dioxin/furan testing schedule.
    d. Nitrogen Oxides. As explained at proposal (59 FR 48198, 
September 20, 1994), the combination of SD/FF, GCP, and SNCR was the 
basis of the new source MACT floor for NOX. These technologies 
remain the basis for the final NOX MACT floor. Since proposal, the 
EPA has obtained additional NOX data showing that large MWC plants 
equipped with SNCR can continuously achieve an emission level of 150 
ppmv over a 24-hour averaging period. The new data were obtained from 
the same plant that was the basis of the proposed NOX emission 
level of 180 ppmv. The new data are representative of what NOX 
emission level can be achieved after a plant has had a period of time 
to adjust to operation with the SNCR system. Applications of SNCR 
typically require some site-specific fine-tuning to achieve optimum 
performance levels. Based on the revised data, a two-phase standard is 
being adopted. The final NOX standard for MWC's at large plants 
allows time to ``fine-tune'' the SNCR system. The final standard for 
MWC's at large plants is 180 ppmv (24-hour averaging period) for the 
first year of operation, and 150 ppmv (24-hour averaging period) 
thereafter.
    The final standards do not require NOX control for MWC's at 
small plants.
    e. MWC Fugitive Ash Emissions. The proposed fugitive ash emission 
limit allowed no visible emissions from ash handling and transfer 
points. Several commenters objected to the proposed level of no visible 
emissions. The commenters were concerned that even where the best ash 
management practices such as wetting the ash or enclosing transfer 
systems, there may be short periods of time when visible emissions are 
observed, such as during maintenance. The proposal was based on about 
16 hours of method 22 visible emissions data for ash handling practices 
at two MWC plants and observations (not using method 22) at two 
additional MWC plants. Since proposal, the EPA has reviewed visible 
emission data from other industries that use similar transfer systems. 
Based on comments received and the review of additional data, the final 
fugitive ash emission limit was revised to limit visible emissions to 
no more than 5 percent of the time.
    As part of the final fugitive ash emission requirements, an 
exemption has been provided during maintenance and repair activities, 
because these necessary activities may require opening of an enclosure 
that could generate short-term visible emissions.
3. Good Combustion Practices
    The proposed standards included CO limits for nine categories of 
combustor technologies, including, among others, RDF stoker combustors 
and coal/RDF mixed fuel-fired combustors. Commenters requested 
clarification on which CO limit applies to a stoker unit that is 
designed to combust coal and RDF but only combusts RDF. Under the final 
standards, a spreader stoker unit burning RDF only or cofiring RDF with 
coal would be subject to the proposed RDF stoker CO limit. To clarify 
this 

[[Page 65397]]
requirement, the final CO requirements include an additional category 
of combustor technology referred to as ``spreader stoker coal/RDF mixed 
fuel-fired combustors,'' which are assigned the same CO limit and 
averaging time as RDF stoker combustors (150 ppmv, 24-hour averaging 
time). The final standards further clarify that the category of 
combustors referred to in the proposed standards as coal/RDF mixed 
fuel-fired combustors only includes pulverized coal/RDF mixed fuel 
streams, and the CO limit and averaging time remains the same as 
proposed (150 ppmv, 4-hour averaging time).
4. Operator Training and Certification
    The proposed standards required full ASME certification of chief 
facility operators and shift supervisors within 6 months of startup of 
an affected MWC. Various commenters including ASME pointed out that the 
proposed standards did not include sufficient time for ASME to conduct 
full certification exams for all MWC operators. After considering these 
comments, the EPA revised the operator training requirements to allow 
additional time for ASME (or State) certification exams. In the final 
standards, chief facility operators and shift supervisors at new MWC 
plants must obtain ASME or State-approved provisional certification 
within 1 year after promulgation or 6 months after startup, whichever 
is later. In addition, by this same date (1 year after promulgation or 
6 months after startup, whichever is later), the same personnel must be 
either fully certified or scheduled with ASME or the State to take a 
full certification exam (instead of actually obtaining full 
certification within 1 year, as proposed).
5. Air Curtain Incinerators
    No changes were made to the proposed standards for air curtain 
incinerators. As discussed above in section IV.B.1, the final standards 
do not cover combustion of clean wood; therefore, air curtain 
incinerators combusting only clean wood are not covered by the 
standards.
6. Siting Analysis/Materials Separation Plan
    Various commenters said the proposed siting analysis was not 
consistent with section 129 of the Clean Air Act. Commenters also 
argued that the proposed siting requirements were either too stringent 
or not stringent enough. The siting analysis in the final rule has been 
reworded to allow for a consideration of alternatives, on a site-
specific basis, to minimize to the maximum extent practicable potential 
risks to the public health or the environment. These changes ensure 
consistency with section 129(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act.
7. Compliance and Performance Testing
    Both the proposed and final standards require all plants to perform 
annual performance tests for dioxin/furan emissions. However, a 
provision for less frequent dioxin/furan testing has been added to the 
final rule to encourage MWC plants to achieve emission levels 
significantly lower than 13 ng/dscm. By achieving low dioxin/furan 
emissions, they would qualify for less frequent testing and thereby 
reduce their testing costs. If all MWC units at an MWC plant achieve 7 
ng/dscm dioxins/furans or less during performance testing for 2 
consecutive years of operation, the plant can elect to conduct dioxin/
furan testing on one unit per year. The plant must test units in 
sequence (e.g., a 3-unit plant would test unit 1 (year 1), unit 2 (year 
2), unit 3 (year 3), unit 1 (year 4), etc.). If an annual performance 
test conducted on any unit indicates total dioxin/furan emissions are 
greater than 7 ng/dscm, the plant must revert to testing all units 
annually beginning the following year until the 2-year compliance 
record is reestablished.
    For small plants, two options are provided. The one-unit incentive 
schedule discussed above is provided for dioxin/furan testing. An 
alternative 3-year testing option is also provided for small plants. 
The alternative 3-year testing option allows small plants to conduct 
performance tests for dioxins/furans, as well as PM, HCl, Cd, Pb, and 
Hg only once every 3 years if the plant demonstrates compliance with 
all pollutant emission limits for 3 consecutive years and continues to 
demonstrate compliance every third year. The owner or operator of a 
small plant may choose either option for performance testing.
8. Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
    Reporting requirements have been changed from quarterly as proposed 
to annual (semiannual if any emission limits or operating parameters 
are violated) to reduce the burden on affected plants. In recognition 
of the cost associated with reporting requirements, the EPA 
reconsidered the effectiveness of quarterly versus annual reporting for 
the purpose of determining compliance. After careful reconsideration, 
the EPA has concluded that annual reporting will provide adequate 
information for most plants. [The EPA notes, however, that once an MWC 
is required to obtain a Title V Operating Permit, the Title V reporting 
requirements given in Section 504(a) of the Act will supersede the 
annual reporting requirements presented above. Section 504(a) requires 
permittees to submit monitoring reports to the permitting authority no 
less often than every six months. See 42 U.S.C. 7661c(a).]

C. Impacts of the Standards

    The final standards can be achieved by utilizing any technology. 
The basis for the MACT-based limits at both proposal and promulgation 
remain the combination of GCP/SD/FF and carbon injection for new large 
and small plants, and the additional use of SNCR at large plants. 
Because the technology basis for the final standards is the same as at 
proposal, the impacts analysis presented at proposal has not been 
revised. Table 2 provides a brief summary of the air and cost impacts 
of the standards. The summary in table 2 provides impacts estimates 
relative to two baseline scenarios: a pre-1989 baseline (typical 
control prior to the 1991 subpart Ea standards) and a 1991 baseline 
(typical control under the 1991 subpart Ea standards). Refer to the 
preamble to the proposed standards (59 FR 48198) for a detailed summary 
of these air and control cost impacts, as well as a discussion of the 
water, solid waste, energy, and economic impacts of the rule. The 
national impacts estimates provided in table 2 and discussed in the 
proposal preamble represent the EPA's estimate of the worst case of 
impacts that would result from implementation of the standards. Recent 
data suggest a reduction in the construction of new MWC's. This would 
reduce the cost of the standards.

                                                                        

[[Page 65398]]
                Table 2.--Impacts of the Current Subpart Ea and Promulgated Subpart Eb Standards                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Increment of                                 
                                                                    promulgated                                 
                            Parameter                             standards over  1991 Standards      Total b   
                                                                     the 1991            a                      
                                                                     standards                                  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New MWC's subject to Standards in the Fifth Year After                                                          
 Promulgation:                                                                                                  
    Combustion capacity (106 Mg/yr).............................            0.8            16.8            17.6 
    Number of MWC plants........................................           24              48              72   
Cost (1990 Dollars):                                                                                            
    Capital cost ($106).........................................          156             613             769   
    Annualized cost ($106/yr)...................................           43             157             200   
    Average cost increase ($/Mg MSW combusted)..................            1.95           11.55           13.50
Annual Emissions Reduction (Mg/yr):                                                                             
    SO2.........................................................        3,000          35,000          38,000   
    Hcl.........................................................        4,000          46,000          50,000   
    PM..........................................................          800           5,700           6,500   
    Cd..........................................................            1               9              10   
    Pb..........................................................           17             140             157   
    Hg..........................................................           18               9              27   
    Nox.........................................................          200          10,300          10,500   
    Total dioxins/furans (kg/yr)................................            1              28              29   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a The impacts are based on a pre-1989 baseline (i.e., a baseline prior to the effective date of the subpart Ea  
  standards.                                                                                                    
b The total impacts are calculated by adding the incremental impacts of the promulgated standards (subpart Eb)  
  to the impacts of the 1991 standards (subpart Ea). These impacts would be equivalent to the total impacts of  
  the promulgated standards over a pre-1989 baseline.                                                           


    A number of comments were received on the possible effects on EPA's 
costing analysis following the recent Supreme Court decision that 
``flow control'' is unconstitutional. The EPA considered the effect of 
flow control on the financing of new MWC's. In summary, the EPA finds 
that if tipping fees are raised to cover the increased costs of these 
regulations, then the lack of ``flow control'' requirements will likely 
result in fewer MWC's being constructed and a shift of wastes to other 
disposal options. The impacts of the flow control decision is likely to 
be very place-specific depending on the relative tipping fees of MWC's 
and other disposal options, transportation costs, and institutional 
factors.

V. Guidelines for Existing Sources (1995)--Summary of the Guidelines, 
Impacts of the Guidelines, and Significant Issues and Changes to the 
Proposed Guidelines

    This section presents a summary of the final guidelines, including 
identification of the source category and pollutants being regulated, 
and presentation of the final emission limits and their associated 
performance testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements and compliance schedules. This section also provides a 
discussion of the most significant issues and changes to the proposed 
guidelines. Also mentioned are the impacts of the final guidelines.
    The EPA strongly believes (based on emissions data from MWC's which 
incorporate the necessary control technology) that the air pollution 
control technology to be retrofitted to existing MWC's to meet the 
emission guidelines will reduce actual emissions to levels 
significantly below the limits established by the emission guidelines. 
There remains, however, some uncertainty as to the actual performance 
level that will be achieved on a continuous basis by the control 
technology when installed at large MWC plants where ESP-based scrubber 
systems are used. Therefore, the dioxin/furan emission limits included 
in the emission guidelines for some types of MWC's, while still 
significantly below the MACT floor, are slightly less stringent than 
those included in the proposal.
    The EPA will track the implementation of the guidelines and annual 
performance test results in order to monitor the level of emissions 
including dioxin/furan control actually achieved by the guidelines. 
Additionally, the EPA may conduct supplemental dioxin/furan tests. The 
EPA will also meet with MWC owners and operators as needed to review 
the performance of the air pollution control technology and the 
effectiveness of maintenance and operational practices in order to 
provide information that will lead to optimal performance of emission 
control technology, and will work with MWC owners and operators to 
assure a continued high level of public safety.

A. Summary of the Guidelines

    The final guidelines require States to develop emission regulations 
limiting air emissions from each existing MWC unit located at a MWC 
plant that has an aggregate plant capacity to combust more than 35 Mg/
day of MSW, for which construction commenced on or before September 20, 
1994.
    The aggregate design capacity of all existing MWC's at an MWC plant 
shall be considered in determining: (1) Whether a plant is subject to 
the guidelines; and (2) what control levels are applicable. The 
capacity of new MWC's (i.e., those that commenced construction after 
September 20, 1994 or that commenced modification or reconstruction 
after June 19, 1996 that are located at the MWC plant are not 
considered in determining applicability of the guidelines but would be 
considered in determining the applicability of subpart Eb (standards 
for new sources). Only MWC units constructed before September 20, 1994 
are considered for determining the applicability of the guidelines. 
Modification of an existing MWC (or funds spent) to comply with the 
emission guidelines would not be considered in determining if an 
existing MWC unit was subject to the standards for new MWC's (subpart 
Ea or Eb).
    Municipal waste combustion plants with a federally enforceable 
permit to combust less than 10 Mg/day of MSW are exempt from the 
requirements of the guidelines as long as they submit a notification of 
exemption and keep daily records of the weight of MSW combusted.
    Cofired combustors (i.e., that combust less than 30 percent MSW) 
located at a plant with an aggregate plant capacity greater than 35 Mg/
day are exempt from the requirements of the guidelines as 

[[Page 65399]]
long as they submit a notification of exemption and keep records of the 
weight of MSW combusted on a calendar quarter basis.
    The definitions of MWC and MSW have been revised but are the same 
for the guidelines as for the standards, and are discussed in the 
summary of the standards in section IV.A of this notice.
    A summary of the final guidelines is presented in table 3.

    Table 3. Summary of Guidelines for Existing MWC's (Subpart Cb) a    
   [* indicates a significant change since proposal and the change is   
                       discussed in this preamble]                      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability                                                           
The final guidelines apply to existing                                  
 MWC's located at plants with                                           
 capacities to combust greater than 35                                  
 Mg/day of residential, commercial, and/                                
 or institutional discards. Industrial                                  
 manufacturing discards are not covered                                 
 by the guidelines. Any medical,                                        
 industrial manufacturing, municipal,                                   
 or other type of waste combustor plant                                 
 with capacity to combust greater than                                  
 35 Mg/day of MSW and with a federally                                  
 enforceable permit to combust less                                     
 than 10 Mg/day of MSW is not covered.*                                 
                                                                        
Plant Size (MSW combustion capacity)     Requirement                    
<35 Mg/day*............................  Not covered by guidelines.     
> 35 Mg/day but 225 Mg/day    Subject to provisions listed   
 (referred to as small MWC plants).       below.                        
> 225 Mg/day (referred to as large MWC   Subject to provisions listed   
 plants).                                 below.                        
Good Combustion Practices                                               
 Applies to large and small MWC plants.                         
 A site-specific operator training manual is required to be     
 developed and made available for MWC personnel.                        
 The EPA or a State MWC operator training course would be       
 required to be completed by the MWC chief facility operator, shift     
 supervisors, and control room operators.                               
 The ASME (or State-equivalent) provisional and full operator   
 certification must be obtained by the MWC chief facility operator      
 (mandatory), shift supervisors (mandatory), and control room operators 
 (optional).*                                                           
 The MWC load level is required to be measured and not to exceed
 110 percent of the maximum load level measured during the most recent  
 dioxin/furan performance test.                                         
 The maximum PM control device inlet flue gas temperature is    
 required to be measured and not to exceed the temperature 17 deg.C     
 above the maximum temperature measured during the most recent dioxin/  
 furan performance test.                                                
 The CO level is required to be measured using a CEMS, and the  
 concentration in the flue gas is required not to exceed the following: 
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                                        
                                                              Averaging 
              MWC type                      CO level             time   
                                                               (hours)  
Modular starved-air and excess-air.  50 ppmv...............            4
Mass burn waterwall and refractory.  100 ppmv..............            4
Mass burn rotary refractory........  100 ppmv..............           24
Fluidized-bed combustion...........  100 ppmv..............            4
Pulverized coal/RDF mixed fuel-      150 ppmv*.............            4
 fired.                                                                 
Spreader stoker coal/RDF mixed fuel- 200 ppmv*.............           24
 fired.                                                                 
RDF stoker.........................  200 ppmv..............           24
Mass burn rotary waterwall.........  250 ppmv..............           24


MWC Organic Emissions (measured as total mass dioxins/furans):          
 Dioxins/furans (performance test by EPA Reference Method 23)   
  Large MWC plants                                                      
    MWC units utilizing an ESP-based     60 ng/dscm total mass          
     air pollution control system.        (mandatory) or 15 ng/dscm     
                                          total mass (optional to       
                                          qualify for less frequent     
                                          testing).* c                  
    MWC units utilizing a nonESP-based   30 ng/dscm total mass          
     air pollution control system.        (mandatory) or 15 ng/dscm     
                                          total mass (optional to       
                                          qualify for less frequent     
                                          testing).* c                  
  Small MWC plants.....................  125 ng/dscm total mass         
                                          (mandatory) or 30 ng/dscm     
                                          total mass (optional to       
                                          qualify for less frequent     
                                          testing).* c                  
 Basis for dioxin/furan limits                                  
  Large MWC plants.....................  GCP and SD/ESP or GCP and SD/  
                                          FF, as specified above.       
  Small MWC plants.....................  GCP and DSI/ESP.               
MWC Metal Emissions:                                                    
 PM (performance test by EPA Reference Method 5)                
  Large MWC plants.....................  27 mg/dscm (0.012 gr/dscf).    
  Small MWC plants.....................  70 mg/dscm (0.030 gr/dscf).*   
 Opacity (performance test by EPA Reference Method 9)           
  Large and small MWC plants...........  10 percent (6-minute average)  
 Cd (performance test by EPA Reference Method 29)               
  Large MWC plants.....................  0.040 mg/dscm (18 gr/million   
                                          dscf).                        
  Small MWC plants.....................  0.10 mg/dscm (44 gr/million    
                                          dscf).                        
 Pb (performance test by EPA Reference Method 29)               
  Large MWC plants.....................  0.49 mg/dscm (200 gr/million   
                                          dscf).*                       
  Small MWC plants.....................  1.6 mg/dscm (700 gr/million    
                                          dscf).                        
 Hg (performance test by EPA Reference Method 29)               
  Large and small MWC plants...........  0.080 mg/dscm (35 gr/million   
                                          dscf) or 85-percent reduction 
                                          in Hg emissions.              
 Basis for PM, opacity, Cd, Pb, and Hg limits                   
  Large MWC plants.....................  GCP and SD/ESP/CI or GCP and SD/
                                          FF/CI                         

[[Page 65400]]
                                                                        
  Small MWC plants.....................  GCP and DSI/ESP/CI.            
MWC Acid Gas Emissions:                                                 
 SO2 (performance test by CEMS)                                 
  Large MWC plants.....................  31 ppmv or 75-percent reduction
                                          in SO2 emissions.*            
  Small MWC plants.....................  80 ppmv or 50-percent reduction
                                          in SO2 emissions.             
 HCl (performance test by EPA Reference Method 26)              
  Large MWC plants.....................  31 ppmv or 95-percent reduction
                                          in HCl emissions.*            
  Small MWC plants.....................  250 ppmv or 50-percent         
                                          reduction in HCl emissions.   
 Basis for SO2 and HCl limits                                   
  Large and small MWC plants...........  See basis for MWC metals.      
Nitrogen Oxides Emissions                                               
 NOX (performance test by CEMS)                                 
  Large MWC plants:                                                     
    Mass burn waterwall................  200 ppmvb.                     
    Mass burn rotary waterwall.........  250 ppmvb.                     
    Refuse-derived fuel combustor......  250 ppmvb.                     
  Fluidized bed combustor..............  240 ppmvb.                     
  Mass burn refractory.................  No NOX controlb requirement    
  Other................................  200 ppmvb.                     
  Small MWC plants.....................  No NOx control requirement.    
 Basis for NOx limits                                           
  Large MWC plants.....................  SNCR.                          
  Refractory MWC plants................  No NOX control requirement     
  Small MWC plants.....................  No NOX control requirement.    
Fugitive Ash Emissions:                                                 
 Fugitive Emissions                                             
 (performance test by EPA Reference                                     
 Method 22)                                                             
  Large and small plants...............  Visible emissions 5 percent of 
                                          the time from ash transfer    
                                          systems except for maintenance
                                          and repair activities.*       
 Basis for fugitive emission     Wet ash handling or enclosed   
 limit                                    ash handling.                 
Performance Testing and Monitoring                                      
 Requirements:                                                          
 Reporting frequency             Annual (semiannual if          
                                          violation)*.                  
 Load, flue gas temperature      Continuous monitoring, 4-hour  
                                          block arithmetic average      
 CO                              CEMS, 4-hour block or 24-hour  
                                          daily arithmetic average, as  
                                          applicable                    
 Dioxins/furans, PM, Cd, Pb,                                    
 HCl, and Hg                                                            
  Large MWC plants.....................  Annual stack test.*            
  Small MWC plants.....................  Annual or third year stack     
                                          test.                         
 Opacity                         COMS (6-minute average) and    
                                          annual stack test.            
 SO2                             CEMS, 24-hour daily geometric  
                                          mean.                         
 NOX (large MWC plants only)     CEMS, 24-hour daily arithmetic 
                                          average.                      
 Fugitive ash emissions          Annual test.*                  
Compliance Schedule:                                                    
 Large MWC plants                                               
  State plans are required to include one of the following three        
   retrofit schedules for compliance with regulatory requirements: (1)  
   Full compliance or closure within 1 year following EPA approval of   
   the State plan; (2) full compliance in 1 to 3 years following        
   issuance of a revised construction or operation permit if a permit   
   modification is required or 1 to 3 years following EPA approval of   
   the State plan if a permit modification is not required, provided the
   State plan includes measurable and enforceable incremental steps of  
   progress toward compliance; or (3) closure in 1 to 3 years following 
   approval of the State plan, provided the State plan includes a       
   closure agreement. If a State plan allows the second or third        
   scheduling options (i.e., more than 1 year), the State plan submitted
   to EPA must contain post-1990 test data for dioxins/furans for all   
   MWC units at large plants under the extended schedule. (See Sec.     
   60.21(h) of subpart B of 40 CFR 60 for additional information        
   relating to measurable and enforceable incremental steps of progress 
   toward compliance).                                                  
 Small MWC plants                                               
  State plans must require full                                         
   compliance or closure with                                           
   regulatory requirements in 3 years                                   
   or less following issuance of a                                      
   revised construction or operation                                    
   permit if a permit modification is                                   
   required, or within 3 years                                          
   following EPA approval of the State                                  
   plan if a permit modification is not                                 
   required.                                                            
 State plans are required to specify that all MWC's at large MWC
 plants for which construction was commenced after June 26, 1987 comply 
 with the guidelines for Hg and dioxins/furans within 1 year following  
 issuance of a revised construction or operation permit if a permit     
 modification is required, or within 1 year following EPA approval of   
 the State plan, whichever is later.                                    
 State plans are required to                                    
 specify that owners or operators of                                    
 MWC's comply with the operator                                         
 training and certification                                             
 requirements by 6 months after startup                                 
 or 1 year after State plan approval by                                 
 the EPA, whichever is later, for large                                 
 plants and by 6 months after startup                                   
 or 18 months after State plan approval                                 
 by the EPA, whichever is later, for                                    
 small plants.                                                          
*=significant change since proposal, and the change is discussed in this
  preamble.                                                             
a All concentration levels in the table are converted to 7 percent O2,  
  dry basis.                                                            
b State plans may allow NOX emissions averaging between existing MWC    
  units at a large MWC plant. The daily weighted average NOX emissions  
  concentration from the MWC units included in the emissions averaging  
  plan must comply with the following 24-hour limits: 180 ppmv for mass 
  burn waterwall combustors; 220 ppmv for mass burn rotary waterwall    
  combustors; 230 ppmv for refuse-derived fuel combustors; 220 ppmv for 
  fluidized bed combustors; and 180 ppmv for other combustor types      
  (excluding mass burn refractory combustors). Refer to the regulatory  
  text of the emission guidelines for additional requirements. State    
  plans may also establish a program to allow emissions trading between 
  non-contiguous MWC plants. Such a program shall meet the requirements 
  of the Open Market Trading Rule of Ozone Smog Precursors, proposed    
  August 3, 1995 (60 FR 39668) as finally promulgated.                  
c Although not part of the dioxin/furan limit, the dioxin/furan total   
  mass limits of 30 ng/dscm, 60 ng/dscm, and 125 ng/dscm are equal to   
  about 0.3 to 0.8 ng/dscm TEQ, 0.7 to 1.4 ng/dscm TEQ, and 1.7 to 2.9  
  ng/dscm TEQ, respectively. The optional reduced testing limits of 15  
  ng/dscm and 30 ng/dscm total mass are equal to about 0.1 to 0.3 ng/   
  dscm TEQ and 0.3 to 0.8 ng/dscm TEQ, respectively.                    


  
[[Page 65401]]


B. Significant Issues and Changes to the Proposed Guidelines

    The most significant changes to the proposed guidelines are 
discussed below. Rationales for these changes as well as other changes 
not discussed below are provided in the promulgation BID (EPA-453/R-95-
0136). Issues not discussed below include additional changes to GCP 
requirements, monitoring requirements, recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements, and compliance schedules.
    1. Designated Facilities
    Under the final guidelines, any medical, municipal, industrial 
manufacturing, or other type of waste combustion plant capable of 
combusting greater than 35 Mg/day MSW but actually combusting less than 
10 Mg/day of MSW is not a designated facility, as long as the plant 
submits an initial report and keeps certain records. This exemption was 
not included in the proposed guidelines. This exemption is identical to 
the exemption in the standards for new sources. Section IV.B.1 provides 
further discussion of the exemption.
    Under the final guidelines, a cofired combustor is defined as a 
unit combusting a fuel feed stream 30 percent or less MSW, as measured 
on a calendar quarterly basis. At proposal, determination of status as 
a cofired combustor was measured on a daily basis. This change is 
identical to the change made in the standards. Refer to section IV.B.1 
for further discussion on the change.
    The initial reporting requirement in the proposed guidelines for 
MWC plants with combustion capacity greater than 25 Mg/day but less 
than or equal to 35 Mg/day is not included in the final guidelines. 
Both the proposed and final guidelines exempt plants with capacity less 
than 35 Mg/day. Also, an exemption for combustion of clean wood or 
clean wood products is included in the final guidelines. This exemption 
is identical to the exemption in the standards. Refer to section IV.B.1 
for discussion of EPA's rationale for this exemption.
2. Emission Limits for MWC Metals, Acid Gases, Organics, and Nitrogen 
Oxides, and Ash Fugitive Emissions
    For existing MWC's, the MACT floor levels and the emission limits 
for several pollutants have been revised since proposal. See the 
proposal preamble (59 FR 48228, September 20, 1994), the promulgation 
BID (EPA-453/R-95-0136), and docket A-90-45 for additional details on 
the MACT floor analysis methodology and the selection of MACT.
    Since proposal, the EPA revised the MACT floors for existing plants 
based on new permit information received and an updated inventory of 
operating MWC plants. This revision resulted in revised MACT floor 
levels for various pollutants for small and large MWC plants. The 
revised MACT floor pollutant levels for large plants have resulted in 
more stringent MACT emission limits for SO2, HCl, and Pb. In 
addition, the revised MACT floors and emission limits for NOX for 
large plants include emission levels based on combustor type. Revisions 
to the MACT floor that resulted in revisions to the selected MACT level 
of control for specific pollutants are discussed below.
    While the final emission limits are somewhat different from 
proposal, the limits can be achieved using the same control 
technologies that were the basis of the proposed emission limits. The 
technology bases for large and small plants are summarized in table 3.
    a. MWC Acid Gases. Based on the new information and test data 
received after proposal and the revised MACT floor analysis, the EPA 
revised the MACT limits for SO2 and HCl for the final guidelines 
for large plants.
    The revised SO2 MACT floor for large plants is 31 ppmv. The 
final SO2 emission limit for large plants, which was set at the 
MACT floor level of 35 ppmv at proposal, is 31 ppmv because of the 
change in the MACT floor at promulgation.
    The MACT-based SO2 limit of 80 ppmv for small plants has not 
changed from proposal; however, the SO2 MACT floor for small 
plants is revised to 98 ppmv. Because the revised floor is more 
stringent than the proposal floor (the floor at proposal was 118 ppmv), 
the EPA's conclusion that acid gas controls will be needed to achieve 
the floor remains the same. In addition, the EPA's conclusion that a 
lower emission rate of 80 ppmv is achievable at minimal cost also 
remains the same. Therefore, the final SO2 emission limit for 
small plants remains at 80 ppmv.
    The revised HCl MACT floor for large plants is 31 ppmv. The final 
HCl emission limit for large plants, which was set at the MACT floor 
level of 35 ppmv at proposal, is 31 ppmv because of the change in the 
MACT floor at promulgation.
    b. MWC Metals. Based on the new information and test data received 
after proposal and the revised MACT floor analysis, the Pb limit for 
large plants was revised for the final guidelines. The proposed Pb MACT 
emission level for large plants was 0.50 mg/dscm; however, the revised 
Pb MACT floor emission level for large plants is 0.49 mg/dscm. 
Therefore, the final Pb emission limit for large plants has been 
revised to 0.49 mg/dscm.
    c. MWC Organics. The dioxin/furan emission limits for large and 
small plants were revised since proposal. The MACT floor for dioxins/
furans for MWC's at large plants is 126 ng/dscm total mass. As 
documented in the preambles to these proposed guidelines (59 FR 48228, 
September 20, 1994) and the promulgated subpart Ca guidelines (56 FR 
5514, February 11, 1991), in combination with GCP, SD/ESP systems can 
achieve dioxin/furan total mass emissions of 60 ng/dscm and SD/FF 
systems can achieve dioxin/furan total mass emissions of 30 ng/dscm. 
Therefore, the MACT floor of 126 ng/dscm can be achieved with either 
SD/ESP or SD/FF systems.
    When determining the final MACT standard (which may be more 
stringent than the MACT floor), section 129(a)(2) requires the 
Administrator to consider certain factors, including the cost of 
achieving the emission reduction. In the Administrator's judgment, it 
would be prohibitively expensive and unreasonable to require existing 
MWC's with ESP's that can meet a dioxin/furan emission limit of 60 ng/
dscm to retrofit an SD/FF in order to achieve an additional 30 ng/dscm 
reduction in emissions. For example, at a typical 1,400 Mg/day MWC 
plant already equipped with an SD/ESP, the capital cost to remove the 
ESP and retrofit a new FF would be about $14 million. This cost would 
be in addition to paying the remaining debt for a relatively new ESP 
(about $5 million including interest payments) and would result in a 
relatively small increase in control device efficiency.
    For the final rule, the Administrator considered several regulatory 
options more stringent than the MACT floor; however, because of this 
high pollution control device retrofit cost, the Administrator decided 
to set separate MACT limits for MWC's with ESP-based control systems 
and MWC's with nonESP-based control systems. For MWC's with ESP-based 
control systems, the EPA selected a MACT level of 60 ng/dscm total 
mass, based on the performance of SD/ESP systems. For MWC's using or 
retrofitting nonESP-based control systems, the EPA selected a MACT 
level of 30 ng/dscm total mass, based on the performance of SD/FF 
systems. The number of MWC plants that will comply by using an SD/ESP 
will be limited (only about 10 percent of the MWC plants). The vast 
majority of MWC's are expected to use SD/FF systems to comply. 

[[Page 65402]]

    The MACT floor for dioxins/furans at small MWC plants is 1,500 ng/
dscm total mass. As with large MWC plants, the final emission 
guidelines limit for dioxins/furans is more stringent than the MACT 
floor. The final guideline limit for dioxins/furans at small MWC plants 
is 125 ng/dscm total mass and is based on DSI/ESP technology.
    The final MACT limit for Hg is based on use of activated carbon 
injection. Activated carbon injection technology used in combination 
with DSI/ESP, SD/ESP, or SD/FF technology is expected to result in 
supplemental dioxin/furan control, reducing dioxin/furan emissions from 
these control systems by more than 50 percent. The final MACT guideline 
levels for dioxins/furans for existing units at small and large plants 
do not consider supplemental dioxin/furan control from activated carbon 
injection because an insufficient amount of emissions data exist to 
adequately determine the performance level of activated carbon 
injection retrofitted to existing MWC air pollution control systems. 
Nonetheless, it is expected that the use of activated carbon injection 
will result in additional reduction of dioxins/furans to levels below 
the emission limits in the final guidelines.
    As with the standards for new MWC's, the final guidelines include a 
provision that allows less frequent dioxin/furan testing if a plant is 
achieving a significantly lower level of dioxin/furan emissions (15 ng/
dscm for MWC's at large plants and 30 ng/dscm for MWC's at small 
plants). This option will encourage optimal performance and minimal 
emissions. Refer to section IV.B.7 for a description of the alternative 
testing schedule.
    Relative to the proposal, the optional TEQ format of the proposed 
dioxin/furan emission limits was removed in the final standards, as 
explained in section IV.B.2.c. Although not part of the dioxin/furan 
limit, the dioxin/furan total mass limits of 30 ng/dscm, 60 ng/dscm, 
and 125 ng/dscm are equal to about 0.3 to 0.8 ng/dscm TEQ, 0.7 to 1.4 
ng/dscm TEQ, and 1.7 to 2.9 ng/dscm TEQ, respectively.
    d. Nitrogen Oxides. After considering data submitted by commenters 
regarding requiring SNCR for MWC units at large plants where some could 
already achieve the MACT floor level without SNCR, the EPA changed the 
proposed NOX emission limit of 180 ppmv for all large plants. The 
NOX MACT floor was revised by calculating the MACT floor 
separately for each subcategory of combustor type, and the MACT limits 
are being promulgated at levels equivalent to the MACT floors for each 
combustor type. The final guideline MACT limits are: 200 ppmv for mass 
burn waterwall combustors; 250 ppmv for refuse-derived fuel combustors; 
250 ppmv for mass burn rotary waterwall combustors; 240 ppmv for 
fluidized bed combustors; no limit for mass burn refractory combustors; 
and 200 ppmv for other combustors not listed above.
    In addition, the EPA has revised the emission guidelines to allow 
States to include in their State plans options for averaging of 
emissions from units within a large MWC plant, and for trading 
emissions between MWC plants. The plant average emission limits for 
units being included in an emissions averaging plan within a plant are 
approximately 10 percent less than the MACT limits for each combustor 
type, as follows: 180 ppmv for mass burn waterwall combustors; 220 ppmv 
for mass burn rotary waterwall combustors; 230 ppmv for refuse-derived 
fuel combustors; 220 ppmv for fluidized bed combustors; and 180 ppmv 
for other combustor types (excluding mass burn rotary refractory 
combustors). Emissions trading between units at noncontiguous plants 
must be consistent with the requirements of the Open Market Trading 
Rule for Ozone Smog Precursors, proposed August 3, 1995 (60 FR 39668), 
as finally promulgated. Until the Open Market trading rule is 
finalized, it is not possible to reference the rule in the guidelines 
text. In the interim, the guideline text indicates NOX emissions 
trading must be approved by the Administrator prior to implementation. 
After the Open Market Trading Rule is finalized, it is preapproved for 
use under the guidelines.
    e. Fugitive Ash Emissions. The emission limit for fugitive ash 
emissions under the final guidelines is visible emissions no more than 
5 percent of the time from ash conveying and transfer systems at MWC's. 
An exemption for maintenance and repair activities has been added. 
These same changes were made to the standards for new sources. See the 
discussion of the standards in section IV.B.2.e for an explanation of 
the reasons for these changes.
3. Good Combustion Practices
    The final CO guidelines include an additional category of combustor 
technology referred to as ``spreader stoker coal/RDF mixed fuel-fired 
combustors,'' which is assigned the same CO limit and averaging time as 
the RDF stoker combustor category (200 ppmv, 24-hour averaging time). 
In the final guidelines, the category of combustors referred to in the 
proposal as ``coal/RDF mixed fuel-fired combustors'' was revised to 
``pulverized coal/RDF mixed fuel-fired combustors,'' and the CO limit 
and averaging time remains the same as proposed (150 ppmv, 4-hour 
averaging time). These same changes were made to the standards for new 
sources. See the discussion of the standards in section IV.B.3 for an 
explanation of the reasons for these changes.
4. Operator Training and Certification
    As discussed in section IV.B.4 for the standards for new sources, 
the EPA has clarified the provisional certification requirements and 
revised the schedule for full certification of chief facility operators 
and shift supervisors to allow sufficient time to schedule exams. As 
stated in the proposal preamble, a State-approved ASME-equivalent 
certification program may be substituted for ASME certification.
    For large plants, the final guidelines specify that a State plan 
must require chief facility operators and shift supervisors to obtain 
ASME provisional certification by 1 year after State plan approval or 6 
months after startup, whichever is later. In addition, a State plan 
must require that, by the same date, these personnel obtain full 
certification or be scheduled with ASME to take the ASME full 
certification exam (instead of actually obtaining full certification 
within 1 year as proposed).
    For small plants, the final guidelines specify that a State plan 
must require chief facility operators and shift supervisors to obtain 
ASME provisional certification by 18 months after State plan approval 
or 6 months after startup, whichever is later. In addition, a State 
plan must require that, by the same date, these personnel obtain full 
certification or be scheduled with ASME to take the ASME full 
certification exam (instead of actually obtaining full certification 
within 1 year as proposed).
5. Air Curtain Incinerators
    No changes were made to the proposed guidelines for air curtain 
incinerators. As discussed in section V.B.1, the final guidelines do 
not cover combustion of clean wood; therefore, air curtain incinerators 
combusting only clean wood are not covered by the guidelines.
6. Compliance and Performance Testing
    Under the final guidelines, State plans must specify that all 
plants are required to perform annual performance testing for dioxin/
furan emissions. However, a provision for less frequent testing has 
been added to encourage plants to 

[[Page 65403]]
optimize performance and achieve emission levels significantly lower 
than the dioxin/furan emission limits in the final guidelines. State 
plans may require that, to take advantage of this provision, existing 
MWC's must meet a dioxin/furan level of 15 ng/dscm (large plants) or 30 
ng/dscm (small plants), for 2 consecutive years. Refer to the 
discussion on the standards for new MWC's under section IV.B.7 for a 
description of this reduced testing schedule.
7. Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Compliance Schedules
    Reporting requirements have been changed from quarterly to annual 
(semiannual if exceeding the emission limit for any pollutant) to 
reduce the economic burden on MWC's. Refer to section IV.B.8 for an 
explanation of the reasons for this change.
    The EPA revised the proposed compliance schedule for large and 
small plants to allow more time for small plants to comply with the 
guidelines and to clarify the schedule for plants that select to close 
down operation rather than retrofit to comply with the guidelines. The 
final compliance schedule is as follows. For large MWC plants, State 
plans may allow three alternative compliance schedules: (1) Full 
compliance or closure within 1 year following approval of the State 
plan; (2) full compliance in 1 to 3 years following issuance of a 
revised construction or operation permit if a permit modification is 
required or 1 to 3 years following approval of the State plan if a 
permit modification is not required, provided the State plan includes 
measurable and enforceable incremental steps of progress toward 
compliance; or (3) closure in 1 to 3 years following approval of the 
State plan, provided the State plan includes a closure agreement. If a 
State plan allows the second or third scheduling options (i.e., more 
than 1 year), the State plan submitted to EPA must include post-1990 
test data for dioxins/furans for all MWC units at large plants under 
the schedule. For small MWC plants, State plans must require full 
compliance or closure in up to 3 years following issuance of a revised 
construction or operation permit if a permit modification is required, 
or 3 years following approval of the State plan if a permit 
modification is not required.

C. Impacts of the Guidelines

    The final guidelines can be achieved by designated facilities that 
utilize the same control technologies that were the basis for the 
proposed guidelines. The basis for the MACT guidelines selected at both 
proposal and promulgation is GCP/SD/ESP(or FF)/SNCR and carbon 
injection for large plants and GCP/DSI/ESP and carbon injection for 
small plants. Because the technology basis for the final guidelines is 
the same as at proposal, the impacts analysis presented at proposal has 
not been revised for the promulgated rule. Table 4 provides a brief 
summary of the air and cost impacts of the guidelines. The summary in 
table 4 provides impacts estimates based on two baseline scenarios: A 
pre-1989 baseline (control level prior to the 1991 subpart Ca 
guidelines) and a 1991 baseline (control level after the 1991 subpart 
Ca guidelines.) Refer to the preamble to the proposed guidelines (59 FR 
48228) for a detailed summary of these air and control cost impacts, as 
well as a discussion of the water, solid waste, energy, and economic 
impacts of the guidelines.

                 Table 4.--Impacts of the 1991 Subpart Ca and Promulgated Subpart Cb Guidelines                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Increment of  
                                                                                                promulgated 1995
                                                          1991 subpart Ca    Promulgated 1995      subpart Cb   
                       Parameter                            guidelines a        subpart Cb      guidelines over 
                                                                               guidelines a     the 1991 subpart
                                                                                                Ca guidelines b 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristics of Existing MWC's:                                                                              
  Combustion capacity (10 \6\ Mg/yr)...................              35.9               39.0                3.1 
  Number of MWC plants.................................             158                179                 21   
Cost (1990 Dollars):                                                                                            
  Capital cost ($10 \6\)...............................             888              2,100              1,212   
  Annualized cost ($10 \6\/yr).........................             168                445                277   
  Average cost increase ($/Mg MSW combusted)...........               6.40              13.60               7.20
Annual Emissions Reduction (Mg/yr):                                                                             
  SO2..................................................          25,000             43,000             18,000   
  HCl..................................................          36,000             56,000             20,000   
  PM...................................................           1,100              3,100              2,000   
  Cd...................................................               2                  5                  3   
  Pb...................................................              30                 83                 53   
  Hg...................................................              11                 47                 36   
  NOX..................................................               0             19,000             19,000   
      Total dioxins/furans (kg/yr).....................             117                157                 40   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a The impacts are based on a pre-1989 baseline (i.e., a baseline prior to the effective date of the subpart Ca  
  guidelines).                                                                                                  
b The impacts are calculated by subtracting the impacts of the 1991 subpart Ca guidelines from the impacts of   
  the promulgated 1995 subpart Cb guidelines (based on a pre-1989 baseline).                                    

    The national impacts estimates provided in table 4 and discussed in 
the proposal preamble represent EPA's estimate of the upper limit of 
impacts that would result from implementation of the guidelines. To the 
extent that any existing MWC's close rather than comply with the 
guidelines or switch to other disposal options that may cost less, the 
national costs will be lower and air emissions will be less.
    A number of comments were received on the possible effects on EPA's 
costing analysis following the recent Supreme Court decision that 
``flow control'' is unconstitutional. The EPA considered the effect of 
flow control on the financing of existing MWC's. In summary, the EPA 
finds that if MWC's raise tipping fees to cover the increased costs of 
these regulations, then the lack of ``flow control'' will likely result 
in a shift of some wastes to other disposal options. The combined 
impacts of no flow control and increased tipping fees on individual 
MWC's and municipalities are likely to be very 

[[Page 65404]]
place-specific depending on the relative tipping fees of MWC's and 
other disposal options, transportation costs, and institutional 
factors. If tipping fees are not raised to offset emission control 
costs, then operators of MWC's will have to finance the costs of the 
regulations out of current revenues.
    The EPA has identified several ways that State and local 
governments can guarantee a continued source of MSW for the MWC's and 
provide funds from the general revenue to support the operation of MWC 
facilities, accomplishing some of the outcomes that flow control can 
produce, including: (1) Government provision of collection services; 
(2) contractor provision of collection services under government 
contract; (3) franchising collection and hauling to designated 
facilities; (4) subsidizing facilities from the general revenues; and 
(5) supporting integrated solid waste management programs from the 
general revenue.

VI. Administrative Requirements

    This section addresses the following administrative requirements: 
Docket, Paperwork Reduction Act, Executive Orders 12866 and 12875, 
Unfunded Mandates Act, Regulatory Flexibility Act, and Clean Air Act 
Procedural Requirements.

A. Docket

    The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information 
considered in the development of this rulemaking. The principal 
purposes of the docket are: (1) To allow interested parties to identify 
and locate documents so that they can effectively participate in the 
rulemaking process; and (2) to serve as the record in case of judicial 
review, except for interagency review material. 42 U.S.C. 
Sec. 7607(d)(7)(A). The docket number for this rulemaking is A-90-45. 
Docket No. A-89-08 also includes background information for this 
rulemaking that supported the proposal and promulgation of the subpart 
Ea standards and subpart Ca guidelines.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this rule have been 
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An 
Information Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA 
(ICR No. 1506.5) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, OPPE 
Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(2136); 401 M St., S.W.; Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 260-
2740. This ICR document is also available on the EPA's TTN Clean Air 
Act Amendments electronic bulletin board. See the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this preamble for information on accessing EPA's 
TTN electronic bulletin board.
    The information required to be collected by this rule is necessary 
to identify the regulated entities who are subject to the rule and to 
ensure their compliance with the rule. The recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements are mandatory and are being established under authority of 
Section 114 of the Act. All information submitted as part of a report 
to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be 
safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, 
Chapter 1, part 2, subpart B--Confidentiality of Business Information 
(see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976, amended by 43 FR 39999, 
September 28, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 
23, 1979).
    The annual reporting and recordkeeping burden presented in this ICR 
document reflects only part of the burden imposed by this rule. The 
rest of the burden was presented to and approved by the OMB in an ICR 
document in 1991 for the subpart Ea NSPS promulgated in February 1991. 
The ICR document that accompanied the subpart Ea rulemaking summarized 
the reporting and recordkeeping requirements that MWC owners and 
operators of large MWC units are required to follow to demonstrate 
compliance with the 1991 NSPS. As explained elsewhere in this document, 
the Clean Air Act Amendments were passed by Congress in 1990, and they 
included section 129 that directs the Administrator to extend the NSPS 
to small MWC plants, as well as to include emission limits for 
additional pollutants and siting requirements. This ICR document for 
subpart Eb presents this additional burden imposed by section 129 of 
the Act, by summarizing the total annual burden on small plants (i.e., 
for the reporting and recordkeeping requirements associated with all 
pollutant emission limits and siting) and the additional annual burden 
on large MWC plants (i.e., only for requirements associated with Cd, 
Pb, Hg, and fugitive ash emission limits and siting).
    The total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden summarized in 
this ICR document for this collection averaged over the first 3 years 
of NSPS application to new MWC's is estimated to be about 69,700 person 
hours per year. This would be the estimated annual burden for 64 
respondents (i.e., MWC units). This is a worst-case burden estimate, as 
discussed under section IV.C. If fewer MWC units are constructed than 
have been projected, then the burden will be less than reported here. 
The average burden per respondent is about 1,100 person hours per year. 
The rule requires an initial one-time notification from each new MWC 
regarding all pollutant emission levels and siting and subsequent 
annual compliance reports regarding all pollutant emission levels. 
Additionally, if any of the pollutant emission limits are exceeded, 
respondents would be required to submit semi-annual reports. The rule 
includes continuous monitoring requirements for SO2, opacity, CO, 
CO2, O2 and annual stack testing requirements for PM, 
dioxins/furans, opacity, HCl, Cd, Pb, Hg, and fugitive ash. Efforts 
were made to reduce the burden on small plants by allowing them to test 
emissions once every 3 years instead of annually if they demonstrate 
that they consistently meet the emissions requirements. This burden 
estimate includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, 
acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes 
of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and 
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; 
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable 
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to 
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review 
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the 
information.
    Comments on the ICR document are requested, including the Agency's 
need for the information presented in this ICR document, the accuracy 
of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for 
minimizing respondent burden. Send comments on the ICR to the Director, 
OPPE Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency (2136); 401 M St. S.W.; Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 
725 17th St. N.W.; Washington, DC 20503; marked ``Attention: Desk 
Officer for EPA''. Include the ICR number in any correspondence. Since 
the OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 
and 60 days after December 19, 1995, a comment to OMB is best assured 
of having its full effect if OMB receives it by January 18, 1996. The 
EPA will publish a response to 

[[Page 65405]]
OMB and public comments on the information collection requirements 
contained in this proposal in a subsequent Federal Register notice.

C. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA 
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant,'' and 
therefore, subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive 
Order. The Order defines ``significant'' regulatory action as one that 
is likely to lead to 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, the promulgated 
standards for new sources will not be a ``significant'' rule because 
the annual effect on the economy is expected not to exceed $43 million 
over the cost of the existing subpart Ea standards. However, the EPA 
considers these promulgated standards to be ``significant'' because of 
their relationship to the guidelines for MWC's that are also being 
promulgated today. The final guidelines will cost $450 million per year 
or less based on a baseline prior to the effective date of the subpart 
Ea standards. As such, this action was submitted to OMB for review. 
Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or recommendations are 
documented in the public docket for this rulemaking.

D. Unfunded Mandates Act

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the EPA 
must prepare a statement to accompany any rule where the estimated 
costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, 
will be $100 million or more in any 1 year. Section 203 requires the 
EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small 
governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule. 
Under section 205(a), the EPA generally must select the ``least costly, 
most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the 
objectives of the rule'' and is consistent with statutory requirements. 
The EPA has complied with section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, by 
promulgating a rule that is the most cost-effective alternative for 
regulation of these sources that meets the statutory requirements under 
the Clean Air Act. For Hg and dioxins/furans, the EPA adopted standards 
that are more stringent than the MACT floor level of control. In the 
case of dioxins/furans, the EPA concluded that a standard more 
stringent than the MACT floor can be achieved at little or no cost, and 
thus represents the most cost-effective control. In the case of Hg, the 
MACT floor emissions level is equal to current uncontrolled levels. 
However, the EPA concluded, after considering the requisite factors in 
section 129(a)(2), that an uncontrolled floor level could not be 
justified under the Clean Air Act and that a more stringent emissions 
standard based on the use of carbon injection as an add-on control 
would be cost-effective. The EPA was unable in this rulemaking to 
identify any alternatives other than carbon injection for control of Hg 
emissions. To the extent that section 205(a) of the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act (UMRA) may be read to have the EPA consider a less stringent 
level of Hg control, the EPA concluded that such an alternative would 
be ``inconsistent with law'' within the meaning of section 205(b)(2) of 
the UMRA. Accordingly, the alternative selected for Hg is the most 
cost-effective one available under these circumstances.
    The unfunded mandates statement under section 202 must include: (1) 
A citation of the statutory authority under which the rule is proposed, 
(2) an assessment of the costs and benefits of the rule including the 
effect of the mandate on health, safety and the environment, and the 
Federal resources available to defray the costs, (3) where feasible, 
estimates of future compliance costs and disproportionate impacts upon 
particular geographic or social segments of the nation or industry, (4) 
where relevant, an estimate of the effect on the national economy, and 
(5) a description of the EPA's consultation with State, local, and 
tribal officials.
    Since this rule is estimated to impose costs to the private sector 
and government entities in excess of $100 million, the EPA has prepared 
the following statement with respect to these impacts.
1. Statutory Authority
    The statutory authority for this rulemaking, sections 111 and 129 
of the Clean Air Act, is fully discussed in section II of this 
preamble. The rule establishes emission guidelines for existing MWC's 
and standards of performance for new MWC's.
    Section 129(a)(2) requires the Administrator to promulgate 
standards for new solid waste incinerator units and emission guidelines 
for existing units that ``reflect the maximum degree of reduction in 
emissions of air pollutants listed under section (a)(4) that the 
Administrator, taking into consideration the cost of achieving such 
emission reduction, and any non-air-quality health and environmental 
impacts and energy requirements, determines is achievable for new or 
existing units in each category. The Administrator may distinguish 
among classes, types (including mass-burn, refuse-derived fuel, modular 
and other types of units), and sizes of units within a category in 
establishing such standards * * *'' 42 U.S.C Sec. 7429(a)(2) (emphasis 
added). This is commonly referred to as maximum achievable control 
technology, or MACT. Section 129(a)(2) further defines a minimum level 
of stringency that can be considered for MACT standards--commonly 
referred to as the MACT floor--which for new units, is the level of 
control achieved by the best controlled similar unit, and for existing 
units, is the level of control achieved by the average of the best 
performing 12 percent of units in the category. Id.
    In the final rule, the Administrator determined for new MWC's that 
MACT for all pollutants was equivalent to the pollutants' MACT floor 
levels--i.e., the MACT floor levels reflect the maximum achievable, 
cost-effective reduction in emissions of the air pollutants specified 
in section 129(a)(4) of the Clean Air Act. The promulgated MACT levels 
reflect the performance of emission control technology that is in 
commercial use at the best controlled similar source (i.e., an MWC 
equipped with an SD/FF system, carbon injection, and SNCR, in 
combination with GCP's). The September 20, 1994 proposed standards were 
more stringent than the MACT floor levels because the proposed levels 
were based on carbon injection technology, which was not in commercial 
use at the time of proposal. Since proposal, a dozen MWC units equipped 
with carbon injection technology have initiated operation; thus, the 
best controlled similar unit in the final rule includes carbon 
injection (i.e., basis for the MACT floor).

[[Page 65406]]

    For existing MWC's, some of the emission limits included in the 
emission guidelines promulgated today are the same as the final MACT 
floor levels. For several pollutants, however, the Administrator 
decided, consistent with section 129(a)(2) after considering costs and 
non-air-quality health and environmental impacts and energy 
requirements, to set MACT standards more stringent than the MACT floor, 
since more stringent levels could be achieved at either no additional 
cost, or minimal costs. The MACT floor levels for acid gases and PM are 
stringent enough for existing units at both small and large plants that 
they require an acid gas/PM control system. Since an acid gas/PM 
control system also controls emissions of all regulated pollutants 
except Hg and NOx, establishing emission limits for acid gases and 
PM effectively establishes emission limits for the other pollutants 
(except Hg and NOx). The cost to comply with the selected emission 
limits relative to the cost of the acid gas/PM control system are 
minimal.
    For example, the same acid gas/PM control system that owners and 
operators of MWC's need to meet the MACT emissions guideline levels for 
SO2 and PM also controls dioxins/furans to levels more stringent 
than the dioxin/furan MACT floor level. Thus, the Administrator 
determined that the final dioxin/furan emission guidelines may be 
achieved at no additional control costs. In the final rule, for MWC's 
at large plants, the Administrator distinguished between the dioxin/
furan emission guidelines for MWC's equipped with ESP-based control 
systems and MWC's equipped with nonESP-based control systems. In the 
Administrator's judgment, it would be prohibitively expensive and 
unreasonable to require existing ESP's that can meet a limit of 60 ng/
dscm to retrofit an SD/FF in order to achieve additional reduction in 
emissions beyond the MACT floor (see the proposal preamble, 50 FR 
48228, September 20, 1994, for a more detailed discussion). For the 
final rule, the Administrator considered several regulatory options 
more stringent than the MACT floor; however, because of the high cost 
of pollution control device retrofit, the Administrator determined that 
MACT for dioxins/furans emitted from MWC's with ESP-based control 
systems is 60 ng/dscm, and MACT for dioxins/furans emitted from MWC's 
with SD/FF systems is 30 ng/dscm.
    The MACT floor for Hg is 0.36 mg/dscm, and MACT for Hg is more 
stringent than the MACT floor at a level of 0.080 mg/dscm. To achieve 
the Hg emission limit in the emission guidelines, carbon injection will 
be required (this exceeds MACT floor requirements). Because of the 
toxicity and bioaccumulation potential of Hg, the Administrator 
considered the small cost of adding Hg control to be cost-effective. 
The cost of Hg control is about $0.25 to $0.35 per gram Hg removed 
($250,000 to $350,000 per Mg), which translates to approximately $0.05 
to $0.07 per month for a household served by an MWC.
2. Social Costs and Benefits
    This assessment of the cost and benefits to State, local, and 
tribal governments of the guidelines is based on EPA's ``Economic 
Impact Analysis for Proposed Emission Standards and Guidelines for 
Municipal Solid Waste Combustors.'' Measuring the social costs of the 
guidelines requires identification of the affected entities by 
ownership (public or private), consideration of regulatory 
alternatives, calculation of the regulatory compliance costs for each 
affected entity, and assessment of the market implications of the 
additional pollution control costs. Calculating the social benefits of 
the guidelines requires estimating the anticipated reductions in 
emissions at MWC's due to regulation, identification of the harmful 
effects of exposure to MWC emissions, and valuing the expected 
reductions in these damages to society.
    a. Affected Entities. For 1996, the base year of the analysis, 
there are 179 MWC's in the population of operational facilities 
affected by the guidelines. Of this total, 100 are publicly owned and 
operated (i.e., facilities owned by State or local governments). There 
are no MWC's currently owned, or expected to be owned in the near 
future, by tribal governments, so there is no impact on tribal 
governments. The remaining 79 MWC's are privately owned and operated. 
The EPA developed 16 model plants to characterize the existing 
facilities based on the technologies used for combustion and air 
pollution control at baseline. Table 5 shows the distribution of 
publicly and privately owned MWC's and the estimated MSW volumes 
managed by the existing MWC model plants. Of the 100 publicly owned and 
operated MWC plants, 38 plants are located in communities with a 
population less than 50,000, 11 plants are located in communities with 
a population between 50,000 and 100,000, 21 plants are located in 
communities with a population between 100,000 and 250,000, and 30 
plants are located in communities with a population greater than 
250,000. A detailed description of the model plants used to 
characterize operational MWC's is presented in table 3-4 of the 
``Economic Impact Analysis of Proposed Emissions Standards and 
Guidelines for Municipal Waste Combustors'' (EPA-450/3-91-029, 1994).

              Table 5.--Summary of Total MSW Throughput at Public and Private MWC's by Model Plant              
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Ownership                             
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------
               Model planta                     Public                     Private                     Total    
                                            throughput (Mg/   Public   throughput (Mg/  Private   throughput (Mg/
                                                  yr)       share (%)        yr)       share (%)        yr)     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.........................................         813,244     100.0                0       0.0          813,244
2.........................................       1,158,112      81.9          256,034      18.1        1,414,146
3.........................................       1,397,867     100.0                0       0.0        1,397,867
4.........................................       1,914,896      19.3        7,995,967      80.7        9,910,863
5.........................................       3,956,410      61.1        2,523,329      38.9        6,479,739
6.........................................         374,566      56.7          286,119      43.3          660,685
7.........................................       1,008,603      57.5          746,477      42.5        1,755,080
8.........................................       1,547,612      66.5          777,981      33.5        2,325,593
9.........................................         400,346      73.3          145,661      26.7          546,007
10........................................         425,552      82.5           90,472      17.5          516,024
11........................................         166,082      42.0          228,966      58.0          395,048
12........................................         284,596      72.6          107,219      27.4          391,815
14........................................         343,596      48.4          366,785      51.6          710,381
15........................................         937,280      29.2        2,277,088      70.8        3,214,368

[[Page 65407]]
                                                                                                                
16........................................          58,462       6.7          819,320      93.3          877,782
17........................................         745,501      52.9          662,673      47.1        1,408,174
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total:................................      15,078,823      45.9       17,737,993      54.1      32,816,816 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a There is no model plant that matches model plant #13 in the Economic Impact Analysis (EPA-450/3-91-029, March 
  1994).                                                                                                        


    b. Regulatory Alternatives Considered. The two broad categories of 
regulatory standards available include design standards and emission 
standards. Design standards specify the type of control equipment 
polluters must install, whereas emission standards specify the maximum 
quantity of a given pollutant that any one polluter may release.
    Design standards offer the least flexible approach considered in 
this analysis. Municipal waste combustors would have to install the 
specified control equipment regardless of the additional emission 
reductions achieved or the relative cost of alternative means of 
emission reductions.
    Emission standards allow greater flexibility in the methods used to 
reduce emissions. Municipal waste combustors are free to meet the 
emission limit in the manner that is least costly to them. 
Consequently, for a given level of emission reductions, emission 
standards are generally less costly than design standards. Furthermore, 
emission standards give MWC's an incentive to develop more effective 
means of controlling emissions. In addition, the Act requires the 
Administrator to promulgate emission standards unless such standards 
are not feasible. See 42 U.S.C. Secs. 7411(h) and 7429(a)(1). Since 
emission standards for MWC's are feasible, the EPA is barred from 
promulgating design standards for MWC's.
    Even though emission standards generally result in a more efficient 
allocation of costs than design standards, uniform emission standards 
can be more costly than necessary. Uniform emission standards require 
the same level of emission control of every discharger. Because 
marginal control costs differ for plants of different sizes, different 
technologies, different levels of product recovery (i.e., in the 
chemical industry), and different levels of baseline control, an 
effective solution can be reached if standards are carefully tailored 
to the special characteristics of each discharger. This type of 
standard is referred to as a differentiated standard.
    In formulating its MWC regulatory alternatives, EPA selected 
candidate regulatory alternatives that contain control limits for MWC's 
differentiated by MWC size classification. Large facilities are defined 
as MWC plants with aggregate plant capacities over 225 Mg/day. Small 
facilities are defined as MWC plants with aggregate plant capacities 
between 35 and 225 Mg/day. Plants with aggregate plant capacities less 
than 35 Mg/day are not covered by today's rulemaking. The lower size 
threshold of 35 Mg/day aggregate plant capacity for controlling MWC 
emissions under today's rulemaking was selected after reviewing the 
population distributions of MWI's and MWC's. Most incinerators at 
medical waste facilities are smaller incinerators that fire segregated 
medical waste with general hospital discards (MSW), and these 
incinerators would have the potential to be covered by today's 
rulemaking. To avoid overlap with the upcoming MWI rulemaking, this 
rulemaking includes the lower size cutoff of 35 Mg/day plant capacity 
and MWC plants with aggregate capacities less than or equal to 35 Mg/
day will be addressed under a separate rulemaking. With a lower size 
cutoff of 35 Mg/day, today's promulgated MWC rulemaking will cover over 
99 percent of the total U.S. MWC combustion capacity but will exclude 
97 percent of the total MWI combustion capacity.
    The regulatory alternatives for the two selected size 
classifications did not specify a particular control technology; 
rather, they specified emission limits that facilities would be 
required to meet. Current practice indicates that the emission 
guideline limits for acid gases, PM, and metals will likely be met with 
one of six different types of control technologies, depending on the 
applicable emission limits. Table 6 presents acid gas, PM, and metals 
control technologies listed in order of increasing efficiency.

  Table 6.--Control Technologies Associated With Acid Gas, Particulate  
                       Matter, and Metals Control                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                GCP + ESP                               
                              GCP + DSI/ESP                             
                              GCP + DSI/FF                              
                              GCP + SD/ESP                              
                               GCP + SD/FF                              
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In designing MWC regulatory alternatives, the EPA considered 
emission limits consistent with the combinations of the acid gas 
control technologies listed in table 6. Small plants may be required to 
meet one control limit and large plants another under a given 
regulatory alternative. Under the final guidelines, more stringent 
control requirements are in fact applicable to large plants than to 
small plants. This was done in an attempt to equalize the cost impact 
on small and large plants. Under the final guidelines the unit cost for 
air pollution control retrofit for large plants would be about $16 per 
Mg of waste combusted. For similar small plants the retrofit costs 
would be about $17 per Mg of waste combusted. Table 7 shows the control 
technologies evaluated for the guidelines regulatory alternatives under 
two compliance scenarios for acid gas, PM, and metals control. The 
control technology bases identified in this table are not intended to 
imply a design standard. Rather, the technology bases are identified 
only for the purpose of estimating costs and emission reductions.

                                                                        

[[Page 65408]]
 Table 7.--Emission Guidelines for Existing MWC'S: Control Technology Bases Used to Estimate the Impacts of the 
                                           Regulatory Alternatives a b                                          
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Size Classification (Mg MSW/day)                   
  Regulatory alternative, and baseline  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  APCD                          Small (35 to 225)                    Large (over 225)           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reg. Alt. I:                                                                                                    
  No control...........................  GCP+ESP                          GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
  ESP (low)............................  GCP+ESP                          GCP+SD/ESP(m)+CI+SNCR                 
  SD/ESP...............................  GCP+SD/ESP                       GCP+SD/ESP(m)+CI+SNCR                 
  SD/FF................................  GCP+SD/FF                        GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
Reg. Alt. II-A:                                                                                                 
  No control...........................  GCP+DSI/FF+CI                    GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
  ESP (low)............................  GCP+DSI/ESP+CI                   GCP+SD/ESP(m)+CI+SNCR                 
  SD/ESP...............................  GCP+SD/ESP+CI                    GCP+SD/ESP(m)+CI+SNCR                 
  SD/FF................................  GCP+SD/FF+CI                     GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
Reg. Alt. II-B:                                                                                                 
  No control...........................  GCP+DSI/FF+CI                    GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
  ESP (low)............................  GCP+DSI/ESP+CI                   GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
  SD/ESP...............................  GCP+SD/ESP+CI                    GCP+SD/ESP(m)+CI+SNCR                 
  SD/FF................................  GCP+SD/FF+CI                     GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
Reg. Alt. III;                                                                                                  
  No control...........................  GCP+SD/FF+CI                     GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
  ESP (low)............................  GCP+SD/FF+CI                     GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
  SD/ESP...............................  GCP+SD/FF+CI                     GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
  SD/FF................................  GCP+SD/FF+CI                     GCP+SD/FF+CI+SNCR                     
MACT Floor:                                                                                                     
No control.............................  GCP+DSI/FF                       GCP+SD/FF+SNCR                        
ESP (low)..............................  GCP+DSI/ESP                      GCP+SD/ESP(M)+SNCR                    
SD/ESP.................................  GCP+SD/ESP                       GCP+SD/ESP(m)+SNCR                    
SD/FF..................................  GCP+SD/FF                        GCP+SD/FF+SNCR                        
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: This table is an extract of table 4-2 of the document entitled ``Economic Impact Analysis for Proposed  
  Emission Standards and Guidelines for Municipal Waste Combustors,'' EPA-450/3-91-029, March 1994. See         
  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for information on obtaining this document.                                         
a The MWC regulation does not mandate a specific type of control equipment. The MWC owner/operator may use any  
  control equipment that meets the emission standards. The control technologies are the projected compliance    
  strategies used as the basis for computing costs. If the MWC has equipment that is meeting or exceeding the   
  control requirements, no additional costs are incurred.                                                       
b CI=carbon injection.                                                                                          



  Table 7A.--Emission Guidelines for Existing MWC's: Emission Reductions and Annualized Costs of the Regulatory 
                                                 Alternatives a                                                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Regulatory alternative                         
Pollutant category (Mg/yr)/annualized --------------------------------------------------------------------------
         cost ($1990 10 6/yr)                         Reg. alt. II-  Reg. alt. II-                              
                                        Reg. alt. I         A              B        Reg. alt. III    Mact floor 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2..................................     41,200         43,300         43,300         45,000         43,300    
HCl..................................     51,600         56,300         56,300         57,300         56,300    
PM...................................      3,070          3,070          3,070          3,240          3,070    
Pb...................................         74.8           74.8           91.1          102             74.8  
Cd...................................          5.24           5.24           5.56           6.02           5.24 
Hg...................................         44.7           47.5           47.5           47.5            0    
NOX..................................      8,680          8,680          8,690          8,690          8,680    
CO...................................     19,300         19,300         19,300         19,300         19,300    
Dioxins/furans (total mass)..........          0.154          0.156          0.157          0.158        b 0.153

[[Page 65409]]
                                                                                                                
Annualized cost ($1990 10 6/yr)......        412            443            448            487            425    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: This table is an extract of tables 5-14 and 5-21 of the document entitled ``Economic Impact Analysis for
  Proposed Emission Standards and Guidelines for Municipal Waste Combustors,'' EPA-450/3-91-029, March 1994. See
  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for information on obtaining this document.                                         
a The MWC regulation does not mandate a specific type of control equipment. The MWC owner/operator may use any  
  control equipment that meets the emission standards. The control technologies are the projected compliance    
  strategies used as the basis for computing costs. If the MWC has equipment that is meeting or exceeding the   
  control requirements, no additional costs are incurred.                                                       
b The MACT floor is regulatory alternative II-A without carbon injection for mercury and dioxin/furan control.  
  The majority of the dioxin/furan emission control is achieved by acid gas controls included in alternative II-
  A and the floor. It is assumed that adding mercury control (carbon injection) to acid gas control reduces     
  dioxin/furan emissions by at least an additional 50 percent. The dioxin/furan emission reduction estimate for 
  the MACT floor is not provided in the ``Economic Impacts Analysis.''                                          


    The regulatory alternatives represent alternative levels of control 
considered by the EPA, whereas the compliance scenarios represent 
potential alternative responses by the MWC owners and operators to the 
emission requirements. Generally speaking, the EPA assumed that MWC 
owners and operators will choose the minimum-cost control technology 
that will meet the emission requirements. However, where there is 
uncertainty regarding the actual emission limits that a particular 
control technology will achieve in practice, owners may choose a more 
conservative (and potentially more costly) compliance strategy to 
reduce the risk of noncompliance. A conservative investment decision is 
particularly likely when the investment decision affects the facility's 
ability to remain in operation (e.g., noncompliance results in plant 
shutdown), is a long-term decision, or involves a significant capital 
outlay. Consequently, we evaluate two compliance scenarios for meeting 
the acid gas, PM, and metals control requirements for existing plants 
subject to guidelines.
    A more detailed discussion of the regulatory alternatives EPA 
considered may be found in the ``Economic Impact Analysis for Proposed 
Emission Standards and Guidelines for Municipal Waste Combustors,'' 
EPA-450/3-91-029, March 1994 (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 
information on obtaining this document). Control alternatives were also 
developed for NOX control and Hg control. Discussion of these 
alternatives can be found in the following memos that may be obtained 
from the EPA's Air Docket, as specified in the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this preamble: (1) ``Update Report on Mercury 
Control Technologies for Municipal Waste Combustors'' prepared by K. 
Nebel and D. White, Radian Corporation, for W. Stevenson, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, July 1993; (2) ``NOX Control on 
Existing MWC's,'' prepared by E. Soderberg et al., Radian Corporation, 
for W. Stevenson, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, August 23, 
1991; (3) ``Wet Scrubbing Systems Performance and Cost,'' prepared by 
K. Nebel, et al., Radian Corporation, for W. Stevenson, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, June 22, 1994; and (4) ``A Summary of 
Mercury Emissions and Applicable Control Technologies for Municipal 
Waste Combustors,'' prepared by K. Nebel and D. White, Radian 
Corporation, for W. Stevenson, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
September 1991.
    c. Social Costs. The regulatory compliance costs of reducing air 
emissions from MWC's include the total and annualized capital costs; 
operating and maintenance costs; monitoring, inspection, recordkeeping, 
and reporting costs; and total annual costs. The annualized capital 
cost is calculated using a 4-percent discount rate for publicly-owned 
MWC's and an 8-percent discount rate for privately-owned MWC's. The 
total annual cost is calculated as the sum of the annualized capital 
cost; operating and maintenance costs; and the monitoring, inspection, 
recordkeeping, and reporting costs. There are no Federal funds 
available to assist State and local governments in meeting these costs.
    Table 8 provides the estimated compliance costs for the final 
regulations and their distribution across public and private MWC's. As 
shown, the national annual compliance costs for existing MWC's total 
$405.5 million, with publicly-owned facilities incurring $229.9 
million. This total both represents 56.7 percent of the estimated 
national compliance costs and forms the basis for allocating benefits 
to publicly-owned MWC's. (The analysis has assumed that benefits are 
linear with emission reductions). The level of compliance costs depends 
not only on the absolute number of facilities, but also on the baseline 
level of pollution control. It is assumed that higher compliance costs 
are associated with higher emission reductions and are, thus, 
appropriate for allocating the benefits associated with the reduced 
emissions.

        Table 8.--Summary of Regulatory Compliance Costs for Existing MWC's by Ownership ($1990, 10 \3\)        
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Annual                        
                                                                      Annual    operating     Annual     Total  
                        Ownership category                           capital       and         MIRR      annual 
                                                                      costs    maintenance   costs a     costs  
                                                                                  costs                         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public............................................................     67,625     154,163       8,092    229,881
Private...........................................................     83,936      87,161       4,575    175,672
                                                                   ---------------------------------------------
      Total.......................................................    151,561     241,325      12,667   405,553 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a MIRR=Monitoring, inspection, reporting, and recordkeeping.                                                    


[[Page 65410]]

    The analysis assumes that the entire increase in costs of 
combustion services for both public and private entities will be passed 
through to MWC customers in the form of increases in the tipping fee 
charged by MWC's. As shown in table 9, the estimated increases in the 
average tipping fee for publicly-owned MWC's are significant and range 
from 36 to 59 percent. The range for privately-owned MWC's is 41 to 65 
percent.

Table 9.--Average Tipping Fee In-creases for Existing MWC's by Ownership
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Small MWC     Large MWC 
                                               plants (35     plants a  
                                               to 225 Mg/   (over 225 Mg/
                  Ownership                     day MSW)      day MSW)  
                                                (percent      (percent  
                                                 change)       change)  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public......................................           59            36 
Private.....................................           65           41  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Fee increases are computed using the average cost per megagram of MSW 
  reported in tables 5-10 and 5-11 of the EPA's ``Economic Impact       
  Analysis for Proposed Emission Standards and Guidelines for Municipal 
  Solid Waste Combustors,'' (EPA-450/3-91-029) and an average tipping   
  fee of $57/Mg of MSW. The average tipping fee is based on the 1993    
  average tipping fee for MWC's reported in Waste Age (Berenyi & Gould, 
  1993) converted to 1990 dollars.                                      

    Section 7.3.1 of the EPA's economic impact analysis (EPA-450/3-91-
029) provides a distributional analysis of the impacts on governmental 
entities with respect to their ability to finance the regulatory 
compliance capital through revenue bonds. A community's ability to 
finance the regulatory compliance capital through revenue bonds is 
estimated by comparing the estimated average annual cost per household 
to the average annual household income for the community. If the cost 
per household exceeds one percent of average annual household income, 
then the community is assumed to have potential difficulty issuing 
revenue bonds. Of the estimated 100 governmental entities subject to 
the guidelines, no governmental entities with a population above 50,000 
are projected to have difficulty issuing revenue bonds as a result of 
the regulation on existing sources. Overall, 3 of the 100 governmental 
entities (all 3 of which have population below 50,000) are projected to 
have difficulty issuing such bonds.
    Without market adjustments, the social costs of the guidelines 
should be equivalent to the national compliance costs shown in table 8. 
However, in this analysis, the social costs differ, both because the 
total capital costs for both public and private MWC's were discounted 
at the social rate equal to 7 percent, and because of tax differences. 
Table 10 shows the estimated social cost of the regulations and the 
distribution across public and private MWC's. The estimated annual 
social cost of the guidelines is $443 million of which 56.7 percent, or 
$251.1 million, is attributed to publicly-owned MWC's. This estimate of 
social cost is greater than the national compliance costs because the 
total capital costs for publicly-owned MWC's is discounted at the 
social rate of 7 percent, as opposed to the 4 percent rate used to 
compute the national compliance costs.

 Table 10.--Summary of Estimated Annual Social Cost by Ownership ($1990)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Total             
                                                      social            
                Ownership category                    costs      Share  
                                                     ($10 \3\  (percent)
                                                    per year)           
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public............................................    251,107       56.7
Private...........................................    191,893       43.3
                                                   ---------------------
      Total.......................................    443,000      100.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 10A provides typical costs of air pollution control retrofits 
for existing MWC's. The costs shown in table 10A are for 17 model 
existing plants.

                  Table 10A.--Typical Cost of Air Pollution Control Retrofit for Existing MWC'S                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Costs ($1990 x 10 6)               
                     Plant size (Mg/day)                        MWC type  -------------------------- Model plant
                                                                             Capital       Annual       number  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
45..........................................................       MOD/SA            2          0.5           10
136.........................................................       MOD/SA            3         10.5            9
181.........................................................       MOD/EA            3          0.4           11
181.........................................................        MB/WW            5          0.9            6
454.........................................................       MB/RWW           13          1.6           12
980.........................................................        MB/WW           25          3.2            5
2,041.......................................................        MB/WW           46          5.0            4
181.........................................................        MB/WW           a5          0.8           14
454.........................................................       MB/RWW          a13          1.6           17
544.........................................................          RDF           28          2.3            8
1,814.......................................................          RDF           64          4.8            7
1,814.......................................................          RDF          a33          4.4           15
544.........................................................          RDF          a17          2.0           16
218.........................................................       MB/REF            8          0.9            2
680.........................................................       MB/REF           39          2.3            1
816.........................................................       MB/REF           35          4.1            3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: See table 5-1 of the ``Economic Impacts Analysis for Proposed Emission Standards and Guidelines for       
  Municipal Waste Combustors'' (EPA-450/3-91-029) for more information.                                         
a These model plants are assumed to be relatively new units that originally incorporated good combustion in     
  their design and, therefore, do not need to retrofit good combustion to comply with the guidelines.           


[[Page 65411]]

    d. Social Benefits. Society will benefit from the proposed 
guidelines through the reduction of emissions of dioxins/furans, Cd, 
Pb, Hg, PM, HCl, SO2, and NOX. These pollutant categories are 
emitted by various types of sources, including MWC's. The level of 
pollutant emissions and health effects vary among types of sources, and 
total national emissions of these pollutants has been shown to have the 
health effects listed in table 11.

                   Table 11.--Health and Other Effects                  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Pollutant category                Health and other effects   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organics...............................    Mortality, morbidity.
                                           Carcinogenicity.     
Metals.................................    Retardation and brain
                                          damage.                       
                                           Hypertension.        
                                           Central nervous      
                                          system injury.                
                                           Renal dysfunction.   
Acid gases.............................    Materials damage.    
                                           Dental erosion.      
                                           Acid rain.           
                                           Mortality, morbidity.
                                           Respiratory tract    
                                          problems, permanent harm to   
                                          lung.                         
                                           Soiling and materials
                                          damage.                       
                                           Reduced agricultural 
                                          yield.                        
                                           Ozone formation.     
Particulate matter.....................    Mortality, morbidity.
                                           Eye and throat       
                                          irritation, bronchitis, lung  
                                          damage.                       
                                           Impaired visibility. 
                                           Soiling and materials
                                          damage.                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because of limitations on data on the concentration-response 
function and valuation of these functions, benefits have not been 
quantified for all pollutants. Benefits have been quantified only for 
emissions of SO2 and PM. Benefits have not been quantified for 
dioxins/furans, Cd, Pb, Hg, HCl or NOX emission control. Benefits 
to the public and environment will result from the control of these 
hazardous air pollutants (HAP's) and criteria pollutants. For the 
HAP's, dioxin/furan compounds have been associated with chloracne, 
reproductive/developmental effects, immune system toxicity, and cancer 
(probable human carcinogen). Particulate-associated metals including Pb 
and Cd are toxic and can cause effects such as mucous membrane 
irritation, gastrointestinal effects, nervous system disorders, skin 
irritation, and reproductive and developmental disorders. In regard to 
volatile metals, Hg in all forms may be characterized as quite toxic 
with each form exhibiting different health effects, including 
gastrointestinal and respiratory tract disturbances, central nervous 
system effects, and developmental effects. Additionally, HCl is 
corrosive and effects the eyes, skin, and mucus membranes, and 
dermatitis has been reported from long-term exposure.
    Table 12 provides the estimated social benefits associated with 
reductions in PM and SO2 emissions from MWC's and their 
distribution across public and private MWC's. The estimated social 
benefit of reduced PM and SO2 emissions is $106 million with $60.3 
million being attributed to reductions at publicly-owned MWC 
facilities. These benefits would be experienced annually by the 
residents of these municipalities. Proper allocation of these benefits 
would be based on the expected emission reductions at public and 
private MWC's. However, due to lack of data at the model plant level, 
these benefits are allocated across public and private MWC's in the 
same proportion as the estimated national compliance costs (i.e., 56.7 
percent for public and 43.3 percent for private).

 Table 12.--Social Benefit Estimates for SO2 and PM Emission Reductions 
                          by Ownership ($1990)                          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Social benefits ($10 \3\ per 
                                                    year) a b           
           Ownership category           --------------------------------
                                             PM        SO2       Total  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public.................................     30,779     29,475     60,254
Private................................     23,521     22,525     46,046
Total..................................     54,300     52,000    106,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Benefit estimates are $1,200 per Mg of SO2 reduced and $17,700 per Mg 
  of PM reduced. (This estimate is derived valuing all mortalities at   
  $4.4 million per life saved. This approach does not consider the      
  length of the changes in longevity resulting from PM exposure). Social
  benefits attributable to public and private MWC's are proportionate to
  their share of the total annual costs.                                
b Does not include benefit credits for dioxins/furans, Cd, and Hg       
  control.                                                              

    Table 13 presents a comparison of the estimated social costs and 
benefits of the guidelines. Unfortunately, because benefit estimates 
are not computed for all pollutants, the social benefit provided in 
table 13 is a partial estimate. Because of this fact, the net benefits 
(i.e., benefits minus costs) shown in table 13 cannot be used to reach 
conclusions regarding the total net benefits of the rule for existing 
sources.

    Table 13.--Social Costs and Partial Social Benefits From Reducing   
        Emissions at MWC's by Ownership ($1990, 10 \3\ Per Year)        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Total     Partial 
                Ownership category                    social     social 
                                                      costs     benefits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public............................................    251,107     60,254
Private...........................................    191,893     46,046
                                                   ---------------------
      Total.......................................    443,000    106,300
------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Effects on the National Economy
    The Unfunded Mandates Act requires that the EPA estimate ``the 
effect'' of this rule

``on the national economy, such as the effect on productivity, 
economic growth, full employment, creation of productive jobs, and 
international competitiveness of the U.S. goods and services, if and 
to the extent that the EPA in its sole discretion determines that

[[Page 65412]]

accurate estimates are reasonably feasible and that such effect is 
relevant and material.''

As stated in the Unfunded Mandates Act, such macroeconomic effects tend 
to be measurable, in nationwide econometric models, only if the 
economic impact of the regulation reaches 0.25 to 0.5 percent of gross 
domestic product (in the range of $1.5 billion to $3 billion). A 
regulation with a smaller aggregate effect is highly unlikely to have 
any measurable impact in macroeconomic terms unless it is highly 
focused on a particular geographic region or economic sector. For this 
reason, no estimate of this rule's effect on the national economy has 
been conducted.
4. Consultation with Government Officials
    The Unfunded Mandates Act requires that the EPA describe the extent 
of the EPA's consultation with affected State, local, and tribal 
officials, summarize the officials' comments or concerns, and summarize 
the EPA's response to those comments or concerns. In addition, section 
203 of the Clean Air Act requires that the EPA develop a plan for 
informing and advising small governments that may be significantly or 
uniquely impacted by a proposal. Throughout the development of these 
rules (pre-proposal through pre-promulgation phases), the EPA consulted 
with representatives of affected State and local governments, including 
the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, the 
National Association of Counties, the Solid Waste Association of North 
America, and the Municipal Waste Management Association, to inform them 
of the proposed rule and determine their concerns. (The EPA also 
consulted with representatives from other entities affected by the 
proposed rule, such as the Integrated Waste Services Association, the 
Sierra Club, and the Natural Resources Defense Council.)
    As part of EPA's consultation efforts in this rulemaking, the EPA 
mailed a copy of the regulatory summary (FACT SHEET) for the September 
20, 1994 proposed MWC standards and guidelines to every elected 
official in an area with either an operating MWC, an MWC under 
construction, or a planned MWC. (The EPA also mailed copies of the 
summary to all owners and operators of these MWC's.) This mailout 
exceeded 400 informational packages. Since approximately half of the 
MWC's are owned and/or operated by municipalities, with this effort, 
the EPA was able to ensure that every affected State and local 
government was made aware of the proposed rule and had the necessary 
information to provide comment.
    In addition, over a 3-month period, EPA staff consulted with State 
and local government representatives to discuss their comments 
regarding the final draft package. Letters were received during this 
time period from the U.S. Conference Mayors and the Integrated Waste 
Services Association (see docket A-90-45, items IV-D-44 and IV-D-85, 
respectively), which raised various concerns; however, in subsequent 
meetings, the EPA learned that State and local officials, as well as 
industry representatives, were mainly concerned with the following 
sections of the final draft emission guidelines: (1) The achievability 
for some MWC's of the final draft NOX emission limit included in 
the emission guidelines; (2) the fact that because the EPA had not 
subcategorized by combustor type for purposes of determining the 
NOX emission limit as it had when it determined the CO emission 
limit, some MWC's would be forced to install retrofit technology in 
order to meet the more stringent NOX limit, (3) the achievability 
for MWC's with large new ESP's of the final draft dioxin/furan emission 
limit included in the emission guidelines; and (4) the inconsistency 
between some of the definitions in the draft rules with the definitions 
given in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ea, which establishes emission limits 
for MWC's that commence construction after December 20, 1989, but on or 
before September 20, 1994.
    As a result of these consultations, the EPA decided to modify the 
final regulatory package to address these concerns. The final emission 
guidelines promulgated today:
    (1) Subcategorize MWC's by combustor type for the purpose of 
establishing different NOx emission guidelines; and
    (2) Establish separate dioxin/furan emission guidelines for MWC's 
with ESP-based systems and MWC's with nonESP-based systems. In 
addition, in order to address the fourth concern identified by State 
and local governments, the EPA is publishing today under a separate 
Federal Register notice, a direct final rule that modifies the 
applicability and definitions sections of 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ea to 
improve clarity and make them consistent with those provided in the 
standards and emission guidelines promulgated in this notice.
    Documentation of the EPA's consideration of comments on the 
proposed standards and guidelines is provided in the BID's for the 
proposed and final standards and guidelines. Refer to the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION and ADDRESSES sections of this preamble for information on 
how to acquire copies of these documents.
    As discussed in section IV.F, the number of affected small entities 
is not expected to be substantial. The full analysis of potential 
regulatory impacts on households, small governments, and small 
businesses is included in the economic impact analysis in the docket 
and listed under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Because the number of 
affected small entities is expected to be insubstantial (i.e., the EPA 
considers that the regulation is likely to affect less than 20 percent 
of small entities with MWC's--see section IV.F for a more detailed 
explanation), no plan to inform and advise small governments is 
required under section 203 of the Unfunded Mandates Act. However, as 
described above, the EPA has communicated and consulted with small 
governments and businesses that will be affected by the standards and 
guidelines, keeping them informed about the content of this 
promulgation. Refer to section III.C. for a description of these 
communications.
E. Executive Order 12875
    To reduce the burden of Federal regulations on States and small 
governments, the President issued Executive Order 12875 on October 26, 
1993, entitled ``Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership.'' Under 
Executive Order 12875, the EPA is required to consult with 
representatives of affected State, local, and tribal governments, and 
keep these affected parties informed about the content and effect of 
the promulgated standards and emission guidelines. Section III.A of 
this notice provides a brief summary of the need for the final 
standards and guidelines. Sections IV.C and V.C provide brief summaries 
of the cost of the final guidelines and standards. Section III.C 
provides a brief account of the actions that the EPA has taken to 
communicate and consult with the affected parties. The discussion 
provided below provides a brief summary of the content of the final 
standards and guidelines. For more information on the content of the 
final standards and guidelines, refer to sections IV.A and V.A of this 
notice.
    The promulgated standards and guidelines establish emission 
limitations for new and existing MWC units located at MWC plants with 
plant capacities to combust greater than 35 Mg/day of MSW. The 
standards and guidelines do not specify which type of air pollution 
control equipment must be 

[[Page 65413]]
used at MWC's to meet the promulgated emission limitations. The EPA 
expects, however, that, as a result of the promulgated standards and 
guidelines, most new and existing MWC's at large MWC plants (plants 
with greater than 225 Mg/day capacity) will use SD/FF systems with 
activated carbon injection (new plants) or retrofit SD/FF or SD/ESP 
systems with activated carbon injection (existing plants) for dioxins/
furans, metals, and acid gas control, and will use SNCR for NOX 
control. New MWC's at small MWC plants (plants with 35 to 225 Mg/day 
capacity) are expected to install SD/FF systems with activated carbon 
injection, and existing MWC's at small plants are expected to install 
DSI/ESP systems with activated carbon injection. Selective noncatalytic 
reduction technology would not be necessary for either new or existing 
MWC's at small MWC plants.

F. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Section 605 of the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires Federal 
agencies to give special consideration to the impacts of regulations on 
small entities, which are small businesses, small organizations, and 
small governments. The major purpose of the RFA is to keep paperwork 
and regulatory requirements from getting out of proportion to the scale 
of the entities being regulated without compromising the objectives of, 
in this case, the Clean Air Act.
    If a regulation is likely to have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities, the EPA may give special 
consideration to those small entities when analyzing regulatory 
alternatives and drafting the regulation. In the case at hand, the EPA 
considers that a regulation that is likely to affect 20 percent or more 
of small entities with MWC's is a regulation that will affect a 
substantial number of small entities.
    Definitions of small entities are flexible. For analysis of the 
regulations being proposed today, the EPA considers a small business in 
this industry to be one with gross annual revenue less than $6 million, 
and a small government to be one that serves a population less than 
50,000. (A typical city of 50,000 generates about 90 Mg/day of MSW.) 
Most small governments dispose of their MSW by landfilling and, 
therefore, will not be affected by regulation of MWC emissions. In 
regard to small organizations such as independent not-for-profit 
enterprises, the EPA finds that they have no more than a very minor 
involvement with MWC's, and for that reason the EPA has not found it 
necessary to study potential direct impacts on small organizations.
    The final regulations do not apply to MWC plants with capacity less 
than 35 Mg/day. The EPA estimates that few if any small-entity MWC's 
would be affected by today's promulgated standards and guidelines.
    Thus, the number of affected small entities is not expected to be 
substantial, and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required. 
Nevertheless, the EPA has conducted an extensive analysis of potential 
regulatory impacts on households, small governments, and small 
businesses. The analysis is summarized in the preambles to the proposed 
standards (59 FR 48198) and guidelines (59 FR 48228.) The full analysis 
is included in the economic impact assessment in the docket and is 
listed at the beginning of today's notice under SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION.
    On December 20, 1989, the EPA proposed standards and guidelines for 
MWC's that applied to all sizes of MWC's. The 1989 proposal had no 
lower size cutoff. Small businesses, small governments, and groups 
representing small-entity interests commented extensively on the need 
to lighten the potential regulatory burden on small entities. Most 
commenters suggested a small size cutoff considerably smaller than the 
one now being proposed. The most frequently suggested levels were 5 to 
11 Mg/day, 18 Mg/day, 23 Mg/day, and 45 Mg/day. The EPA has used these 
suggestions and the information submitted by these commenters, as well 
as information from other sources, to fulfill the intent of the RFA. 
The EPA has incorporated into the standards and guidelines being 
promulgated today several features that will mitigate and, in most 
cases eliminate, any potential, adverse economic impacts on small 
entities. These features are as follows:
    (1) The standards and guidelines will apply only to MWC's with a 
plant capacity of greater than 35 Mg/day. This cutoff eliminates from 
the purview of the regulation and guidelines the overwhelming majority 
of projected new and existing very small MWC's;
    (2) The standards and guidelines are ``tiered'' so that the 
stringency (and therefore potential economic burden) of the emission 
standards and guidelines increases as the size of the MWC plant 
increases. Plants with capacities less than or equal to 35 Mg/day are 
not covered under the final standards and guidelines. Plants with 
capacities of 35 to 225 Mg/day are not required to control NOx. 
Only plants with capacities larger than 225 Mg/day--plants not often 
associated with small entities--are subject to a full complement of 
rigorous standards;
    (3) As opposed to design, equipment, work practice, or operational 
standards, the standards for new sources and the guidelines for 
existing sources consist predominantly of emission limits. Emission 
limits give MWC owners and operators of new and existing MWC's the 
freedom to select the most economical means of compliance.
    (4) The guidelines are not the usual type of regulation governed by 
the RFA. The guidelines will not apply directly to any MWC's, but will 
be used as a guide by individual State air pollution control agencies 
in developing site-specific regulations for MWC's. States are allowed 
some flexibility in implementing the guidelines.
    Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the EPA certifies 
that the standards and guidelines will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities because the number of 
small entities affected is not substantial.

G. Clean Air Act Procedural Requirements

    The following procedural requirements of the Clean Air Act are 
addressed: Administrative listing, periodic review, external 
participation, and economic impact assessment.
1. Administrator Listing--Sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air Act
    As prescribed by section 111 of the Clean Air Act, establishment of 
standards of performance and emission guidelines for MWC's is based on 
the Administrator's determination (52 FR 25399, July 7, 1987) that 
these sources contribute significantly to air pollution that may 
reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. 
Additionally, section 129 of the 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act 
directs the Administrator to promulgate revised standards for new MWC's 
and guidelines for existing MWC's.
2. Periodic Review--Sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air Act
    Sections 111 and 129 of the Clean Air Act require that the 
standards and guidelines be reviewed not later than 5 years following 
the initial promulgation. At that time and at 5-year intervals 
thereafter, the Administrator shall review the standards and guidelines 
and revise them if necessary. This review will include an assessment of 
such factors as the need for integration with other programs, the 
existence of alternative methods, enforceability, improvements in 
emission control technology, and reporting requirements.

[[Page 65414]]

3. External Participation
    In accordance with section 117 of the Clean Air Act, publication of 
this promulgation was preceded by consultation with appropriate 
advisory committees, independent experts, and Federal departments and 
agencies.
4. Economic Impact Assessment
    Section 317A of the Clean Air Act requires the EPA to prepare an 
economic impact assessment for any standards or guidelines promulgated 
under section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act. An economic impact 
assessment was prepared for the promulgated standards and guidelines. 
In the manner described in the sections of this preamble regarding the 
impacts of and rationale for the promulgated standards and guidelines, 
the EPA considered all aspects of the economic impact assessment in 
promulgating the standards and guidelines. The economic impact 
assessment is included in the list of key technical documents at the 
beginning of today's notice under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental Protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: October 31, 1995.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    Part 60, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 60--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7414, 7416, 7429, and 7601.
    2. Section 60.17 of subpart A of part 60 is amended by revising 
paragraphs (h)(1), (h)(2), and (h)(3) to read as follows:


Sec. 60.17  Incorporation by reference.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (1) ASME QRO-1-1994, Standard for the Qualification and 
Certification of Resource Recovery Facility Operators, IBR approved for 
Secs. 60.56a, 60.54b(a) and 60.54b(b).

    (2) ASME PTC 4.1-1964 (Reaffirmed 1991), Power Test Codes: Test 
Code for Steam Generating Units (with 1968 and 1969 Addenda), IBR 
approved for Secs. 60.46b, 60.58a(h)(6)(ii), and 60.58b(i)(6)(ii).
    (3) ASME Interim Supplement 19.5 on Instruments and Apparatus: 
Application, Part II of Fluid Meters, 6th Edition (1971), IBR approved 
for Secs. 60.58a(h)(6)(ii) and 60.58b(i)(6)(ii).
* * * * *
    3. Section 60.23 of subpart B of part 60 is amended by revising 
paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:


Sec. 60.23  Adoption and submittal of State plans; public hearings.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Unless otherwise specified in the applicable subpart, within 9 
months after notice of the availability of a final guideline document 
is published under Sec. 60.22(a), each State shall adopt and submit to 
the Administrator, in accordance with Sec. 60.4 of subpart A of this 
part, a plan for the control of the designated pollutant to which the 
guideline document applies.
* * * * *
    4. Section 60.24 of subpart B of part 60 is amended by revising 
paragraph (f) introductory text to read as follows:


Sec. 60.24  Emission standards and compliance schedules.

* * * * *
    (f) Unless otherwise specified in the applicable subpart on a case-
by-case basis for particular designated facilities or classes of 
facilities, States may provide for the application of less stringent 
emissions standards or longer compliance schedules than those otherwise 
required by paragraph (c) of this section, provided that the State 
demonstrates with respect to each such facility (or class of 
facilities):
* * * * *
    5. Subpart C of part 60 is amended by revising Sec. 60.30 to read 
as follows:


Sec. 60.30  Scope.

    The following subparts contain emission guidelines and compliance 
times for the control of certain designated pollutants in accordance 
with section 111(d) and section 129 of the Clean Air Act and subpart B 
of this part.
    (a) Subpart Ca--[Removed and Reserved]
    (b) Subpart Cb--Municipal Waste Combustors
    (c) Subpart Cc--[Reserved]
    (d) Subpart Cd--Sulfuric Acid Production Plants

Subpart Ca--[Removed and Reserved]

    5a. Part 60 is amended by removing and reserving subpart Ca.

Subpart Cb--[Redesignated as Subpart Cd]

Subpart Cc--[Reserved]

    6. Part 60 is amended by redesignating subpart Cb as Cd, reserving 
subpart Cc, and revising the new subpart Cd to read as follows:
Subpart Cd--Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Times for Sulfuric Acid 
Production Units
Sec.
60.30d  Designated facilities.
60.31d  Emission guidelines.
60.32d  Compliance times.

Subpart Cd--Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Sulfuric 
Acid Production Units


Sec. 60.30d  Designated facilities.

    Sulfuric acid production units. The designated facility to which 
Secs. 60.31d and 60.32d apply is each existing ``sulfuric acid 
production unit'' as defined in Sec. 60.81(a) of subpart H of this 
part.


Sec. 60.31d  Emissions guidelines.

    Sulfuric acid production units. The emission guideline for 
designated facilities is 0.25 grams sulfuric acid mist (as measured by 
EPA Reference Method 8 of appendix A of this part) per kilogram (0.5 
pounds per ton) of sulfuric acid produced, the production being 
expressed as 100 percent sulfuric acid.


Sec. 60.32d  Compliance times.

    Sulfuric acid production units. Planning, awarding of contracts, 
and installation of equipment capable of attaining the level of the 
emission guideline established under Sec. 60.31d can be accomplished 
within 17 months after the effective date of a State emission standard 
for sulfuric acid mist.
    7. Part 60 is further amended by adding a new subpart Cb to read as 
follows:
Subpart Cb--Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Times for Municipal 
Waste Combustors That Are Constructed on or Before December 19, 1995
Sec.
60.30b  Scope.
60.31b  Definitions.
60.32b  Designated facilities.
60.33b  Emission guidelines for municipal waste combustor metals, 
acid gases, organics, and nitrogen oxides.
60.34b  Emission guidelines for municipal waste combustor operating 
practices.
60.35b  Emission guidelines for municipal waste combustor operator 
training and certification.
60.36b  Emission guidelines for municipal waste combustor fugitive 
ash emissions.
60.37b  Emission guidelines for air curtain incinerators. 

[[Page 65415]]

60.38b  Compliance and performance testing.
60.39b  Reporting and recordkeeping guidelines, and compliance 
schedules.

Subpart Cb--Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Schedules for 
Municipal Waste Combustors


Sec. 60.30b  Scope.

    This subpart contains emission guidelines and compliance schedules 
for the control of certain designated pollutants from certain municipal 
waste combustors in accordance with section 111(d) and section 129 of 
the Clean Air Act and subpart B of this part. The provisions in these 
emission guidelines supersede the provisions of Sec. 60.24(f) of 
subpart B of this part.


Sec. 60.31b  Definitions.

    Terms used but not defined in this subpart have the meaning given 
them in the Clean Air Act and subparts A, B, and Eb of this part.
    Municipal waste combustor plant means one or more municipal waste 
combustor units at the same location for which construction was 
commenced on or before September 20, 1994.
    Municipal waste combustor plant capacity means the aggregate 
municipal waste combustor unit capacity of all municipal waste 
combustor units at a municipal waste combustor plant for which 
construction was commenced on or before September 20, 1994.


Sec. 60.32b  Designated facilities.

    (a) The designated facility to which these guidelines apply is each 
municipal waste combustor unit located within a municipal waste 
combustor plant with an aggregate municipal waste combustor plant 
capacity greater than 35 megagrams per day of municipal solid waste for 
which construction was commenced on or before September 20, 1994.
    (b) Any waste combustion unit at a medical, industrial, or other 
type of waste combustor plant that is capable of combusting more than 
35 megagrams per day of municipal solid waste and is subject to a 
federally enforceable permit limiting the plantwide maximum amount of 
municipal solid waste that may be combusted to less than or equal to 10 
megagrams per day is not subject to this subpart if the owner or 
operator:
    (1) Notifies the Administrator of an exemption claim,
    (2) Provides a copy of the federally enforceable permit that limits 
the firing of municipal solid waste to less than 10 megagrams per day, 
and
    (3) Keeps records of the amount of municipal solid waste fired on a 
daily basis.
    (c) Physical or operational changes made to an existing municipal 
waste combustor unit primarily for the purpose of complying with 
emission guidelines under this subpart are not considered in 
determining whether the unit is a modified or reconstructed facility 
under subpart Ea or subpart Eb of this part.
    (d) A qualifying small power production facility, as defined in 
section 3(17)(C) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(17)(C)), that 
burns homogeneous waste (such as automotive tires or used oil, but not 
including refuse-derived fuel) for the production of electric energy is 
not subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of the facility 
notifies the Administrator of this exemption and provides data 
documenting that the facility qualifies for this exemption.
    (e) A qualifying cogeneration facility, as defined in section 
3(18)(B) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(18)(B)), that burns 
homogeneous waste (such as automotive tires or used oil, but not 
including refuse-derived fuel) for the production of electric energy 
and steam or forms of useful energy (such as heat) that are used for 
industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling purposes, is not subject to 
this subpart if the owner or operator of the facility notifies the 
Administrator of this exemption and provides data documenting that the 
facility qualifies for this exemption.
    (f) Any unit combusting a single-item waste stream of tires is not 
subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of the unit:
    (1) Notifies the Administrator of an exemption claim, and
    (2) Provides data documenting that the unit qualifies for this 
exemption.
    (g) Any unit required to have a permit under section 3005 of the 
Solid Waste Disposal Act is not subject to this subpart.
    (h) Any materials recovery facility (including primary or secondary 
smelters) that combusts waste for the primary purpose of recovering 
metals is not subject to this subpart.
    (i) Any cofired combustor, as defined under Sec. 60.51b of subpart 
Eb of this part, that meets the capacity specifications in paragraph 
(a) of this section is not subject to this subpart if the owner or 
operator of the cofired combustor:
    (1) Notifies the Administrator of an exemption claim,
    (2) Provides a copy of the federally enforceable permit (specified 
in the definition of cofired combustor in this section), and
    (3) Keeps a record on a calendar quarter basis of the weight of 
municipal solid waste combusted at the cofired combustor and the weight 
of all other fuels combusted at the cofired combustor.
    (j) Air curtain incinerators, as defined under Sec. 60.51b of 
subpart Eb of this part, that meet the capacity specifications in 
paragraph (a) of this section, and that combust a fuel stream composed 
of 100 percent yard waste are exempt from all provisions of this 
subpart except the opacity standard under Sec. 60.37b, the testing 
procedures under Sec. 60.38b, and the reporting and recordkeeping 
provisions under Sec. 60.39b.
    (k) Air curtain incinerators that meet the capacity specifications 
in paragraph (a) of this section and that combust municipal solid waste 
other than yard waste are subject to all provisions of this subpart.
    (l) Pyrolysis/combustion units that are an integrated part of a 
plastics/rubber recycling unit (as defined in Sec. 60.51b) are not 
subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of the plastics/rubber 
recycling unit keeps records of the weight of plastics, rubber, and/or 
rubber tires processed on a calendar quarter basis; the weight of 
chemical plant feedstocks and petroleum refinery feedstocks produced 
and marketed on a calendar quarter basis; and the name and address of 
the purchaser of the feedstocks. The combustion of gasoline, diesel 
fuel, jet fuel, fuel oils, residual oil, refinery gas, petroleum coke, 
liquified petroleum gas, propane, or butane produced by chemical plants 
or petroleum refineries that use feedstocks produced by plastics/rubber 
recycling units are not subject to this subpart.


Sec. 60.33b  Emission guidelines for municipal waste combustor metals, 
acid gases, organics, and nitrogen oxides.

    (a) The emission limits for municipal waste combustor metals are 
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3) of this section.
    (1) For approval, a State plan shall include emission limits for 
particulate matter and opacity at least as protective as the emission 
limits for particulate matter and opacity specified in paragraphs 
(a)(1)(i) through (a)(1)(iii) of this section.
    (i) The emission limit for particulate matter contained in the 
gases discharged to the atmosphere from a designated facility located 
within a large municipal waste combustor plant is 27 milligrams per dry 
standard cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (ii) The emission limit for particulate matter contained in the 
gases discharged to the atmosphere from a designated facility located 
within a small municipal waste combustor plant is 70 

[[Page 65416]]
milligrams per dry standard cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (iii) The emission limit for opacity exhibited by the gases 
discharged to the atmosphere from a designated facility located within 
a small or large municipal waste combustor plant is 10 percent (6-
minute average).
    (2) For approval, a State plan shall include emission limits for 
cadmium and lead at least as protective as the emission limits for 
cadmium and lead specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (a)(2)(iv) 
of this section.
    (i) The emission limit for cadmium contained in the gases 
discharged to the atmosphere from a designated facility located within 
a large municipal waste combustor plant is 0.040 milligrams per dry 
standard cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (ii) The emission limit for cadmium contained in the gases 
discharged to the atmosphere from a designated facility located within 
a small municipal waste combustor plant is 0.10 milligrams per dry 
standard cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (iii) The emission limit for lead contained in the gases discharged 
to the atmosphere from a designated facility located within a large 
municipal waste combustor plant is 0.49 milligrams per dry standard 
cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (iv) The emission limit for lead contained in the gases discharged 
to the atmosphere from a designated facility located within a small 
municipal waste combustor plant is 1.6 milligrams per dry standard 
cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (3) For approval, a State plan shall include emission limits for 
mercury at least as protective as the emission limits specified in this 
paragraph. The emission limit for mercury contained in the gases 
discharged to the atmosphere from a designated facility located within 
a small or large municipal waste combustor plant is 0.080 milligrams 
per dry standard cubic meter or 15 percent of the potential mercury 
emission concentration (an 85-percent reduction by weight), corrected 
to 7 percent oxygen, whichever is less stringent.
    (b) The emission limits for municipal waste combustor acid gases, 
expressed as sulfur dioxide and hydrogen chloride, are specified in 
paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.
    (1) For approval, a State plan shall include emission limits for 
sulfur dioxide at least as protective as the emission limits for sulfur 
dioxide specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (b)(1)(ii) of this 
section.
    (i) The emission limit for sulfur dioxide contained in the gases 
discharged to the atmosphere from a designated facility located within 
a large municipal waste combustor plant is 31 parts per million by 
volume or 25 percent of the potential sulfur dioxide emission 
concentration (75-percent reduction by weight or volume), corrected to 
7 percent oxygen (dry basis), whichever is less stringent. Compliance 
with this emission limit is based on a 24-hour daily geometric mean.
    (ii) The emission limit for sulfur dioxide contained in the gases 
discharged to the atmosphere from a designated facility located within 
a small municipal waste combustor plant is 80 parts per million by 
volume or 50 percent of the potential sulfur dioxide emission 
concentration (50-percent reduction by weight or volume), corrected to 
7 percent oxygen (dry basis), whichever is less stringent. Compliance 
with this emission limit is based on a 24-hour geometric mean.
    (2) For approval, a State plan shall include emission limits for 
hydrogen chloride at least as protective as the emission limits for 
hydrogen chloride specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (b)(2)(ii) of 
this section.
    (i) The emission limit for hydrogen chloride contained in the gases 
discharged to the atmosphere from a designated facility located within 
a large municipal waste combustor plant is 31 parts per million by 
volume or 5 percent of the potential hydrogen chloride emission 
concentration (95-percent reduction by weight or volume), corrected to 
7 percent oxygen (dry basis), whichever is less stringent.
    (ii) The emission limit for hydrogen chloride contained in the 
gases discharged to the atmosphere from an affected facility located 
within a small municipal waste combustor plant is 250 parts per million 
by volume or 50 percent of the potential hydrogen chloride emission 
concentration (50-percent reduction by weight or volume), corrected to 
7 percent oxygen (dry basis), whichever is less stringent.
    (c) The emission limits for municipal waste combustor organics, 
expressed as total mass dioxins/furans, are specified in paragraphs 
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section.
    (1) For approval, a State plan shall include an emission limit for 
dioxins/furans contained in the gases discharged to the atmosphere from 
a designated facility located within a large municipal waste combustor 
plant at least as protective as the emission limit for dioxins/furans 
specified in either paragraph (c)(1)(i) or (c)(1)(ii) of this section, 
as applicable.
    (i) The emission limit for designated facilities that employ an 
electrostatic precipitator-based emission control system is 60 
nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total mass), corrected to 7 
percent oxygen.
    (ii) The emission limit for designated facilities that do not 
employ an electrostatic precipitator-based emission control system is 
30 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total mass), corrected to 7 
percent oxygen.
    (2) For approval, a State plan shall include an emission limit for 
dioxins/furans contained in the gases discharged to the atmosphere from 
a designated facility located within a small municipal waste combustor 
plant at least as protective as the emission limit for dioxins/furans 
specified in this paragraph. The emission limit for dioxins/furans for 
designated facilities located within a small municipal waste combustor 
plant is 125 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total mass), 
corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (d) For approval, a State plan shall include emission limits for 
nitrogen oxides at least as protective as the emission limits listed in 
table 1 of this subpart for designated facilities located within large 
municipal waste combustor plants. Table 1 provides emission limits for 
the nitrogen oxides concentration level for each type of designated 
facility.

 Table 1.--Nitrogen Oxides Guidelines for Designated Facilities at Large
                    Municipal Waste Combustor Plants                    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Nitrogen  
                                                               oxides   
                                                              emission  
           Municipal waste combustor technology             limit (parts
                                                             per million
                                                            by volume) a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mass burn waterwall.......................................          200 
Mass burn rotary waterwall................................          250 
Refuse-derived fuel combustor.............................          250 
Fluidized bed combustor...................................          240 
Mass burn refractory combustors...........................     no limit 
Otherb....................................................         200  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Corrected to 7 percent oxygen, dry basis.                             
b Excludes mass burn refractory municipal waste combustors.             

    (1) A State plan may allow nitrogen oxides emissions averaging as 
specified in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (d)(1)(v) of this section.
    (i) An owner or operator of a large municipal waste combustor plant 
may elect to implement a nitrogen oxides emissions averaging plan for 
the designated facilities that are located at that plant and that are 
subject to subpart Cb, except as specified in paragraphs 

[[Page 65417]]
(d)(1)(i)(A) and (d)(1)(i)(B) of this section.
    (A) Municipal waste combustor units subject to subpart Ea or Eb 
cannot be included in the emissions averaging plan.
    (B) Mass burn refractory municipal waste combustor units cannot be 
included in the emissions averaging plan.
    (ii) The designated facilities included in the nitrogen oxides 
emissions averaging plan must be identified in the initial compliance 
report specified in Sec. 60.59b(f) or in the annual report specified in 
Sec. 60.59b(g), as applicable, prior to implementing the averaging 
plan. The designated facilities being included in the averaging plan 
may be redesignated each calendar year. Partial year redesignation is 
allowable with State approval.
    (iii) To implement the emissions averaging plan, the average daily 
(24-hour) nitrogen oxides emission concentration level for gases 
discharged from the designated facilities being included in the 
emissions averaging plan must be no greater than the levels specified 
in table 2 of this subpart. Table 2 provides emission limits for the 
nitrogen oxides concentration level for each type of designated 
facility.

   Table 2.--Nitrogen Oxides Limits For Existing Designated Facilities  
    Included in an Emissions Averaging Plan at Large Municipal Waste    
                            Combustor Plants                            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Nitrogen  
                                                               oxides   
                                                              emission  
           Municipal waste combustor technology             limit (parts
                                                             per million
                                                             by volume)a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mass burn waterwall.......................................          180 
Mass burn rotary waterwall................................          220 
Refuse-derived fuel combustor.............................          230 
Fluidized bed combustor...................................          220 
Otherb....................................................          180 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Corrected to 7 percent oxygen, dry basis.                             
b Excludes mass burn refractory municipal waste combustors. Mass burn   
  refractory municipal waste combustors may not be included in an       
  emissions averaging plan.                                             

    (iv) Under the emissions averaging plan, the average daily nitrogen 
oxides emissions specified in paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section 
shall be calculated using equation (1). Designated facilities that are 
offline shall not be included in calculating the average daily nitrogen 
oxides emission level.
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR19DE95.000

where:

NOX 24-hr=24-hr daily average nitrogen oxides emission 
concentration level for the emissions averaging plan (parts per million 
by volume corrected to 7 percent oxygen).
NOX i-hr=24-hr daily average nitrogen oxides emission 
concentration level for designated facility i (parts per million by 
volume, corrected to 7 percent oxygen), calculated according to the 
procedures in Sec. 60.58b(h) of this subpart.
Si=maximum demonstrated municipal waste combustor unit load for 
designated facility i (pounds per hour steam or feedwater flow as 
determined in the most recent dioxin/furan performance test).
h=total number of designated facilities being included in the daily 
emissions average.

    (v) For any day in which any designated facility included in the 
emissions averaging plan is offline, the owner or operator of the 
municipal waste combustor plant must demonstrate compliance according 
to either paragraph (d)(1)(v)(A) of this section or both paragraphs 
(d)(1)(v)(B) and (d)(1)(v)(C) of this section.
    (A) Compliance with the applicable limits specified in table 2 of 
this subpart shall be demonstrated using the averaging procedure 
specified in paragraph (d)(1)(iv) of this section for the designated 
facilities that are online.
    (B) For each of the designated facilities included in the emissions 
averaging plan, the nitrogen oxides emissions on a daily average basis 
shall be calculated and shall be equal to or less than the maximum 
daily nitrogen oxides emission level achieved by that designated 
facility on any of the days during which the emissions averaging plan 
was achieved with all designated facilities online during the most 
recent calendar quarter. The requirements of this paragraph do not 
apply during the first quarter of operation under the emissions 
averaging plan.
    (C) The average nitrogen oxides emissions (kilograms per day) 
calculated according to paragraph (d)(1)(v)(C)(2) of this section shall 
not exceed the average nitrogen oxides emissions (kilograms per day) 
calculated according to paragraph (d)(1)(v)(C)(1) of this section.
    (1) For all days during which the emissions averaging plan was 
implemented and achieved and during which all designated facilities 
were online, the average nitrogen oxides emissions shall be calculated. 
The average nitrogen oxides emissions (kilograms per day) shall be 
calculated on a calendar year basis according to paragraphs 
(d)(1)(v)(C)(1)(i) through (d)(1)(v)(C)(1)(iii) of this section.
    (i) For each designated facility included in the emissions 
averaging plan, the daily amount of nitrogen oxides emitted (kilograms 
per day) shall be calculated based on the hourly nitrogen oxides data 
required under Sec. 60.38b(a) and specified under Sec. 60.58b(h)(5) of 
subpart Eb of this part, the flue gas flow rate determined using table 
19-1 of EPA Reference Method 19 or a State-approved method, and the 
hourly average steam or feedwater flow rate.
    (ii) The daily total nitrogen oxides emissions shall be calculated 
as the sum of the daily nitrogen oxides emissions from each designated 
facility calculated under paragraph (d)(1)(v)(C)(1)(i) of this section.
    (iii) The average nitrogen oxides emissions (kilograms per day) on 
a calendar year basis shall be calculated as the sum of all daily total 
nitrogen oxides emissions calculated under paragraph 
(d)(1)(v)(C)(1)(ii) of this section divided by the number of calendar 
days for which a daily total was calculated.
    (2) For all days during which one or more of the designated 
facilities under the emissions averaging plan was offline, the average 
nitrogen oxides emissions shall be calculated. The average nitrogen 
oxides emissions (kilograms per day) shall be calculated on a calendar 
year basis according to paragraphs (d)(1)(v)(C)(2)(i) through 
(d)(1)(v)(C)(2)(iii) of this section.
    (i) For each designated facility included in the emissions 
averaging plan, the daily amount of nitrogen oxides emitted (kilograms 
per day) shall be calculated based on the hourly nitrogen oxides data 
required under Sec. 60.38b(a) and specified under Sec. 60.58b(h)(5) of 
subpart Eb of this part, the flue gas flow rate determined using table 
19-1 of EPA Reference Method 19 or a State-approved method, and the 
hourly average steam or feedwater flow rate.
    (ii) The daily total nitrogen oxides emissions shall be calculated 
as the sum of the daily nitrogen oxides emissions from each designated 
facility calculated under paragraph (d)(1)(v)(C)(2)(i) of this section.
    (iii) The average nitrogen oxides emissions (kilograms per day) on 
a calendar year basis shall be calculated 

[[Page 65418]]
as the sum of all daily total nitrogen oxides emissions calculated 
under paragraph (d)(1)(v)(C)(2)(ii) of this section divided by the 
number of calendar days for which a daily total was calculated.
    (2) A State plan may establish a program to allow owners or 
operators of municipal waste combustor plants to engage in trading of 
nitrogen oxides emission credits. A trading program must be approved by 
the Administrator before implementation.


Sec. 60.34b  Emission guidelines for municipal waste combustor 
operating practices.

    (a) For approval, a State plan shall include emission limits for 
carbon monoxide at least as protective as the emission limits for 
carbon monoxide listed in table 3 of this subpart. Table 3 provides 
emission limits for the carbon monoxide concentration level for each 
type of designated facility located within a small or large municipal 
waste combustor plant.

        Table 3.--Municipal Waste Combustor Operating Guidelines        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Carbon               
                                                  monoxide              
                                                 emissions              
     Municipal waste combustor technology          level      Averaging 
                                                 (parts per   time (hrs)
                                                 million by             
                                                  volume)a              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mass burn waterwall...........................          100            4
Mass burn refractory..........................          100            4
Mass burn rotary refractory...................          100           24
Mass burn rotary waterwall....................          250           24
Modular starved air...........................           50            4
Modular excess air............................           50            4
Refuse-derived fuel stoker....................          200           24
Buddling fluidized bed combustor..............          100            4
Circulating fluidized bed combustor...........          100            4
Pulverized coal/refuse-derived fuel mixed fuel-                         
 fired combustor..............................          150            4
Spreader stoker coal/refuse-derived fuel mixed                          
 fuel-fired combustor.........................          200           24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Measured at the combustor outlet in conjunction with a measurement of 
  oxygen concentration, corrected to 7 percent oxygen, dry basis.       
  Calculated as an arithmetic average.                                  

    (b) For approval, a State plan shall include requirements for 
municipal waste combustor operating practices at least as protective as 
those requirements listed in Sec. 60.53b(b) and (c) of subpart Eb of 
this part.


Sec. 60.35b  Emission guidelines for municipal waste combustor operator 
training and certification.

    For approval, a State plan shall include requirements for 
designated facilities located within small or large municipal waste 
combustor plants for municipal waste combustor operator training and 
certification at least as protective as those requirements listed in 
Sec. 60.54b of subpart Eb of this part. The State plan shall require 
compliance with these requirements according to the schedule specified 
in Sec. 60.39b(c)(4).


Sec. 60.36b  Emission guidelines for municipal waste combustor fugitive 
ash emissions.

    For approval, a State plan shall include requirements for municipal 
waste combustor fugitive ash emissions at least as protective as those 
requirements listed in Sec. 60.55b of subpart Eb of this part.


Sec. 60.37b  Emission guidelines for air curtain incinerators.

    For approval, a State plan shall include emission limits for 
opacity for air curtain incinerators at least as protective as those 
listed in Sec. 60.56b of subpart Eb of this part.


Sec. 60.38b  Compliance and performance testing.

    (a) For approval, a State plan shall include the performance 
testing methods listed in Sec. 60.58b of subpart Eb of this part, as 
applicable, except as provided for under Sec. 60.24(b)(2) of subpart B 
of this part and paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
    (b) For approval, a State plan shall include for designated 
facilities at large municipal waste combustor plants the alternative 
performance testing schedule for dioxins/furans specified in 
Sec. 60.58b(g)(5)(iii) of subpart Eb of this part, as applicable, for 
those designated facilities that achieve a dioxin/furan emission level 
less than or equal to 15 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter total 
mass, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (c) For approval, a State plan shall include for designated 
facilities at small municipal waste combustor plants the alternative 
performance testing schedule for dioxins/furans specified in 
Sec. 60.58b(g)(5)(iii) of subpart Eb of this part, as applicable, for 
those designated facilities that achieve a dioxin/furan emission level 
less than or equal to 30 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter total 
mass, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.


Sec. 60.39b  Reporting and recordkeeping guidelines and compliance 
schedules.

    (a) For approval, a State plan shall include the reporting and 
recordkeeping provisions listed in Sec. 60.59b of subpart Eb of this 
part, as applicable, except for the siting requirements under 
Sec. 60.59b(a), (b)(5), and (d)(11) of subpart Eb of this part.
    (b) Not later than December 19, 1996, each State in which a 
designated facility is operating shall submit to the Administrator a 
plan to implement and enforce the emission guidelines. The compliance 
schedule specified in this paragraph is in accordance with section 
129(b)(2) of the Act and supersedes the compliance schedule provided in 
Sec. 60.23(a)(1) of subpart B of this part.
    (c) For approval, a State plan shall include the compliance 
schedules specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(5) of this 
section.
    (1) A State plan shall allow designated facilities located within 
large municipal waste combustor plants to comply with all requirements 
of a State plan (or close) within 1 year after approval of the State 
plan, except as provided by paragraph (c)(1)(i) and (c)(1)(ii) of this 
section.
    (i) A State plan that allows designated facilities more than 1 year 
but less than 3 years following the date of issuance of a revised 
construction or operation permit, if a permit modification is 

[[Page 65419]]
required, or more than 1 year but less than 3 years following approval 
of the State plan, if a permit modification is not required, shall 
include measurable and enforceable incremental steps of progress toward 
compliance. Suggested measurable and enforceable activities are 
specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A) through (c)(1)(i)(J) of this 
section.
    (A) Date for obtaining services of an architectural and engineering 
firm regarding the air pollution control device(s);
    (B) Date for obtaining design drawings of the air pollution control 
device(s);
    (C) Date for submittal of permit modifications, if necessary;
    (D) Date for submittal of the final control plan to the 
Administrator. [Sec. 60.21 (h)(1) of subpart B of this part.];
    (E) Date for ordering the air pollution control device(s);
    (F) Date for obtaining the major components of the air pollution 
control device(s);
    (G) Date for initiation of site preparation for installation of the 
air pollution control device(s);
    (H) Date for initiation of installation of the air pollution 
control device(s);
    (I) Date for initial startup of the air pollution control 
device(s); and
    (J) Date for initial performance test(s) of the air pollution 
control device(s).
    (ii) A State plan that allows designated facilities more than 1 
year but up to 3 years after State plan approval to close shall require 
a closure agreement. The closure agreement must include the date of 
plant closure.
    (2) If the State plan requirements for a designated facility 
located within a large municipal waste combustor plant include a 
compliance schedule longer than 1 year after approval of the State plan 
in accordance with paragraph (c)(1)(i) or (c)(1)(ii) of this section, 
the State plan submittal (for approval) shall include performance test 
results for dioxin/furan emissions for each designated facility that 
has a compliance schedule longer than 1 year following the approval of 
the State plan, and the performance test results shall have been 
conducted during or after 1990. The performance test shall be conducted 
according to the procedures in Sec. 60.38b.
    (3) A State plan shall allow designated facilities located within 
small municipal waste combustor plants to comply with all requirements 
of the State plan (or close) within 3 years following the date of 
issuance of a revised construction or operation permit, if a permit 
modification is required, or within 3 years following approval of the 
State plan, if a permit modification is not required.
    (4) A State plan shall require compliance with the municipal waste 
combustor operator training and certification requirements under 
Sec. 60.35b according to the schedule specified in paragraphs (c)(4)(i) 
through (c)(4)(iii) of this section.
    (i) For designated facilities located within small municipal waste 
combustor plants, the State plan shall require compliance with the 
municipal waste combustor operator training and certification 
requirements specified under Sec. 60.54b (a) through (c) of subpart Eb 
of this part by the date 6 months after startup of a designated 
facility or 18 months after State plan approval, whichever is later.
    (ii) For designated facilities located within large municipal waste 
combustor plants, the State plan shall require compliance with the 
municipal waste combustor operator training and certification 
requirements specified under Sec. 60.54b (a) through (c) of subpart Eb 
of this part by the date 6 months after the date of startup or 12 
months after State plan approval, whichever is later.
    (iii) For designated facilities located within small or large 
municipal waste combustor plants, the State plan shall require 
compliance with the requirements specified in Sec. 60.54b (d), (f), and 
(g) of subpart Eb of this part no later than 6 months after startup or 
12 months after State plan approval, whichever is later.
    (A) The requirement specified in Sec. 60.54b(d) of subpart Eb of 
this part does not apply to chief facility operators, shift 
supervisors, and control room operators who have obtained full 
certification from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers on or 
before the date of State plan approval.
    (B) The owner or operator may request that the Administrator waive 
the requirement specified in Sec. 60.54b(d) of subpart Eb of this part 
for chief facility operators, shift supervisors, and control room 
operators who have obtained provisional certification from the American 
Society of Mechanical Engineers on or before the date of State plan 
approval.
    (C) The initial training requirements specified in 
Sec. 60.54b(f)(1) of subpart Eb of this part shall be completed no 
later than the date specified in paragraph (c)(4)(iii)(C)(1), 
(c)(4)(iii)(C)(2), or (c)(4)(iii)(C)(3), of this section whichever is 
later.
    (1) The date 6 months after the date of startup of the affected 
facility;
    (2) Twelve months after State plan approval; or
    (3) The date prior to the day when the person assumes 
responsibilities affecting municipal waste combustor unit operation.
    (5) A State plan shall require all designated facilities for which 
construction, modification, or reconstruction is commenced after June 
26, 1987 that are located within a large municipal waste combustor 
plant to comply with the emission limit for mercury specified in 
Sec. 60.33b(a)(3) and the emission limit for dioxins/furans specified 
in Sec. 60.33b(c)(1) within 1 year following issuance of a revised 
construction or operation permit, if a permit modification is required, 
or within 1 year following approval of the State plan, whichever is 
later.
    (d) In the event no plan for implementing the emission guidelines 
is adopted, all designated facilities meeting the applicability 
requirements under Sec. 60.32b shall be in compliance with the 
guidelines no later than December 19, 2000.
    8. Part 60 is amended by adding subpart Eb as follows:
Subpart Eb--Standards of Performance for Municipal Waste Combustors for 
Which Construction is Commenced After September 20, 1994
Sec.
60.50b  Applicability and delegation of authority.
60.51b  Definitions.
60.52b  Standards for municipal waste combustor metals, acid gases, 
organics, and nitrogen oxides.
60.53b  Standards for municipal waste combustor operating practices.
60.54b  Standards for municipal waste combustor operator training 
and certification.
60.55b  Standards for municipal waste combustor fugitive ash 
emissions.
60.56b  Standards for air curtain incinerators.
60.57b  Siting requirements.
60.58b  Compliance and performance testing.
60.59b  Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Subpart Eb--Standards of Performance for Municipal Waste Combustors 
for Which Construction is Commenced After September 20, 1994


Sec. 60.50b  Applicability and delegation of authority.

    (a) The affected facility to which this subpart applies is each 
municipal waste combustor unit located within a municipal waste 
combustor plant with an aggregate municipal waste combustor plant 
capacity greater than 35 megagrams per day of municipal solid waste for 
which construction is commenced after September 20, 1994 or for which 
modification or reconstruction is commenced after June 19, 1996. 

[[Page 65420]]

    (b) Any waste combustion unit at a medical, industrial, or other 
type of waste combustor plant that is capable of combusting more than 
35 megagrams per day of municipal solid waste and is subject to a 
federally enforceable permit limiting the plantwide maximum amount of 
municipal solid waste that may be combusted to less than or equal to 10 
megagrams per day is not subject to this subpart if the owner or 
operator:
    (1) Notifies the Administrator of an exemption claim;
    (2) Provides a copy of the federally enforceable permit that limits 
the firing of municipal solid waste to less than 10 megagrams per day; 
and
    (3) Keeps records of the amount of municipal solid waste fired on a 
daily basis.
    (c) An affected facility to which this subpart applies is not 
subject to subpart E or Ea of this part.
    (d) Physical or operational changes made to an existing municipal 
waste combustor unit primarily for the purpose of complying with 
emission guidelines under subpart Cb are not considered a modification 
or reconstruction and do not result in an existing municipal waste 
combustor unit becoming subject to this subpart.
    (e) A qualifying small power production facility, as defined in 
section 3(17)(C) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(17)(C)), that 
burns homogeneous waste (such as automotive tires or used oil, but not 
including refuse-derived fuel) for the production of electric energy is 
not subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of the facility 
notifies the Administrator of this exemption and provides data 
documenting that the facility qualifies for this exemption.
    (f) A qualifying cogeneration facility, as defined in section 
3(18)(B) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796(18)(B)), that burns 
homogeneous waste (such as automotive tires or used oil, but not 
including refuse-derived fuel) for the production of electric energy 
and steam or forms of useful energy (such as heat) that are used for 
industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling purposes, is not subject to 
this subpart if the owner or operator of the facility notifies the 
Administrator of this exemption and provides data documenting that the 
facility qualifies for this exemption.
    (g) Any unit combusting a single-item waste stream of tires is not 
subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of the unit:
    (1) Notifies the Administrator of an exemption claim; and
    (3) Provides data documenting that the unit qualifies for this 
exemption.
    (h) Any unit required to have a permit under section 3005 of the 
Solid Waste Disposal Act is not subject to this subpart.
    (i) Any materials recovery facility (including primary or secondary 
smelters) that combusts waste for the primary purpose of recovering 
metals is not subject to this subpart.
    (j) Any cofired combustor, as defined under Sec. 60.51b, located at 
a plant that meets the capacity specifications in paragraph (a) of this 
section is not subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of the 
cofired combustor:
    (1) Notifies the Administrator of an exemption claim;
    (2) Provides a copy of the federally enforceable permit (specified 
in the definition of cofired combustor in this section); and
    (3) Keeps a record on a calendar quarter basis of the weight of 
municipal solid waste combusted at the cofired combustor and the weight 
of all other fuels combusted at the cofired combustor.
    (k) Air curtain incinerators, as defined under Sec. 60.51b, located 
at a plant that meet the capacity specifications in paragraph (a) of 
this section and that combust a fuel stream composed of 100 percent 
yard waste are exempt from all provisions of this subpart except the 
opacity limit under Sec. 60.56b, the testing procedures under 
Sec. 60.58b(l), and the reporting and recordkeeping provisions under 
Sec. 60.59b (e) and (i).
    (l) Air curtain incinerators located at plants that meet the 
capacity specifications in paragraph (a) of this section combusting 
municipal solid waste other than yard waste are subject to all 
provisions of this subpart.
    (m) Pyrolysis/combustion units that are an integrated part of a 
plastics/rubber recycling unit (as defined in Sec. 60.51b) are not 
subject to this subpart if the owner or operator of the plastics/rubber 
recycling unit keeps records of the weight of plastics, rubber, and/or 
rubber tires processed on a calendar quarter basis; the weight of 
chemical plant feedstocks and petroleum refinery feedstocks produced 
and marketed on a calendar quarter basis; and the name and address of 
the purchaser of the feedstocks. The combustion of gasoline, diesel 
fuel, jet fuel, fuel oils, residual oil, refinery gas, petroleum coke, 
liquified petroleum gas, propane, or butane produced by chemical plants 
or petroleum refineries that use feedstocks produced by plastics/rubber 
recycling units are not subject to this subpart.
    (n) The following authorities shall be retained by the 
Administrator and not transferred to a State: None.
    (o) This subpart shall become effective June 19, 1996.


Sec. 60.51b  Definitions.

    Air curtain incinerator means an incinerator that operates by 
forcefully projecting a curtain of air across an open chamber or pit in 
which burning occurs. Incinerators of this type can be constructed 
above or below ground and with or without refractory walls and floor.
    Batch municipal waste combustor means a municipal waste combustor 
unit designed so that it cannot combust municipal solid waste 
continuously 24 hours per day because the design does not allow waste 
to be fed to the unit or ash to be removed while combustion is 
occurring.
    Bubbling fluidized bed combustor means a fluidized bed combustor in 
which the majority of the bed material remains in a fluidized state in 
the primary combustion zone.
    Calendar quarter means a consecutive 3-month period 
(nonoverlapping) beginning on January 1, April 1, July 1, and October 
1.
    Calendar year means the period including 365 days starting January 
1 and ending on December 31.
    Chief facility operator means the person in direct charge and 
control of the operation of a municipal waste combustor and who is 
responsible for daily onsite supervision, technical direction, 
management, and overall performance of the facility.
    Circulating fluidized bed combustor means a fluidized bed combustor 
in which the majority of the fluidized bed material is carried out of 
the primary combustion zone and is transported back to the primary zone 
through a recirculation loop.
    Clean wood means untreated wood or untreated wood products 
including clean untreated lumber, tree stumps (whole or chipped), and 
tree limbs (whole or chipped). Clean wood does not include yard waste, 
which is defined elsewhere in this section, or construction, 
renovation, and demolition wastes (including but not limited to 
railroad ties and telephone poles), which are exempt from the 
definition of municipal solid waste in this section.
    Cofired combustor means a unit combusting municipal solid waste 
with nonmunicipal solid waste fuel (e.g., coal, industrial process 
waste) and subject to a federally enforceable permit limiting the unit 
to combusting a fuel feed stream, 30 percent or less of the weight of 
which is comprised, in aggregate, of municipal solid waste as measured 
on a calendar quarter basis.

[[Page 65421]]

    Continuous emission monitoring system means a monitoring system for 
continuously measuring the emissions of a pollutant from an affected 
facility.
    Dioxin/furan means tetra- through octa- chlorinated dibenzo-p-
dioxins and dibenzofurans.
    Federally enforceable means all limitations and conditions that are 
enforceable by the Administrator including the requirements of 40 CFR 
parts 60, 61, and 63, requirements within any applicable State 
implementation plan, and any permit requirements established under 40 
CFR 52.21 or under 40 CFR 51.18 and 40 CFR 51.24.
    First calendar half means the period starting on January 1 and 
ending on June 30 in any year.
    Four-hour block average or 4-hour block average means the average 
of all hourly emission concentrations when the affected facility is 
operating and combusting municipal solid waste measured over 4-hour 
periods of time from 12:00 midnight to 4 a.m., 4 a.m. to 8 a.m., 8 a.m. 
to 12:00 noon, 12:00 noon to 4 p.m., 4 p.m. to 8 p.m., and 8 p.m. to 
12:00 midnight.
    Large municipal waste combustor plant means a municipal waste 
combustor plant with a municipal waste combustor aggregate plant 
capacity for affected facilities that is greater than 225 megagrams per 
day of municipal solid waste.
    Mass burn refractory municipal waste combustor means a field-
erected combustor that combusts municipal solid waste in a refractory 
wall furnace. Unless otherwise specified, this includes combustors with 
a cylindrical rotary refractory wall furnace.
    Mass burn rotary waterwall municipal waste combustor means a field-
erected combustor that combusts municipal solid waste in a cylindrical 
rotary waterwall furnace.
    Mass burn waterwall municipal waste combustor means a field-erected 
combustor that combusts municipal solid waste in a waterwall furnace.
    Materials separation plan means a plan that identifies both a goal 
and an approach to separate certain components of municipal solid waste 
for a given service area in order to make the separated materials 
available for recycling. A materials separation plan may include 
elements such as dropoff facilities, buy-back or deposit-return 
incentives, curbside pickup programs, or centralized mechanical 
separation systems. A materials separation plan may include different 
goals or approaches for different subareas in the service area, and may 
include no materials separation activities for certain subareas or, if 
warranted, an entire service area.
    Maximum demonstrated municipal waste combustor unit load means the 
highest 4-hour arithmetic average municipal waste combustor unit load 
achieved during four consecutive hours during the most recent dioxin/
furan performance test demonstrating compliance with the applicable 
limit for municipal waste combustor organics specified under 
Sec. 60.52b(c).
    Maximum demonstrated particulate matter control device temperature 
means the highest 4-hour arithmetic average flue gas temperature 
measured at the particulate matter control device inlet during four 
consecutive hours during the most recent dioxin/furan performance test 
demonstrating compliance with the applicable limit for municipal waste 
combustor organics specified under Sec. 60.52b(c).
    Modification or modified municipal waste combustor unit means a 
municipal waste combustor unit to which changes have been made after 
June 19, 1996 if the cumulative cost of the changes, over the life of 
the unit, exceed 50 percent of the original cost of construction and 
installation of the unit (not including the cost of any land purchased 
in connection with such construction or installation) updated to 
current costs; or any physical change in the municipal waste combustor 
unit or change in the method of operation of the municipal waste 
combustor unit increases the amount of any air pollutant emitted by the 
unit for which standards have been established under section 129 or 
section 111. Increases in the amount of any air pollutant emitted by 
the municipal waste combustor unit are determined at 100-percent 
physical load capability and downstream of all air pollution control 
devices, with no consideration given for load restrictions based on 
permits or other nonphysical operational restrictions.
    Modular excess-air municipal waste combustor means a combustor that 
combusts municipal solid waste and that is not field-erected and has 
multiple combustion chambers, all of which are designed to operate at 
conditions with combustion air amounts in excess of theoretical air 
requirements.
    Modular starved-air municipal waste combustor means a combustor 
that combusts municipal solid waste and that is not field-erected and 
has multiple combustion chambers in which the primary combustion 
chamber is designed to operate at substoichiometric conditions.
    Municipal solid waste or municipal-type solid waste or MSW means 
household, commercial/retail, and/or institutional waste. Household 
waste includes material discarded by single and multiple residential 
dwellings, hotels, motels, and other similar permanent or temporary 
housing establishments or facilities. Commercial/retail waste includes 
material discarded by stores, offices, restaurants, warehouses, 
nonmanufacturing activities at industrial facilities, and other similar 
establishments or facilities. Institutional waste includes material 
discarded by schools, nonmedical waste discarded by hospitals, material 
discarded by nonmanufacturing activities at prisons and government 
facilities, and material discarded by other similar establishments or 
facilities. Household, commercial/retail, and institutional waste does 
not include used oil; sewage sludge; wood pallets; construction, 
renovation, and demolition wastes (which includes but is not limited to 
railroad ties and telephone poles); clean wood; industrial process or 
manufacturing wastes; medical waste; or motor vehicles (including motor 
vehicle parts or vehicle fluff). Household, commercial/retail, and 
institutional wastes include:
    (1) Yard waste;
    (2) Refuse-derived fuel; and
    (3) Motor vehicle maintenance materials limited to vehicle 
batteries and tires except as specified in Sec. 60.50b(g).
    Municipal waste combustor, MWC, or municipal waste combustor unit: 
(1) Means any setting or equipment that combusts solid, liquid, or 
gasified municipal solid waste including, but not limited to, field-
erected incinerators (with or without heat recovery), modular 
incinerators (starved-air or excess-air), boilers (i.e., steam 
generating units), furnaces (whether suspension-fired, grate-fired, 
mass-fired, air curtain incinerators, or fluidized bed-fired), and 
pyrolysis/combustion units. Municipal waste combustors do not include 
pyrolysis/combustion units located at a plastics/rubber recycling unit 
(as specified in Sec. 60.50b(m) of this section). Municipal waste 
combustors do not include internal combustion engines, gas turbines, or 
other combustion devices that combust landfill gases collected by 
landfill gas collection systems.
    (2) The boundaries of a municipal solid waste combustor are defined 
as follows. The municipal waste combustor unit includes, but is not 
limited to, the municipal solid waste fuel feed system, grate system, 
flue gas system, bottom ash system, and the combustor water system. The 
municipal waste combustor boundary starts at the 

[[Page 65422]]
municipal solid waste pit or hopper and extends through:
    (i) The combustor flue gas system, which ends immediately following 
the heat recovery equipment or, if there is no heat recovery equipment, 
immediately following the combustion chamber,
    (ii) The combustor bottom ash system, which ends at the truck 
loading station or similar ash handling equipment that transfer the ash 
to final disposal, including all ash handling systems that are 
connected to the bottom ash handling system; and
    (iii) The combustor water system, which starts at the feed water 
pump and ends at the piping exiting the steam drum or superheater.
    (3) The municipal waste combustor unit does not include air 
pollution control equipment, the stack, water treatment equipment, or 
the turbine-generator set.
    Municipal waste combustor acid gases means all acid gases emitted 
in the exhaust gases from municipal waste combustor units including, 
but not limited to, sulfur dioxide and hydrogen chloride gases.
    Municipal waste combustor metals means metals and metal compounds 
emitted in the exhaust gases from municipal waste combustor units.
    Municipal waste combustor organics means organic compounds emitted 
in the exhaust gases from municipal waste combustor units and includes 
tetra-through octa- chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans.
    Municipal waste combustor plant means one or more municipal waste 
combustor units at the same location for which construction, 
modification, or reconstruction is commenced after September 20, 1994.
    Municipal waste combustor plant capacity means the aggregate 
municipal waste combustor unit capacity of all municipal waste 
combustor units at a municipal waste combustor plant for which 
construction, modification, or reconstruction of the units commenced 
after September 20, 1994. Any municipal waste combustor units for which 
construction, modification, or reconstruction is commenced on or before 
September 20, 1994 are not included for determining applicability under 
this subpart.
    Municipal waste combustor unit capacity means the maximum charging 
rate of a municipal waste combustor unit expressed in megagrams per day 
of municipal solid waste combusted, calculated according to the 
procedures under Sec. 60.58b(j). Section 60.58b(j) includes procedures 
for determining municipal waste combustor unit capacity for continuous 
and batch feed municipal waste combustors.
    Municipal waste combustor unit load means the steam load of the 
municipal waste combustor unit measured as specified in 
Sec. 60.58b(i)(6).
    Particulate matter means total particulate matter emitted from 
municipal waste combustor units as measured by EPA Reference Method 5 
(see Sec. 60.58b(c)).
    Plastics/rubber recycling unit means an integrated processing unit 
where plastics, rubber, and/or rubber tires are the only feed materials 
(incidental contaminants may be included in the feed materials) and 
they are processed into a chemical plant feedstock or petroleum 
refinery feedstock, where the feedstock is marketed to and used by a 
chemical plant or petroleum refinery as input feedstock. The combined 
weight of the chemical plant feedstock and petroleum refinery feedstock 
produced by the plastics/rubber recycling unit on a calendar quarter 
basis shall be more than 70 percent of the combined weight of the 
plastics, rubber, and rubber tires processed by the plastics/rubber 
recycling unit on a calendar quarter basis. The plastics, rubber, and/
or rubber tire feed materials to the plastics/rubber recycling unit may 
originate from the separation or diversion of plastics, rubber, or 
rubber tires from MSW or industrial solid waste, and may include 
manufacturing scraps, trimmings, and off-specification plastics, 
rubber, and rubber tire discards. The plastics, rubber, and rubber tire 
feed materials to the plastics/rubber recycling unit may contain 
incidental contaminants (e.g., paper labels on plastic bottles, metal 
rings on plastic bottle caps, etc.).
    Potential hydrogen chloride emission concentration means the 
hydrogen chloride emission concentration that would occur from 
combustion of municipal solid waste in the absence of any emission 
controls for municipal waste combustor acid gases.
    Potential mercury emission concentration means the mercury emission 
concentration that would occur from combustion of municipal solid waste 
in the absence of any mercury emissions control.
    Potential sulfur dioxide emissions means the sulfur dioxide 
emission concentration that would occur from combustion of municipal 
solid waste in the absence of any emission controls for municipal waste 
combustor acid gases.
    Pulverized coal/refuse-derived fuel mixed fuel-fired combustor 
means a combustor that fires coal and refuse-derived fuel 
simultaneously, in which pulverized coal is introduced into an air 
stream that carries the coal to the combustion chamber of the unit 
where it is fired in suspension. This includes both conventional 
pulverized coal and micropulverized coal.
    Pyrolysis/combustion unit means a unit that produces gases, 
liquids, or solids through the heating of municipal solid waste, and 
the gases, liquids, or solids produced are combusted and emissions 
vented to the atmosphere.
    Reconstruction means rebuilding a municipal waste combustor unit 
for which the reconstruction commenced after June 19, 1996, and the 
cumulative costs of the construction over the life of the unit exceed 
50 percent of the original cost of construction and installation of the 
unit (not including any cost of land purchased in connection with such 
construction or installation) updated to current costs (current 
dollars).
    Refractory unit or refractory wall furnace means a combustion unit 
having no energy recovery (e.g., via a waterwall) in the furnace (i.e., 
radiant heat transfer section) of the combustor.
    Refuse-derived/fuel means a type of municipal solid waste produced 
by processing municipal solid waste through shredding and size 
classification. This includes all classes of refuse-derived fuel 
including low-density fluff refuse-derived fuel through densified 
refuse-derived fuel and pelletized refuse-derived fuel.
    Refuse-derived fuel stoker means a steam generating unit that 
combusts refuse-derived fuel in a semisuspension firing mode using air-
fed distributors.
    Same location means the same or contiguous property that is under 
common ownership or control including properties that are separated 
only by a street, road, highway, or other public right-of-way. Common 
ownership or control includes properties that are owned, leased, or 
operated by the same entity, parent entity, subsidiary, subdivision, or 
any combination thereof including any municipality or other 
governmental unit, or any quasi-governmental authority (e.g., a public 
utility district or regional waste disposal authority).
    Second calendar half means the period starting July 1 and ending on 
December 31 in any year.
    Shift supervisor means the person who is in direct charge and 
control of the operation of a municipal waste combustor and who is 
responsible for onsite supervision, technical direction, management, 
and overall performance of the facility during an assigned shift.
    Small municipal waste combustor plant means a municipal waste 
combustor plant with a municipal waste combustor plant capacity for 
affected 

[[Page 65423]]
facilities that is greater than 35 megagrams per day but equal to or 
less than 225 megagrams per day of municipal solid waste.
    Spreader stoker coal/refuse-derived fuel mixed fuel-fired combustor 
means a combustor that fires coal and refuse-derived fuel 
simultaneously, in which coal is introduced to the combustion zone by a 
mechanism that throws the fuel onto a grate from above. Combustion 
takes place both in suspension and on the grate.
    Standard conditions means a temperature of 20 deg. C and a pressure 
of 101.3 kilopascals.
    Total mass dioxin/furan or total mass means the total mass of 
tetra- through octa- chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans, 
as determined using EPA Reference Method 23 and the procedures 
specified under Sec. 60.58b(g).
    Twenty-four hour daily average or 24-hour daily average means 
either the arithmetic mean or geometric mean (as specified) of all 
hourly emission concentrations when the affected facility is operating 
and combusting municipal solid waste measured over a 24-hour period 
between 12:00 midnight and the following midnight.
    Untreated lumber means wood or wood products that have been cut or 
shaped and include wet, air-dried, and kiln-dried wood products. 
Untreated lumber does not include wood products that have been painted, 
pigment-stained, or ``pressure-treated.'' Pressure-treating compounds 
include, but are not limited to, chromate copper arsenate, 
pentachlorophenol, and creosote.
    Waterwall furnace means a combustion unit having energy (heat) 
recovery in the furnace (i.e., radiant heat transfer section) of the 
combustor.
    Yard waste means grass, grass clippings, bushes, shrubs, and 
clippings from bushes and shrubs that are generated by residential, 
commercial/retail, institutional, and/or industrial sources as part of 
maintenance activities associated with yards or other private or public 
lands. Yard waste does not include construction, renovation, and 
demolition wastes, which are exempt from the definition of municipal 
solid waste in this section. Yard waste does not include clean wood, 
which is exempt from the definition of municipal solid waste in this 
section.


Sec. 60.52b  Standards for municipal waste combustor metals, acid 
gases, organics, and nitrogen oxides.

    (a) The limits for municipal waste combustor metals are specified 
in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) of this section.
    (1) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause to 
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases 
that contain particulate matter in excess of 24 milligrams per dry 
standard cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (2) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause to 
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases 
that exhibit greater than 10 percent opacity (6-minute average).
    (3) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause to 
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases 
that contain cadmium in excess of 0.020 milligrams per dry standard 
cubic meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (4) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause to 
be discharged into the atmosphere from the affected facility any gases 
that contain lead in excess of 0.20 milligrams per dry standard cubic 
meter, corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (5) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause to 
be discharged into the atmosphere from the affected facility any gases 
that contain mercury in excess of 0.080 milligrams per dry standard 
cubic meter or 15 percent of the potential mercury emission 
concentration (85-percent reduction by weight), corrected to 7 percent 
oxygen, whichever is less stringent.
    (b) The limits for municipal waste combustor acid gases are 
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.
    (1) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause to 
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases 
that contain sulfur dioxide in excess of 30 parts per million by volume 
or 20 percent of the potential sulfur dioxide emission concentration 
(80-percent reduction by weight or volume), corrected to 7 percent 
oxygen (dry basis), whichever is less stringent. The averaging time is 
specified under Sec. 60.58b(e).
    (2) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause to 
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases 
that contain hydrogen chloride in excess of 25 parts per million by 
volume or 5 percent of the potential hydrogen chloride emission 
concentration (95-percent reduction by weight or volume), corrected to 
7 percent oxygen (dry basis), whichever is less stringent.
    (c) The limits for municipal waste combustor organics are specified 
in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section.
    (1) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant for which 
construction, modification, or reconstruction commences after September 
20, 1994, but on or before November 20, 1997 shall cause to be 
discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases 
that contain dioxin/furan emissions that exceed 30 nanograms per dry 
standard cubic meter (total mass), corrected to 7 percent oxygen, for 
the first 3 years following the date of initial startup. After the 
first 3 years following the date of initial startup, no owner or 
operator shall cause to be discharged into the atmosphere from that 
affected facility any gases that contain dioxin/furan total mass 
emissions that exceed 13 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total 
mass), corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
    (2) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant for which 
construction, 

[[Page 65424]]
modification, or reconstruction commences after November 20, 1997 shall 
cause to be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility 
any gases that contain dioxin/furan total mass emissions that exceed 13 
nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total mass), corrected to 7 
percent oxygen.
    (d) The limits for nitrogen oxides are specified in paragraphs 
(d)(1) and (d)(2) of this section.
    (1) During the first year of operation after the date on which the 
initial performance test is completed or is required to be completed 
under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part, no owner or operator of an 
affected facility located within a large municipal waste combustor 
plant shall cause to be discharged into the atmosphere from that 
affected facility any gases that contain nitrogen oxides in excess of 
180 parts per million by volume, corrected to 7 percent oxygen (dry 
basis). The averaging time is specified under Sec. 60.58b(h).
    (2) After the first year of operation following the date on which 
the initial performance test is completed or is required to be 
completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part, no owner or 
operator of an affected facility located within a large municipal waste 
combustor plant shall cause to be discharged into the atmosphere from 
that affected facility any gases that contain nitrogen oxides in excess 
of 150 parts per million by volume, corrected to 7 percent oxygen (dry 
basis). The averaging time is specified under Sec. 60.58b(h).


Sec. 60.53b  Standards for municipal waste combustor operating 
practices.

    (a) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause to 
be discharged into the atmosphere from that affected facility any gases 
that contain carbon monoxide in excess of the emission limits specified 
in table 1 of this subpart.

         Table 1.--Municipal Waste Combustor Operating Standards        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Carbon monoxide                  
                                       emission limit                   
Municipal waste combustor technology     (parts per      Averaging time 
                                         million by          (hours)    
                                          volume) a                     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mass burn waterwall.................               100                 4
Mass burn refractory................               100                 4
Mass burn rotary waterwall..........               100                24
Modular starved air.................                50                 4
Modular excess air..................                50                 4
Refuse-derived fuel stoker..........               150                24
Bubbling fluidized bed combustor....               100                 4
Circulating fluidized bed combustor.               100                 4
Pulverized coal/refuse-derived fuel                                     
 mixed fuel-fired combustor.........               150                 4
Spreader stoker coal/refuse-derived                                     
 fuel mixed fuel-fired combustor....               150                24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Measured at the combustor outlet in conjunction with a measurement of 
  oxygen concentration, corrected to 7 percent oxygen (dry basis). The  
  averaging times are specified in greater detail in Sec.  60.58b(i).   

    (b) No owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause such 
facility to operate at a load level greater than 110 percent of the 
maximum demonstrated municipal waste combustor unit load as defined in 
Sec. 60.51b, except as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of 
this section. The averaging time is specified under Sec. 60.58b(i).
    (1) During the annual dioxin/furan performance test and the 2 weeks 
preceding the annual dioxin/furan performance test, no municipal waste 
combustor unit load limit is applicable.
    (2) The municipal waste combustor unit load limit may be waived in 
accordance with permission granted by the Administrator or delegated 
State regulatory authority for the purpose of evaluating system 
performance, testing new technology or control technologies, diagnostic 
testing, or related activities for the purpose of improving facility 
performance or advancing the state-of-the-art for controlling facility 
emissions.
    (c) No owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause such 
facility to operate at a temperature, measured at the particulate 
matter control device inlet, exceeding 17  deg.C above the maximum 
demonstrated particulate matter control device temperature as defined 
in Sec. 60.51b, except as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of 
this section. The averaging time is specified under Sec. 60.58b(i). The 
requirements specified in this paragraph apply to each particulate 
matter control device utilized at the affected facility.
    (1) During the annual dioxin/furan performance test and the 2 weeks 
preceding the annual dioxin/furan performance test, no particulate 
matter control device temperature limitations are applicable.
    (2) The particulate matter control device temperature limits may be 
waived in accordance with permission granted by the Administrator or 
delegated State regulatory authority for the purpose of evaluating 
system performance, testing new technology or control technologies, 
diagnostic testing, or related activities for the purpose of improving 
facility performance or advancing the state-of-the-art for controlling 
facility emissions.


Sec. 60.54b  Standards for municipal waste combustor operator training 
and certification.

    (a) No later than the date 6 months after the date of startup of an 
affected facility located within a small or large municipal waste 
combustor plant or on December 19, 1996, whichever is later, each chief 
facility operator and shift supervisor shall obtain and maintain a 
current provisional operator certification from either the American 
Society of Mechanical Engineers [QRO-1-1994 (incorporated by 
reference--see Sec. 60.17 of subpart A of this part)] or a State 
certification program.
    (b) Not later than the date 6 months after the date of startup of 
an affected facility located within a small or large municipal waste 
combustor plant or on December 19, 1996, whichever is later, each chief 
facility operator and shift 

[[Page 65425]]
supervisor shall have completed full certification or shall have 
scheduled a full certification exam with either the American Society of 
Mechanical Engineers [QRO-1-1994 (incorporated by reference--see 
Sec. 60.17 of subpart A of this part)] or a State certification 
program.
    (c) No owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall allow the facility 
to be operated at any time unless one of the following persons is on 
duty and at the affected facility: A fully certified chief facility 
operator, a provisionally certified chief facility operator who is 
scheduled to take the full certification exam according to the schedule 
specified in paragraph (b) of this section, a fully certified shift 
supervisor, or a provisionally certified shift supervisor who is 
scheduled to take the full certification exam according to the schedule 
specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
    (i) The requirement specified in paragraph (c) of this section 
shall take effect 6 months after the date of startup of the affected 
facility or on December 19, 1996, whichever is later.
    (ii) If one of the persons listed in paragraph (c) of this section 
must leave the affected facility during their operating shift, a 
provisionally certified control room operator who is onsite at the 
affected facility may fulfill the requirement in paragraph (c) of this 
section.
    (d) All chief facility operators, shift supervisors, and control 
room operators at affected facilities located within a small or large 
municipal waste combustor plant must complete the EPA or State 
municipal waste combustor operator training course no later than the 
date 6 months after the date of startup of the affected facility or by 
December 19, 1996, whichever is later.
    (e) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall develop and update 
on a yearly basis a site-specific operating manual that shall, at a 
minimum, address the elements of municipal waste combustor unit 
operation specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(11) of this 
section.
    (1) A summary of the applicable standards under this subpart;
    (2) A description of basic combustion theory applicable to a 
municipal waste combustor unit;
    (3) Procedures for receiving, handling, and feeding municipal solid 
waste;
    (4) Municipal waste combustor unit startup, shutdown, and 
malfunction procedures;
    (5) Procedures for maintaining proper combustion air supply levels;
    (6) Procedures for operating the municipal waste combustor unit 
within the standards established under this subpart;
    (7) Procedures for responding to periodic upset or off-
specification conditions;
    (8) Procedures for minimizing particulate matter carryover;
    (9) Procedures for handling ash;
    (10) Procedures for monitoring municipal waste combustor unit 
emissions; and
    (11) Reporting and recordkeeping procedures.
    (f) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall establish a 
training program to review the operating manual according to the 
schedule specified in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this section with 
each person who has responsibilities affecting the operation of an 
affected facility including, but not limited to, chief facility 
operators, shift supervisors, control room operators, ash handlers, 
maintenance personnel, and crane/load handlers.
    (1) Each person specified in paragraph (f) of this section shall 
undergo initial training no later than the date specified in paragraph 
(f)(1)(i), (f)(1)(ii), or (f)(1)(iii) of this section whichever is 
later.
    (i) The date 6 months after the date of startup of the affected 
facility;
    (ii) The date prior to the day the person assumes responsibilities 
affecting municipal waste combustor unit operation; or
    (iii) December 19, 1996.
    (2) Annually, following the initial review required by paragraph 
(f)(1) of this section.
    (g) The operating manual required by paragraph (e) of this section 
shall be kept in a readily accessible location for all persons required 
to undergo training under paragraph (f) of this section. The operating 
manual and records of training shall be available for inspection by the 
EPA or its delegated enforcement agency upon request.


Sec. 60.55b  Standards for municipal waste combustor fugitive ash 
emissions.

    (a) On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, no owner or operator of an affected facility located 
within a small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall cause to 
be discharged to the atmosphere visible emissions of combustion ash 
from an ash conveying system (including conveyor transfer points) in 
excess of 5 percent of the observation period (i.e., 9 minutes per 3-
hour period), as determined by EPA Reference Method 22 observations as 
specified in Sec. 60.58b(k), except as provided in paragraphs (b) and 
(c) of this section.
    (b) The emission limit specified in paragraph (a) of this section 
does not cover visible emissions discharged inside buildings or 
enclosures of ash conveying systems; however, the emission limit 
specified in paragraph (a) of this section does cover visible emissions 
discharged to the atmosphere from buildings or enclosures of ash 
conveying systems.
    (c) The provisions specified in paragraph (a) of this section do 
not apply during maintenance and repair of ash conveying systems.


Sec. 60.56b  Standards for air curtain incinerators.

    On and after the date on which the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, the owner or operator of an air curtain incinerator 
located at a plant with a plant capacity to combust greater than 35 
megagrams per day of municipal solid waste and that combusts a fuel 
feed stream composed of 100 percent yard waste and no other municipal 
solid waste materials shall at no time cause to be discharged into the 
atmosphere from that incinerator any gases that exhibit greater than 
10-percent opacity (6-minute average), except that an opacity level of 
up to 35 percent (6-minute average) is permitted during startup periods 
during the first 30 minutes of operation of the unit.


Sec. 60.57b  Siting requirements.

    (a) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant, for which the initial 
application for a construction permit under 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, 
or part 52, as applicable, is submitted after December 19, 1995, shall 
prepare a materials separation plan, as defined in Sec. 60.51b, for the 
affected facility and its service area, and shall comply with the 
requirements specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(10) of this 
section. The initial application is defined as representing a good 
faith submittal for complying with the requirements under 40 CFR part 
51, subpart I, or part 52, as applicable, as determined by the 
Administrator.
    (1) The owner or operator shall prepare a preliminary draft 
materials separation plan and shall make the plan available to the 
public as specified in 

[[Page 65426]]
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (a)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (i) The owner or operator shall distribute the preliminary draft 
materials separation plan to the principal public libraries in the area 
where the affected facility is to be constructed.
    (ii) The owner or operator shall publish a notification of a public 
meeting in the principal newspaper(s) serving the area where the 
affected facility is to be constructed and where the waste treated by 
the affected facility will primarily be collected. As a minimum, the 
notification shall include the information specified in paragraphs 
(a)(1)(ii)(A) through (a)(1)(ii)(D) of this section.
    (A) The date, time, and location of the public meeting.
    (B) The location of the public libraries where the preliminary 
draft materials separation plan may be found, including normal business 
hours of the libraries.
    (C) An agenda of the issues to be discussed at the public meeting.
    (D) The dates that the public comment period on the preliminary 
draft materials separation plan begins and ends.
    (2) The owner or operator shall conduct a public meeting, accept 
comments on the preliminary draft materials separation plan, and comply 
with the requirements specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through 
(a)(2)(iv) of this section.
    (i) The public meeting shall be conducted in the county where the 
affected facility is to be located.
    (ii) The public meeting shall be scheduled to occur 30 days or more 
after making the preliminary draft materials separation plan available 
to the public as specified under paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
    (iii) Suggested issues to be addressed at the public meeting are 
listed in paragraphs (a)(2)(iii)(A) through (a)(2)(iii)(H) of this 
section.
    (A) The expected size of the service area for the affected 
facility.
    (B) The amount of waste generation anticipated for the service 
area.
    (C) The types and estimated amounts of materials proposed for 
separation.
    (D) The methods proposed for materials separation.
    (E) The amount of residual waste to be disposed.
    (F) Alternate disposal methods for handling the residual waste.
    (G) Identification of the location(s) where responses to public 
comment on the preliminary draft materials separation plan will be 
available for inspection, as specified in paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4) 
of this section.
    (H) Identification of the locations where the final draft materials 
separation plan will be available for inspection, as specified in 
paragraph (a)(7).
    (iv) Nothing in this section shall preclude an owner or operator 
from combining this public meeting with any other public meeting 
required as part of any other Federal, State, or local permit review 
process except the public meeting required under paragraph (b)(4) of 
this section.
    (3) Following the public meeting required by paragraph (a)(2) of 
this section, the owner or operator shall prepare responses to the 
comments received at the public meeting.
    (4) The owner or operator shall make the document summarizing 
responses to public comments available to the public (including 
distribution to the principal public libraries used to announce the 
meeting) in the service area where the affected facility is to be 
located.
    (5) The owner or operator shall prepare a final draft materials 
separation plan for the affected facility considering the public 
comments received at the public meeting.
    (6) As required under Sec. 60.59b(a), the owner or operator shall 
submit to the Administrator a copy of the notification of the public 
meeting, a transcript of the public meeting, the document summarizing 
responses to public comments, and copies of both the preliminary and 
final draft materials separation plans on or before the time the 
facility's application for a construction permit is submitted under 40 
CFR part 51, subpart I, or part 52, as applicable.
    (7) As part of the distribution of the siting analysis required 
under paragraph (b)(3) of this section, the owner or operator shall 
make the final draft materials separation plan required under paragraph 
(a)(5) of this section available to the public, as specified in 
paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
    (8) As part of the public meeting for review of the siting analysis 
required under paragraph (b)(4) of this section, the owner or operator 
shall address questions concerning the final draft materials separation 
plan required by paragraph (a)(5) of this section including discussion 
of how the final draft materials separation plan has changed from the 
preliminary draft materials separation plan that was discussed at the 
first public meeting required by paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
    (9) If the owner or operator receives any comments on the final 
draft materials separation plan during the public meeting required in 
paragraph (b)(4) of this section, the owner or operator shall respond 
to those comments in the document prepared in accordance with paragraph 
(b)(5) of this section.
    (10) The owner or operator shall prepare a final materials 
separation plan and shall submit, as required under 
Sec. 60.59b(b)(5)(ii), the final materials separation plan as part of 
the initial notification of construction.
    (b) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant, for which the initial 
application for a construction permit under 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, 
or part 52, as applicable, is submitted after December 19, 1995 shall 
prepare a siting analysis in accordance with paragraphs (b)(1) and 
(b)(2) of this section and shall comply with the requirements specified 
in paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(7) of this section.
    (1) The siting analysis shall be an analysis of the impact of the 
affected facility on ambient air quality, visibility, soils, and 
vegetation.
    (2) The analysis shall consider air pollution control alternatives 
that minimize, on a site-specific basis, to the maximum extent 
practicable, potential risks to the public health or the environment.
    (3) The owner or operator shall make the siting analysis and final 
draft materials separation plan required by paragraph (a)(5) of this 
section available to the public as specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) 
and (b)(3)(ii) of this section.
    (i) The owner or operator shall distribute the siting analysis and 
final draft materials separation plan to the principal public libraries 
in the area where the affected facility is to be constructed.
    (ii) The owner or operator shall publish a notification of a public 
meeting in the principal newspaper(s) serving the area where the 
affected facility is to be constructed and where the waste treated by 
the affected facility will primarily be collected. As a minimum, the 
notification shall include the information specified in paragraphs 
(b)(3)(ii)(A) through (b)(3)(ii)(D) of this section.
    (A) The date, time, and location of the public meeting.
    (B) The location of the public libraries where the siting analyses 
and final draft materials separation plan may be found, including 
normal business hours.
    (C) An agenda of the issues to be discussed at the public meeting.
    (D) The dates that the public comment period on the siting analyses 
and final draft materials separation plan begins and ends. 

[[Page 65427]]

    (4) The owner or operator shall conduct a public meeting and accept 
comments on the siting analysis and the final draft materials 
separation plan required under paragraph (a)(5) of this section. The 
public meeting shall be conducted in the county where the affected 
facility is to be located and shall be scheduled to occur 30 days or 
more after making the siting analysis available to the public as 
specified under paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
    (5) The owner or operator shall prepare responses to the comments 
on the siting analysis and the final draft materials separation plan 
that are received at the public meeting.
    (6) The owner or operator shall make the document summarizing 
responses to public comments available to the public (including 
distribution to all public libraries) in the service area where the 
affected facility is to be located.
    (7) As required under Sec. 60.59b(b)(5), the owner or operator 
shall submit a copy of the notification of the public meeting, a 
transcript of the public meeting, the document summarizing responses to 
public comments, and the siting analysis as part of the initial 
notification of construction.
    (c) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant, for which construction 
is commenced after September 20, 1994 shall prepare a siting analysis 
in accordance with 40 CFR part 51, Subpart I, or part 52, as 
applicable, and shall submit the siting analysis as part of the initial 
notification of construction. Affected facilities subject to paragraphs 
(a) and (b) of this section are not subject to this paragraph.


Sec. 60.58b  Compliance and performance testing.

    (a) The provisions for startup, shutdown, and malfunction are 
provided in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section.
    (1) Except as provided by Sec. 60.56b, the standards under this 
subpart apply at all times except during periods of startup, shutdown, 
or malfunction. Duration of startup, shutdown, or malfunction periods 
are limited to 3 hours per occurrence.
    (i) The startup period commences when the affected facility begins 
the continuous burning of municipal solid waste and does not include 
any warmup period when the affected facility is combusting fossil fuel 
or other nonmunicipal solid waste fuel, and no municipal solid waste is 
being fed to the combustor.
    (ii) Continuous burning is the continuous, semicontinuous, or batch 
feeding of municipal solid waste for purposes of waste disposal, energy 
production, or providing heat to the combustion system in preparation 
for waste disposal or energy production. The use of municipal solid 
waste solely to provide thermal protection of the grate or hearth 
during the startup period when municipal solid waste is not being fed 
to the grate is not considered to be continuous burning.
    (2) The opacity limits for air curtain incinerators specified in 
Sec. 60.56b apply at all times as specified under Sec. 60.56b except 
during periods of malfunction. Duration of malfunction periods are 
limited to 3 hours per occurrence.
    (b) The owner or operator of a small or large municipal waste 
combustor plant shall install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a 
continuous emission monitoring system and record the output of the 
system for measuring the oxygen or carbon dioxide content of the flue 
gas at each location where carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, or nitrogen 
oxides emissions are monitored and shall comply with the test 
procedures and test methods specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through 
(b)(7) of this section.
    (1) The span value of the oxygen (or carbon dioxide) monitor shall 
be 25 percent oxygen (or carbon dioxide).
    (2) The monitor shall be installed, evaluated, and operated in 
accordance with Sec. 60.13 of subpart A of this part.
    (3) The initial performance evaluation shall be completed no later 
than 180 days after the date of initial startup of the municipal waste 
combustor, as specified under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part.
    (4) The monitor shall conform to Performance Specification 3 in 
appendix B of this part except for section 2.3 (relative accuracy 
requirement).
    (5) The quality assurance procedures of appendix F of this part 
except for section 5.1.1 (relative accuracy test audit) shall apply to 
the monitor.
    (6) If carbon dioxide is selected for use in diluent corrections, 
the relationship between oxygen and carbon dioxide levels shall be 
established during the initial performance test according to the 
procedures and methods specified in paragraphs (b)(6)(i) through 
(b)(6)(iv) of this section. This relationship may be reestablished 
during performance compliance tests.
    (i) The emission rate correction factor and the integrated bag 
sampling and analysis procedure of EPA Reference Method 3B shall be 
used to determine the oxygen concentration at the same location as the 
carbon dioxide monitor.
    (ii) Samples shall be taken for at least 30 minutes in each hour.
    (iii) Each sample shall represent a 1-hour average.
    (iv) A minimum of three runs shall be performed.
    (7) As required by Sec. 60.59b(f)(5), the relationship between 
carbon dioxide and oxygen concentrations that is established in 
accordance with paragraph (b)(6) of this section shall be submitted to 
the EPA as part of the initial performance test report.
    (c) The procedures and test methods specified in paragraphs (c)(1) 
through (c)(11) of this section shall be used to determine compliance 
with the emission limits for particulate matter and opacity under 
Sec. 60.52b(a)(1) and (a)(2).
    (1) The EPA Reference Method 1 shall be used to select sampling 
site and number of traverse points.
    (2) The EPA Reference Method 3 shall be used for gas analysis.
    (3) The EPA Reference Method 5 shall be used for determining 
compliance with the particulate matter emission limit. The minimum 
sample volume shall be 1.7 cubic meters. The probe and filter holder 
heating systems in the sample train shall be set to provide a gas 
temperature no greater than 160plus-minus14  deg.C. An oxygen or 
carbon dioxide measurement shall be obtained simultaneously with each 
Method 5 run.
    (4) An owner or operator may request that compliance with the 
particulate matter emission limit be determined using carbon dioxide 
measurements corrected to an equivalent of 7 percent oxygen. The 
relationship between oxygen and carbon dioxide levels for the affected 
facility shall be established as specified in paragraph (b)(6) of this 
section.
    (5) As specified under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part, all 
performance tests shall consist of three test runs. The average of the 
particulate matter emission concentrations from the three test runs is 
used to determine compliance.
    (6) In accordance with paragraphs (c)(7) and (c)(11) of this 
section, EPA Reference Method 9 shall be used for determining 
compliance with the opacity limit except as provided under 
Sec. 60.11(e) of subpart A of this part.
    (7) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall conduct an initial 
performance test for particulate matter emissions and opacity as 
required under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part.
    (8) The owner or operator of an affected facility shall install, 
calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous 

[[Page 65428]]
opacity monitoring system for measuring opacity and shall follow the 
methods and procedures specified in paragraphs (c)(8)(i) through 
(c)(8)(iv) of this section.
    (i) The output of the continuous opacity monitoring system shall be 
recorded on a 6-minute average basis.
    (ii) The continuous opacity monitoring system shall be installed, 
evaluated, and operated in accordance with Sec. 60.13 of subpart A of 
this part.
    (iii) The continuous opacity monitoring system shall conform to 
Performance Specification 1 in appendix B of this part.
    (iv) The initial performance evaluation shall be completed no later 
than 180 days after the date of the initial startup of the municipal 
waste combustor unit, as specified under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this 
part.
    (9) Following the date that the initial performance test for 
particulate matter is completed or is required to be completed under 
Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part for an affected facility located 
within a large municipal waste combustor plant, the owner or operator 
shall conduct a performance test for particulate matter on an annual 
basis (no more than 12 calendar months following the previous 
performance test).
    (10) Following the date that the initial performance test for 
particulate matter is completed or is required to be completed under 
Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part for an affected facility located 
within a small municipal waste combustor plant, the owner or operator 
shall conduct a performance test for particulate matter on an annual 
basis (no more than 12 calendar months following the previous 
performance test). If all performance tests over a 3-year period 
indicate compliance with the particulate matter emission limit, the 
owner or operator may elect not to conduct a performance test for the 
subsequent 2 years. At a minimum, a performance test for particulate 
matter shall be conducted every third year (no more than 36 months 
following the previous performance test) at a small municipal waste 
combustor plant. If a performance test conducted every third year 
indicates compliance with the particulate matter emission limit, the 
owner or operator may elect not to conduct a performance test for an 
additional 2 years. If any performance test indicates noncompliance 
with the particulate matter emission limit, performance tests shall be 
required annually until all annual performance tests over a 3-year 
period indicate compliance with the particulate matter emission limit.
    (11) Following the date that the initial performance test for 
opacity is completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of 
subpart A of this part for an affected facility located within a small 
or large municipal waste combustor plant, the owner or operator shall 
conduct a performance test for opacity on an annual basis (no more than 
12 calendar months following the previous performance test) using the 
test method specified in paragraph (c)(6) of this section.
    (d) The procedures and test methods specified in paragraphs (d)(1) 
and (d)(2) of this section shall be used to determine compliance with 
the emission limits for cadmium, lead, and mercury under 
Sec. 60.52b(a).
    (1) The procedures and test methods specified in paragraphs 
(d)(1)(i) through (d)(1)(ix) of this section shall be used to determine 
compliance with the emission limits for cadmium and lead under 
Sec. 60.52b(a) (3) and (4).
    (i) The EPA Reference Method 1 shall be used for determining the 
location and number of sampling points.
    (ii) The EPA Reference Method 3 shall be used for flue gas 
analysis.
    (iii) The EPA Reference Method 29 shall be used for determining 
compliance with the cadmium and lead emission limits.
    (iv) An oxygen or carbon dioxide measurement shall be obtained 
simultaneously with each Method 29 test run for cadmium and lead 
required under paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section.
    (v) An owner or operator may request that compliance with the 
cadmium or lead emission limit be determined using carbon dioxide 
measurements corrected to an equivalent of 7 percent oxygen. The 
relationship between oxygen and carbon dioxide levels for the affected 
facility shall be established as specified in paragraph (b)(6) of this 
section.
    (vi) All performance tests shall consist of a minimum of three test 
runs conducted under representative full load operating conditions. The 
average of the cadmium or lead emission concentrations from three test 
runs or more shall be used to determine compliance.
    (vii) Following the date of the initial performance test or the 
date on which the initial performance test is required to be completed 
under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part, the owner or operator of an 
affected facility located within a large municipal waste combustor 
plant shall conduct a performance test for compliance with the emission 
limits for cadmium and lead on an annual basis (no more than 12 
calendar months following the previous performance test).
    (viii) Following the date that the initial performance test for 
cadmium is completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of 
subpart A of this part for an affected facility located within a small 
municipal waste combustor plant, the owner or operator shall conduct a 
performance test for cadmium emissions on an annual basis (no more than 
12 calendar months following the previous performance test). If all 
performance tests over a 3-year period indicate compliance with the 
cadmium emission limit, the owner or operator may elect not to conduct 
a performance test for the subsequent 2 years. At a minimum, a 
performance test for cadmium shall be conducted every third year (no 
more than 36 months following the previous performance test) at a small 
municipal waste combustor plant. If a performance test conducted every 
third year indicates compliance with the cadmium emission limit, the 
owner or operator may elect not to conduct a performance test for an 
additional 2 years. If any performance test indicates noncompliance 
with the cadmium emission limit, performance tests shall be conducted 
annually until all annual performance tests over a 3-year period 
indicate compliance with the cadmium emission limit.
    (ix) Following the date that the initial performance test for lead 
is completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart 
A of this part for an affected facility located within a small 
municipal waste combustor plant, the owner or operator shall conduct a 
performance test for lead emissions on an annual basis (no more than 12 
calendar months following the previous performance test). If all three 
performance tests over a 3-year period indicate compliance with the 
lead emission limit, the owner or operator may elect not to conduct a 
performance test for the subsequent 2 years. At a minimum, a 
performance test for lead shall be conducted every third year (no more 
than 36 months following the previous performance test) at a small 
municipal waste combustor plant. If a performance test conducted every 
third year indicates compliance with the lead emission limit, the owner 
or operator may elect not to conduct a performance test for an 
additional 2 years. If any performance test indicates noncompliance 
with the lead emission limit, performance tests shall be conducted 
annually until all annual performance tests over a 3-year period 
indicate compliance with the lead emission limit. 

[[Page 65429]]

    (2) The procedures and test methods specified in paragraphs 
(d)(2)(i) through (d)(2)(xi) of this section shall be used to determine 
compliance with the mercury emission limit under Sec. 60.52b(a)(5).
    (i) The EPA Reference Method 1 shall be used for determining the 
location and number of sampling points.
    (ii) The EPA Reference Method 3 shall be used for flue gas 
analysis.
    (iii) The EPA Reference Method 29 shall be used to determine the 
mercury emission concentration. The minimum sample volume when using 
Method 29 for mercury shall be 1.7 cubic meters.
    (iv) An oxygen (or carbon dioxide) measurement shall be obtained 
simultaneously with each Method 29 test run for mercury required under 
paragraph (d)(2)(iii) of this section.
    (v) The percent reduction in the potential mercury emissions (%PHg) 
is computed using equation 1:
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR19DE95.001

where:

%PHg = percent reduction of the potential mercury emissions 
achieved.
Ei = potential mercury emission concentration measured at the 
control device inlet, corrected to 7 percent oxygen (dry basis).
Eo = controlled mercury emission concentration measured at the 
mercury control device outlet, corrected to 7 percent oxygen (dry 
basis).

    (vi) All performance tests shall consist of a minimum of three test 
runs conducted under representative full load operating conditions. The 
average of the mercury emission concentrations or percent reductions 
from three test runs or more is used to determine compliance.
    (vii) An owner or operator may request that compliance with the 
mercury emission limit be determined using carbon dioxide measurements 
corrected to an equivalent of 7 percent oxygen. The relationship 
between oxygen and carbon dioxide levels for the affected facility 
shall be established as specified in paragraph (b)(6) of this section.
    (viii) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within 
a small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall conduct an 
initial performance test for mercury emissions as required under 
Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part.
    (ix) Following the date that the initial performance test for 
mercury is completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of 
subpart A of this part, the owner or operator of an affected facility 
located within a large municipal waste combustor plant shall conduct a 
performance test for mercury emissions on a annual basis (no more than 
12 calendar months from the previous performance test).
    (x) Following the date that the initial performance test for 
mercury is completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of 
subpart A of this part for an affected facility located within a small 
municipal waste combustor plant, the owner or operator shall conduct a 
performance test for mercury emissions on an annual basis (no more than 
12 calendar months following the previous performance test). If all 
three performance tests over a 3-year period indicate compliance with 
the mercury emission limit, the owner or operator may elect not to 
conduct a performance test for the subsequent 2 years. At a minimum, a 
performance test for mercury shall be conducted every third year (no 
more than 36 months following the previous performance test) at a small 
municipal waste combustor plant. If a performance test conducted every 
third year indicates compliance with the mercury emission limit, the 
owner or operator may elect not to conduct a performance test for an 
additional 2 years. If any performance test indicates noncompliance 
with the mercury emission limit, performance tests shall be conducted 
annually until all annual performance tests over a 3-year period 
indicate compliance with the mercury emission limit.
    (xi) The owner or operator of an affected facility where activated 
carbon injection is used to comply with the mercury emission limit 
shall follow the procedures specified in paragraph (m) of this section 
for measuring and calculating carbon usage.
    (e) The procedures and test methods specified in paragraphs (e)(1) 
through (e)(14) of this section shall be used for determining 
compliance with the sulfur dioxide emission limit under 
Sec. 60.52b(b)(1).
    (1) The EPA Reference Method 19, section 4.3, shall be used to 
calculate the daily geometric average sulfur dioxide emission 
concentration.
    (2) The EPA Reference Method 19, section 5.4, shall be used to 
determine the daily geometric average percent reduction in the 
potential sulfur dioxide emission concentration.
    (3) An owner or operator may request that compliance with the 
sulfur dioxide emission limit be determined using carbon dioxide 
measurements corrected to an equivalent of 7 percent oxygen. The 
relationship between oxygen and carbon dioxide levels for the affected 
facility shall be established as specified in paragraph (b)(6) of this 
section.
    (4) The owner or operator of an affected facility shall conduct an 
initial performance test for sulfur dioxide emissions as required under 
Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part. Compliance with the sulfur dioxide 
emission limit (concentration or percent reduction) shall be determined 
by using the continuous emission monitoring system specified in 
paragraph (e)(5) of this section to measure sulfur dioxide and 
calculating a 24-hour daily geometric average emission concentration or 
a 24-hour daily geometric average percent reduction using EPA Reference 
Method 19, sections 4.3 and 5.4, as applicable.
    (5) The owner or operator of an affected facility shall install, 
calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous emission monitoring 
system for measuring sulfur dioxide emissions discharged to the 
atmosphere and record the output of the system.
    (6) Following the date that the initial performance test for sulfur 
dioxide is completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of 
subpart A of this part, compliance with the sulfur dioxide emission 
limit shall be determined based on the 24-hour daily geometric average 
of the hourly arithmetic average emission concentrations using 
continuous emission monitoring system outlet data if compliance is 
based on an emission concentration, or continuous emission monitoring 
system inlet and outlet data if compliance is based on a percent 
reduction.
    (7) At a minimum, valid continuous monitoring system hourly 
averages shall be obtained as specified in paragraphs (e)(7)(i) and 
(e)(7)(ii) for 75 percent of the operating hours per day for 90 percent 
of the operating days per calendar quarter that the affected facility 
is combusting municipal solid waste.
    (i) At least two data points per hour shall be used to calculate 
each 1-hour arithmetic average.
    (ii) Each sulfur dioxide 1-hour arithmetic average shall be 
corrected to 7 percent oxygen on an hourly basis using the 1-hour 
arithmetic average of the oxygen (or carbon dioxide) continuous 
emission monitoring system data.
    (8) The 1-hour arithmetic averages required under paragraph (e)(6) 
of this section shall be expressed in parts per million corrected to 7 
percent oxygen (dry basis) and used to calculate the 24-hour daily 
geometric average emission concentrations and daily geometric average 
emission percent reductions. The 1-hour arithmetic averages shall be 
calculated using the data points 

[[Page 65430]]
required under Sec. 60.13(e)(2) of subpart A of this part.
    (9) All valid continuous emission monitoring system data shall be 
used in calculating average emission concentrations and percent 
reductions even if the minimum continuous emission monitoring system 
data requirements of paragraph (e)(7) of this section are not met.
    (10) The procedures under Sec. 60.13 of subpart A of this part 
shall be followed for installation, evaluation, and operation of the 
continuous emission monitoring system.
    (11) The initial performance evaluation shall be completed no later 
than 180 days after the date of initial startup of the municipal waste 
combustor as specified under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part.
    (12) The continuous emission monitoring system shall be operated 
according to Performance Specification 2 in appendix B of this part.
    (i) During each relative accuracy test run of the continuous 
emission monitoring system required by Performance Specification 2 in 
appendix B of this part, sulfur dioxide and oxygen (or carbon dioxide) 
data shall be collected concurrently (or within a 30- to 60-minute 
period) by both the continuous emission monitors and the test methods 
specified in paragraphs (e)(12)(i)(A) and (e)(12)(i)(B) of this 
section.
    (A) For sulfur dioxide, EPA Reference Method 6, 6A, or 6C shall be 
used.
    (B) For oxygen (or carbon dioxide), EPA Reference Method 3A or 3B 
shall be used.
    (ii) The span value of the continuous emissions monitoring system 
at the inlet to the sulfur dioxide control device shall be 125 percent 
of the maximum estimated hourly potential sulfur dioxide emissions of 
the municipal waste combustor unit. The span value of the continuous 
emission monitoring system at the outlet of the sulfur dioxide control 
device shall be 50 percent of the maximum estimated hourly potential 
sulfur dioxide emissions of the municipal waste combustor unit.
    (13) Quarterly accuracy determinations and daily calibration drift 
tests shall be performed in accordance with procedure 1 in appendix F 
of this part.
    (14) When sulfur dioxide emissions data are not obtained because of 
continuous emission monitoring system breakdowns, repairs, calibration 
checks, and zero and span adjustments, emissions data shall be obtained 
by using other monitoring systems as approved by the Administrator or 
EPA Reference Method 19 to provide, as necessary, valid emissions data 
for a minimum of 75 percent of the hours per day that the affected 
facility is operated and combusting municipal solid waste for 90 
percent of the days per calendar quarter that the affected facility is 
operated and combusting municipal solid waste.
    (f) The procedures and test methods specified in paragraphs (f)(1) 
through (f)(8) of this section shall be used for determining compliance 
with the hydrogen chloride emission limit under Sec. 60.52b(b)(2).
    (1) The EPA Reference Method 26 or 26A, as applicable, shall be 
used to determine the hydrogen chloride emission concentration. The 
minimum sampling time for Method 26 shall be 1 hour.
    (2) An oxygen (or carbon dioxide) measurement shall be obtained 
simultaneously with each Method 26 test run for hydrogen chloride 
required by paragraph (f)(1) of this section.
    (3) The percent reduction in potential hydrogen chloride emissions 
(% PHCl) is computed using equation 2:
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR19DE95.002

where:

%PHCl=percent reduction of the potential hydrogen chloride 
emissions achieved.
Ei=potential hydrogen chloride emission concentration measured 
at the control device inlet, corrected to 7 percent oxygen (dry 
basis).

Eo=controlled hydrogen chloride emission concentration measured 
at the control device outlet, corrected to 7 percent oxygen (dry 
basis).
    (4) An owner or operator may request that compliance with the 
hydrogen chloride emission limit be determined using carbon dioxide 
measurements corrected to an equivalent of 7 percent oxygen. The 
relationship between oxygen and carbon dioxide levels for the affected 
facility shall be established as specified in paragraph (b)(6) of this 
section.
    (5) As specified under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part, all 
performance tests shall consist of three test runs. The average of the 
hydrogen chloride emission concentrations or percent reductions from 
the three test runs is used to determine compliance.
    (6) The owner or operator of an affected facility shall conduct an 
initial performance test for hydrogen chloride as required under 
Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part.
    (7) Following the date that the initial performance test for 
hydrogen chloride is completed or is required to be completed under 
Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part, the owner or operator of an 
affected facility located within a large municipal waste combustor 
plant shall conduct a performance test for hydrogen chloride emissions 
on an annual basis (no more than 12 calendar months following the 
previous performance test).
    (8) Following the date that the initial performance test for 
hydrogen chloride is completed or is required to be completed under 
Sec. 60.8 of this part, the owner or operator of an affected facility 
located within a small municipal waste combustor plant shall conduct a 
performance test for hydrogen chloride emissions on an annual basis (no 
more than 12 calendar months following the previous performance test). 
If all performance tests over a 3-year period indicate compliance with 
the hydrogen chloride emission limit, the owner or operator may elect 
not to conduct a performance test for the subsequent 2 years. At a 
minimum, a performance test for hydrogen chloride shall be conducted 
every third year (no more than 36 months following the previous 
performance test) at a small municipal waste combustor plant. If a 
performance test conducted every third year indicates compliance with 
the hydrogen chloride emission limit, the owner or operator may elect 
not to conduct a performance test for an additional 2 years. If any 
performance test indicates noncompliance with the hydrogen chloride 
emission limit, performance tests shall be conducted annually until all 
annual performance tests over a 3-year period indicate compliance with 
the hydrogen chloride emission limit.
    (g) The procedures and test methods specified in paragraphs (g)(1) 
through (g)(9) of this section shall be used to determine compliance 
with the limits for dioxin/furan emissions under Sec. 60.52b(c).
    (1) The EPA Reference Method 1 shall be used for determining the 
location and number of sampling points.
    (2) The EPA Reference Method 3 shall be used for flue gas analysis.
    (3) The EPA Reference Method 23 shall be used for determining the 
dioxin/furan emission concentration.
    (i) The minimum sample time shall be 4 hours per test run.
    (ii) An oxygen (or carbon dioxide) measurement shall be obtained 
simultaneously with each Method 23 test run for dioxins/furans.
    (4) The owner or operator of an affected facility shall conduct an 
initial performance test for dioxin/furan emissions in accordance with 
paragraph (g)(3) of this section, as required under Sec. 60.8 of 
subpart A of this part. 

[[Page 65431]]

    (5) Following the date that the initial performance test for 
dioxins/furans is completed or is required to be completed under 
Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part, the owner or operator of an 
affected facility located within small and large municipal waste 
combustor plants shall conduct performance tests for dioxin/furan 
emissions in accordance with paragraph (g)(3) of this section, 
according to one of the schedules specified in paragraphs (g)(5)(i) 
through (g)(5)(iii) of this section.
    (i) For affected facilities located within small and large 
municipal waste combustor plants, performance tests shall be conducted 
on an annual basis (no more than 12 calendar months following the 
previous performance test.)
    (ii) For affected facilities located within small municipal waste 
combustor plants where all performance tests for an affected facility 
over a 3-year period indicate compliance with the dioxin/furan emission 
limit, the owner or operator may elect not to conduct a performance 
test for the subsequent 2 years for that affected facility. At a 
minimum, a performance test for dioxin/furan emissions shall be 
conducted every third year (no more than 36 months following the 
previous performance test) for each affected facility. If a performance 
test conducted every third year indicates compliance with the dioxin/
furan emission limit, the owner or operator may elect not to conduct a 
performance test on the affected facility for an additional 2 years. If 
any performance test indicates noncompliance with the dioxin/furan 
emission limit, performance tests shall be conducted annually until all 
annual performance tests for the affected facility over a 3-year period 
indicate compliance with the dioxin/furan emission limit.
    (iii) For affected facilities located within small or large 
municipal waste combustor plants where all performance tests for all 
affected facilities over a 2-year period indicate that dioxin/furan 
emissions are less than or equal to 7 nanograms per dry standard cubic 
meter (total mass) for all affected facilities located within a 
municipal waste combustor plant, the owner or operator of the municipal 
waste combustor plant may elect to conduct annual performance tests for 
one affected facility (i.e., unit) per year at the municipal waste 
combustor plant. At a minimum, a performance test for dioxin/furan 
emissions shall be conducted annually (no more than 12 months following 
the previous performance test) for one affected facility at the 
municipal waste combustor plant. Each year a different affected 
facility at the municipal waste combustor plant shall be tested, and 
the affected facilities at the plant shall be tested in sequence (e.g., 
unit 1, unit 2, unit 3, as applicable). If each annual performance test 
continues to indicate a dioxin/furan emission level less than or equal 
to 7 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total mass), the owner or 
operator may continue conducting a performance test on only one 
affected facility per year. If any annual performance test indicates a 
dioxin/furan emission level greater than 7 nanograms per dry standard 
cubic meter (total mass), performance tests thereafter shall be 
conducted annually on all affected facilities at the plant until and 
unless all annual performance tests for all affected facilities at the 
plant over a 2-year period indicate a dioxin/furan emission level less 
than or equal to 7 nanograms per dry standard cubic meter (total mass).
    (6) The owner or operator of an affected facility that selects to 
follow the performance testing schedule specified in paragraph 
(g)(5)(iii) of this section shall follow the procedures specified in 
Sec. 60.59b(g)(4) for reporting the selection of this schedule.
    (7) The owner or operator of an affected facility where activated 
carbon is used to comply with the dioxin/furan emission limits 
specified in Sec. 60.52b(c) or the dioxin/furan emission level 
specified in paragraph (g)(5)(iii) of this section shall follow the 
procedures specified in paragraph (m) of this section for measuring and 
calculating the carbon usage rate.
    (8) An owner or operator may request that compliance with the 
dioxin/furan emission limit be determined using carbon dioxide 
measurements corrected to an equivalent of 7 percent oxygen. The 
relationship between oxygen and carbon dioxide levels for the affected 
facility shall be established as specified in paragraph (b)(6) of this 
section.
    (9) As specified under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part, all 
performance tests shall consist of three test runs. The average of the 
dioxin/furan emission concentrations from the three test runs is used 
to determine compliance.
    (h) The procedures and test methods specified in paragraphs (h)(1) 
through (h)(12) of this section shall be used to determine compliance 
with the nitrogen oxides emission limit for municipal waste combustors 
located at large municipal waste combustor plants under Sec. 60.52b(d) 
(no nitrogen oxides performance tests are required for affected 
facilities located within small municipal waste combustor plants).
    (1) The EPA Reference Method 19, section 4.1, shall be used for 
determining the daily arithmetic average nitrogen oxides emission 
concentration.
    (2) An owner or operator may request that compliance with the 
nitrogen oxides emission limit be determined using carbon dioxide 
measurements corrected to an equivalent of 7 percent oxygen. The 
relationship between oxygen and carbon dioxide levels for the affected 
facility shall be established as specified in paragraph (b)(6) of this 
section.
    (3) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
large municipal waste combustor plant subject to the nitrogen oxides 
limit under Sec. 60.52b(d) shall conduct an initial performance test 
for nitrogen oxides as required under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this 
part. Compliance with the nitrogen oxides emission limit shall be 
determined by using the continuous emission monitoring system specified 
in paragraph (h)(4) of this section for measuring nitrogen oxides and 
calculating a 24-hour daily arithmetic average emission concentration 
using EPA Reference Method 19, section 4.1.
    (4) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
large municipal waste combustor plant subject to the nitrogen oxides 
emission limit under Sec. 60.52b(d) shall install, calibrate, maintain, 
and operate a continuous emission monitoring system for measuring 
nitrogen oxides discharged to the atmosphere, and record the output of 
the system.
    (5) Following the date that the initial performance test for 
nitrogen oxides is completed or is required to be completed under 
Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part, compliance with the emission limit 
for nitrogen oxides required under Sec. 60.52b(d) shall be determined 
based on the 24-hour daily arithmetic average of the hourly emission 
concentrations using continuous emission monitoring system outlet data.
    (6) At a minimum, valid continuous emission monitoring system 
hourly averages shall be obtained as specified in paragraphs (h)(6)(i) 
and (h)(6)(ii) of this section for 75 percent of the operating hours 
per day for 90 percent of the operating days per calendar quarter that 
the affected facility is combusting municipal solid waste.
    (i) At least 2 data points per hour shall be used to calculate each 
1-hour arithmetic average.
    (ii) Each nitrogen oxides 1-hour arithmetic average shall be 
corrected to 7 percent oxygen on an hourly basis using the 1-hour 
arithmetic average of the oxygen (or carbon dioxide) 

[[Page 65432]]
continuous emission monitoring system data.
    (7) The 1-hour arithmetic averages required by paragraph (h)(5) of 
this section shall be expressed in parts per million by volume (dry 
basis) and used to calculate the 24-hour daily arithmetic average 
concentrations. The 1-hour arithmetic averages shall be calculated 
using the data points required under Sec. 60.13(e)(2) of subpart A of 
this part.
    (8) All valid continuous emission monitoring system data must be 
used in calculating emission averages even if the minimum continuous 
emission monitoring system data requirements of paragraph (h)(6) of 
this section are not met.
    (9) The procedures under Sec. 60.13 of subpart A of this part shall 
be followed for installation, evaluation, and operation of the 
continuous emission monitoring system. The initial performance 
evaluation shall be completed no later than 180 days after the date of 
initial startup of the municipal waste combustor unit, as specified 
under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part.
    (10) The owner or operator shall operate the continuous emission 
monitoring system according to Performance Specification 2 in appendix 
B of this part and shall follow the procedures and methods specified in 
paragraphs (h)(10)(i) and (h)(10)(ii) of this section.
    (i) During each relative accuracy test run of the continuous 
emission monitoring system required by Performance Specification 2 of 
appendix B of this part, nitrogen oxides and oxygen (or carbon dioxide) 
data shall be collected concurrently (or within a 30- to 60-minute 
period) by both the continuous emission monitors and the test methods 
specified in paragraphs (h)(10)(i)(A) and (h)(10)(i)(B) of this 
section.
    (A) For nitrogen oxides, EPA Reference Method 7, 7A, 7C, 7D, or 7E 
shall be used.
    (B) For oxygen (or carbon dioxide), EPA Reference Method 3A or 3B 
shall be used.
    (ii) The span value of the continuous emission monitoring system 
shall be 125 percent of the maximum estimated hourly potential nitrogen 
oxide emissions of the municipal waste combustor unit.
    (11) Quarterly accuracy determinations and daily calibration drift 
tests shall be performed in accordance with procedure 1 in appendix F 
of this part.
    (12) When nitrogen oxides continuous emissions data are not 
obtained because of continuous emission monitoring system breakdowns, 
repairs, calibration checks, and zero and span adjustments, emissions 
data shall be obtained using other monitoring systems as approved by 
the Administrator or EPA Reference Method 19 to provide, as necessary, 
valid emissions data for a minimum of 75 percent of the hours per day 
for 90 percent of the days per calendar quarter the unit is operated 
and combusting municipal solid waste.
    (i) The procedures specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(12) 
of this section shall be used for determining compliance with the 
operating requirements under Sec. 60.53b.
    (1) Compliance with the carbon monoxide emission limits in 
Sec. 60.53b(a) shall be determined using a 4-hour block arithmetic 
average for all types of affected facilities except mass burn rotary 
waterwall municipal waste combustors and refuse-derived fuel stokers.
    (2) For affected mass burn rotary waterwall municipal waste 
combustors and refuse-derived fuel stokers, compliance with the carbon 
monoxide emission limits in Sec. 60.53b(a) shall be determined using a 
24-hour daily arithmetic average.
    (3) The owner or operator of an affected facility shall install, 
calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous emission monitoring 
system for measuring carbon monoxide at the combustor outlet and record 
the output of the system and shall follow the procedures and methods 
specified in paragraphs (i)(3)(i) through (i)(3)(iii) of this section.
    (i) The continuous emission monitoring system shall be operated 
according to Performance Specification 4A in appendix B of this part.
    (ii) During each relative accuracy test run of the continuous 
emission monitoring system required by Performance Specification 4A in 
appendix B of this part, carbon monoxide and oxygen (or carbon dioxide) 
data shall be collected concurrently (or within a 30- to 60-minute 
period) by both the continuous emission monitors and the test methods 
specified in paragraphs (i)(3)(ii)(A) and (i)(3)(ii)(B) of this 
section.
    (A) For carbon monoxide, EPA Reference Method 10, 10A, or 10B shall 
be used.
    (B) For oxygen (or carbon dioxide), EPA Reference Method 3A or 3B 
shall be used.
    (iii) The span value of the continuous emission monitoring system 
shall be 125 percent of the maximum estimated hourly potential carbon 
monoxide emissions of the municipal waste combustor unit.
    (4) The 4-hour block and 24-hour daily arithmetic averages 
specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this section shall be 
calculated from 1-hour arithmetic averages expressed in parts per 
million by volume corrected to 7 percent oxygen (dry basis). The 1-hour 
arithmetic averages shall be calculated using the data points generated 
by the continuous emission monitoring system. At least two data points 
shall be used to calculate each 1-hour arithmetic average.
    (5) An owner or operator may request that compliance with the 
carbon monoxide emission limit be determined using carbon dioxide 
measurements corrected to an equivalent of 7 percent oxygen. The 
relationship between oxygen and carbon dioxide levels for the affected 
facility shall be established as specified in paragraph (b)(6) of this 
section.
    (6) The procedures specified in paragraphs (i)(6)(i) through 
(i)(6)(v) of this section shall be used to determine compliance with 
load level requirements under Sec. 60.53b(b).
    (i) The owner or operator of an affected facility with steam 
generation capability shall install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a 
steam flow meter or a feedwater flow meter; measure steam (or 
feedwater) flow in kilograms per hour (or pounds per hour) on a 
continuous basis; and record the output of the monitor. Steam (or 
feedwater) flow shall be calculated in 4-hour block arithmetic 
averages.
    (ii) The method included in the ``American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers Power Test Codes: Test Code for Steam Generating Units, Power 
Test Code 4.1--1964 (R1991)'' section 4 (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec. 60.17 of subpart A of this part) shall be used for calculating the 
steam (or feedwater) flow required under paragraph (i)(6)(i) of this 
section. The recommendations in ``American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers Interim Supplement 19.5 on Instruments and Apparatus: 
Application, Part II of Fluid Meters, 6th edition (1971),'' chapter 4 
(incorporated by reference--see Sec. 60.17 of subpart A of this part) 
shall be followed for design, construction, installation, calibration, 
and use of nozzles and orifices except as specified in (i)(6)(iii) of 
this section.
    (iii) Measurement devices such as flow nozzles and orifices are not 
required to be recalibrated after they are installed.
    (iv) All signal conversion elements associated with steam (or 
feedwater flow) measurements must be calibrated according to the 
manufacturer's instructions before each dioxin/furan 

[[Page 65433]]
performance test, and at least once per year.
    (a) [Reserved].
    (7) To determine compliance with the maximum particulate matter 
control device temperature requirements under Sec. 60.53b(c), the owner 
or operator of an affected facility shall install, calibrate, maintain, 
and operate a device for measuring on a continuous basis the 
temperature of the flue gas stream at the inlet to each particulate 
matter control device utilized by the affected facility. Temperature 
shall be calculated in 4-hour block arithmetic averages.
    (8) The maximum demonstrated municipal waste combustor unit load 
shall be determined during the initial performance test for dioxins/
furans and each subsequent performance test during which compliance 
with the dioxin/furan emission limit specified in Sec. 60.52b(c) is 
achieved. The maximum demonstrated municipal waste combustor unit load 
shall be the highest 4-hour arithmetic average load achieved during 
four consecutive hours during the most recent test during which 
compliance with the dioxin/furan emission limit was achieved.
    (9) For each particulate matter control device employed at the 
affected facility, the maximum demonstrated particulate matter control 
device temperature shall be determined during the initial performance 
test for dioxins/furans and each subsequent performance test during 
which compliance with the dioxin/furan emission limit specified in 
Sec. 60.52b(c) is achieved. The maximum demonstrated particulate matter 
control device temperature shall be the highest 4-hour arithmetic 
average temperature achieved at the particulate matter control device 
inlet during four consecutive hours during the most recent test during 
which compliance with the dioxin/furan limit was achieved.
    (10) At a minimum, valid continuous emission monitoring system 
hourly averages shall be obtained as specified in paragraphs (i)(10)(i) 
and (i)(10)(ii) of this section for 75 percent of the operating hours 
per day for 90 percent of the operating days per calendar quarter that 
the affected facility is combusting municipal solid waste.
    (i) At least two data points per hour shall be used to calculate 
each 1-hour arithmetic average.
    (ii) At a minimum, each carbon monoxide 1-hour arithmetic average 
shall be corrected to 7 percent oxygen on an hourly basis using the 1-
hour arithmetic average of the oxygen (or carbon dioxide) continuous 
emission monitoring system data.
    (11) All valid continuous emission monitoring system data must be 
used in calculating the parameters specified under paragraph (i) of 
this section even if the minimum data requirements of paragraph (i)(10) 
of this section are not met. When carbon monoxide continuous emission 
data are not obtained because of continuous emission monitoring system 
breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, and zero and span adjustments, 
emissions data shall be obtained using other monitoring systems as 
approved by the Administrator or EPA Reference Method 10 to provide, as 
necessary, the minimum valid emission data.
    (12) Quarterly accuracy determinations and daily calibration drift 
tests for the carbon monoxide continuous emission monitoring system 
shall be performed in accordance with procedure 1 in appendix F of this 
part.
    (j) The procedures specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (j)(2) of 
this section shall be used for calculating municipal waste combustor 
unit capacity as defined under Sec. 60.51b.
    (1) For municipal waste combustor units capable of combusting 
municipal solid waste continuously for a 24-hour period, municipal 
waste combustor unit capacity, in megagrams per day of municipal solid 
waste combusted, shall be calculated based on 24 hours of operation at 
the maximum charging rate. The maximum charging rate shall be 
determined as specified in paragraphs (j)(1)(i) and (j)(1)(ii) of this 
section as applicable.
    (i) For combustors that are designed based on heat capacity, the 
maximum charging rate shall be calculated based on the maximum design 
heat input capacity of the unit and a heating value of 10,500 
kilojoules per kilogram.
    (ii) For combustors that are not designed based on heat capacity, 
the maximum charging rate shall be the maximum design charging rate.
    (2) For batch feed municipal waste combustor units, municipal waste 
combustor unit capacity, in megagrams per day of municipal solid waste 
combusted, shall be calculated as the maximum design amount of 
municipal solid waste that can be charged per batch multiplied by the 
maximum number of batches that could be processed in a 24-hour period. 
The maximum number of batches that could be processed in a 24-hour 
period is calculated as 24 hours divided by the design number of hours 
required to process one batch of municipal solid waste, and may include 
fractional batches (e.g., if one batch requires 16 hours, then 24/16, 
or 1.5 batches, could be combusted in a 24-hour period). For batch 
combustors that are designed based on heat capacity, the design heating 
value of 10,500 kilojoules per kilogram for all municipal solid waste 
shall be used in calculating the municipal waste combustor unit 
capacity in megagrams per day of municipal solid waste.
    (k) The procedures specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(3) of 
this section shall be used for determining compliance with the fugitive 
ash emission limit under Sec. 60.55b.
    (1) The EPA Reference Method 22 shall be used for determining 
compliance with the fugitive ash emission limit under Sec. 60.55b. The 
minimum observation time shall be a series of three 1-hour 
observations. The observation period shall include times when the 
facility is transferring ash from the municipal waste combustor unit to 
the area where ash is stored or loaded into containers or trucks.
    (2) The average duration of visible emissions per hour shall be 
calculated from the three 1-hour observations. The average shall be 
used to determine compliance with Sec. 60.55b.
    (3) The owner or operator of an affected facility shall conduct an 
initial performance test for fugitive ash emissions as required under 
Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part.
    (l) The procedures specified in paragraphs (l)(1) through (l)(3) of 
this section shall be used to determine compliance with the opacity 
limit for air curtain incinerators under Sec. 60.56b.
    (1) The EPA Reference Method 9 shall be used for determining 
compliance with the opacity limit.
    (2) The owner or operator of the air curtain incinerator shall 
conduct an initial performance test for opacity as required under 
Sec. 60.8 of subpart A of this part.
    (3) Following the date that the initial performance test is 
completed or is required to be completed under Sec. 60.8 of subpart A 
of this part, the owner or operator of the air curtain incinerator 
shall conduct a performance test for opacity on an annual basis (no 
more than 12 calendar months following the previous performance test).
    (m) The owner or operator of an affected facility where activated 
carbon injection is used to comply with the mercury emission limit 
under Sec. 60.52b(a)(5), or the dioxin/furan emission limits under 
Sec. 60.52(b)(c), or the dioxin/furan emission level specified in 
Sec. 60.58b(g)(5)(iii) shall follow the procedures specified in 
paragraphs (m)(1) through (m)(3) of this section.
    (1) During the performance tests for dioxins/furans and mercury, as 


[[Page 65434]]
applicable, the owner or operator shall estimate an average carbon mass 
feed rate based on carbon injection system operating parameters such as 
the screw feeder speed, hopper volume, hopper refill frequency, or 
other parameters appropriate to the feed system being employed, as 
specified in paragraphs (m)(1)(i) and (m)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (i) An average carbon mass feed rate in kilograms per hour or 
pounds per hour shall be estimated during the initial performance test 
for mercury emissions and each subsequent performance test for mercury 
emissions.
    (ii) An average carbon mass feed rate in kilograms per hour or 
pounds per hour shall be estimated during the initial performance test 
for dioxin/furan emissions and each subsequent performance test for 
dioxin/furan emissions.
    (2) During operation of the affected facility, the carbon injection 
system operating parameter(s) that are the primary indicator(s) of the 
carbon mass feed rate (e.g., screw feeder setting) must equal or exceed 
the level(s) documented during the performance tests specified under 
paragraphs (m)(1)(i) and (m)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (3) The owner or operator shall estimate the total carbon usage of 
the plant (kilograms or pounds) for each calendar quarter by two 
independent methods, according to the procedures in paragraphs 
(m)(3)(i) and (m)(3)(ii) of this section.
    (i) The weight of carbon delivered to the plant.
    (ii) Estimate the average carbon mass feed rate in kilograms per 
hour or pounds per hour for each hour of operation for each affected 
facility based on the parameters specified under paragraph (m)(1) of 
this section, and sum the results for all affected facilities at the 
plant for the total number of hours of operation during the calendar 
quarter.


Sec. 60.59b  Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    (a) The owner or operator of an affected facility located at a 
municipal waste combustor plant with a capacity to combust greater than 
35 megagrams per day shall submit, on or before the date the 
application for a construction permit is submitted under 40 CFR part 
51, subpart I, or part 52, as applicable, the items specified in 
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this section.
    (1) The preliminary and final draft materials separation plans 
required by Sec. 60.57b(a)(1) and (a)(5).
    (2) A copy of the notification of the public meeting required by 
Sec. 60.57b(a)(1)(ii).
    (3) A transcript of the public meeting required by 
Sec. 60.57b(a)(2).
    (4) A copy of the document summarizing responses to public comments 
required by Sec. 60.57b(a)(3).
    (b) The owner or operator of an affected facility located at a 
municipal waste combustor plant with a capacity to combust greater than 
35 megagrams per day shall submit a notification of construction, which 
includes the information specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(5) 
of this section.
    (1) Intent to construct.
    (2) Planned initial startup date.
    (3) The types of fuels that the owner or operator plans to combust 
in the affected facility.
    (4) The municipal waste combustor unit capacity, municipal waste 
combustor plant capacity, and supporting capacity calculations prepared 
in accordance with Sec. 60.58b(j).
    (5) Documents associated with the siting requirements under 
Sec. 60.57b (a) and (b), as specified in paragraphs (b)(5)(i) through 
(b)(5)(v) of this section.
    (i) The siting analysis required by Sec. 60.57b (b)(1) and (b)(2).
    (ii) The final materials separation plan for the affected facility 
required by Sec. 60.57b(a)(10).
    (iii) A copy of the notification of the public meeting required by 
Sec. 60.57b(b)(3)(ii).
    (iv) A transcript of the public meeting required by 
Sec. 60.57b(b)(4).
    (v) A copy of the document summarizing responses to public comments 
required by Sec. 60.57b (a)(9) and (b)(5).
    (c) The owner or operator of an air curtain incinerator subject to 
the opacity limit under Sec. 60.56b shall provide a notification of 
construction that includes the information specified in paragraphs 
(b)(1) through (b)(4) of this section.
    (d) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant and subject to the 
standards under Secs. 60.52b, 60.53b, 60.54b, 60.55b, and 60.57b shall 
maintain records of the information specified in paragraphs (d)(1) 
through (d)(15) of this section, as applicable, for each affected 
facility for a period of at least 5 years.
    (1) The calendar date of each record.
    (2) The emission concentrations and parameters measured using 
continuous monitoring systems as specified under paragraphs (d)(2)(i) 
and (d)(2)(ii) of this section.
    (i) The measurements specified in paragraphs (d)(2)(i)(A) through 
(d)(2)(i)(D) of this section shall be recorded and be available for 
submittal to the Administrator or review onsite by an inspector.
    (A) All 6-minute average opacity levels as specified under 
Sec. 60.58b(c).
    (B) All 1-hour average sulfur dioxide emission concentrations as 
specified under Sec. 60.58b(e).
    (C) All 1-hour average nitrogen oxides emission concentrations as 
specified under Sec. 60.58b(h) (large municipal waste combustor plants 
only).
    (D) All 1-hour average carbon monoxide emission concentrations, 
municipal waste combustor unit load measurements, and particulate 
matter control device inlet temperatures as specified under 
Sec. 60.58b(i).
    (ii) The average concentrations and percent reductions, as 
applicable, specified in paragraphs (d)(2)(ii)(A) through (d)(2)(ii)(D) 
of this section shall be computed and recorded, and shall be available 
for submittal to the Administrator or review on-site by an inspector.
    (A) All 24-hour daily geometric average sulfur dioxide emission 
concentrations and all 24-hour daily geometric average percent 
reductions in sulfur dioxide emissions as specified under 
Sec. 60.58b(e).
    (B) All 24-hour daily arithmetic average nitrogen oxides emission 
concentrations as specified under Sec. 60.58b(h) (large municipal waste 
combustor plants only).
    (C) All 4-hour block or 24-hour daily arithmetic average carbon 
monoxide emission concentrations, as applicable, as specified under 
Sec. 60.58b(i).
    (D) All 4-hour block arithmetic average municipal waste combustor 
unit load levels and particulate matter control device inlet 
temperatures as specified under Sec. 60.58b(i).
    (3) Identification of the calendar dates when any of the average 
emission concentrations, percent reductions, or operating parameters 
recorded under paragraphs (d)(2)(ii)(A) through (d)(2)(ii)(E) of this 
section, or the opacity levels recorded under paragraph (d)(2)(i)(A) of 
this section are above the applicable limits, with reasons for such 
exceedances and a description of corrective actions taken.
    (4) For affected facilities that apply activated carbon for mercury 
or dioxin/furan control, the records specified in paragraphs (d)(4)(i) 
through (d)(4)(v) of this section.
    (i) The average carbon mass feed rate (in kilograms per hour or 
pounds per hour) estimated as required under Sec. 60.58b(m)(1)(i) of 
this section during the initial mercury performance test and all 
subsequent annual performance tests, with supporting calculations.
    (ii) The average carbon mass feed rate (in kilograms per hour or 
pounds per hour) estimated as required under 

[[Page 65435]]
Sec. 60.58b(m)(1)(ii) of this section during the initial dioxin/furan 
performance test and all subsequent annual performance tests, with 
supporting calculations.
    (iii) The average carbon mass feed rate (in kilograms per hour or 
pounds per hour) estimated for each hour of operation as required under 
Sec. 60.58b(m)(3)(ii) of this section, with supporting calculations.
    (iv) The total carbon usage for each calendar quarter estimated as 
specified by paragraph 60.58b(m)(3) of this section, with supporting 
calculations.
    (v) Carbon injection system operating parameter data for the 
parameter(s) that are the primary indicator(s) of carbon feed rate 
(e.g., screw feeder speed).
    (5) [Reserved]
    (6) Identification of the calendar dates for which the minimum 
number of hours of any of the data specified in paragraphs (d)(6)(i) 
through (d)(6)(v) of this section have not been obtained including 
reasons for not obtaining sufficient data and a description of 
corrective actions taken.
    (i) Sulfur dioxide emissions data;
    (ii) Nitrogen oxides emissions data (large municipal waste 
combustor plants only);
    (iii) Carbon monoxide emissions data;
    (iv) Municipal waste combustor unit load data; and
    (v) Particulate matter control device temperature data.
    (7) Identification of each occurrence that sulfur dioxide emissions 
data, nitrogen oxides emissions data (large municipal waste combustors 
only), or operational data (i.e., carbon monoxide emissions, unit load, 
and particulate matter control device temperature) have been excluded 
from the calculation of average emission concentrations or parameters, 
and the reasons for excluding the data.
    (8) The results of daily drift tests and quarterly accuracy 
determinations for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides (large municipal 
waste combustors only), and carbon monoxide continuous emission 
monitoring systems, as required under appendix F of this part, 
procedure 1.
    (9) The test reports documenting the results of the initial 
performance test and all annual performance tests listed in paragraphs 
(d)(9)(i) and (d)(9)(ii) of this section shall be recorded along with 
supporting calculations.
    (i) The results of the initial performance test and all annual 
performance tests conducted to determine compliance with the 
particulate matter, opacity, cadmium, lead, mercury, dioxins/furans, 
hydrogen chloride, and fugitive ash emission limits.
    (ii) For the initial dioxin/furan performance test and all 
subsequent dioxin/furan performance tests recorded under paragraph 
(d)(9)(i) of this section, the maximum demonstrated municipal waste 
combustor unit load and maximum demonstrated particulate matter control 
device temperature (for each particulate matter control device).
    (10) [Reserved]
    (11) For each municipal waste combustor subject to the siting 
provisions under Sec. 60.57b, the siting analysis, the final materials 
separation plan, a record of the location and date of the public 
meetings, and the documentation of the responses to public comments 
received at the public meetings.
    (12) The records specified in paragraphs (d)(12)(i) through 
(d)(12)(iii) of this section.
    (i) Records showing the names of the municipal waste combustor 
chief facility operator, shift supervisors, and control room operators 
who have been provisionally certified by the American Society of 
Mechanical Engineers or an equivalent State-approved certification 
program as required by Sec. 60.54b(a) including the dates of initial 
and renewal certifications and documentation of current certification.
    (ii) Records showing the names of the municipal waste combustor 
chief facility operator, shift supervisors, and control room operators 
who have been fully certified by the American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers or an equivalent State-approved certification program as 
required by Sec. 60.54b(a) including the dates of initial and renewal 
certifications and documentation of current certification.
    (iii) Records showing the names of the municipal waste combustor 
chief facility operator, shift supervisors, and control room operators 
who have completed the EPA municipal waste combustor operator training 
course or a State-approved equivalent course as required by 
Sec. 60.54b(d) including documentation of training completion.
    (13) Records showing the names of persons who have completed a 
review of the operating manual as required by Sec. 60.54b(f) including 
the date of the initial review and subsequent annual reviews.
    (14) For affected facilities that apply activated carbon for 
mercury or dioxin/furan control, identification of the calendar dates 
when the average carbon mass feed rates recorded under (d)(4)(iii) of 
this section were less than either of the hourly carbon feed rates 
estimated during performance tests for mercury or dioxin/furan 
emissions and recorded under paragraphs (d)(4)(i) and (d)(4)(ii) of 
this section, respectively, with reasons for such feed rates and a 
description of corrective actions taken.
    (15) For affected facilities that apply activated carbon for 
mercury or dioxin/furan control, identification of the calendar dates 
when the carbon injection system operating parameter(s) that are the 
primary indicator(s) of carbon mass feed rate (e.g., screw feeder 
speed) recorded under paragraph (d)(4)(v) of this section are below the 
level(s) estimated during the performance tests as specified in 
Sec. 60.58b(m)(1)(i) and Sec. 60.58b(m)(1)(ii) of this section, with 
reasons for such occurrences and a description of corrective actions 
taken.
    (e) The owner or operator of an air curtain incinerator subject to 
the opacity limit under Sec. 60.56b shall maintain records of results 
of the initial opacity performance test and subsequent performance 
tests required by Sec. 60.58b(l) for a period of at least 5 years.
    (f) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall submit the 
information specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(6) of this 
section in the initial performance test report.
    (1) The initial performance test data as recorded under paragraphs 
(d)(2)(ii)(A) through (d)(2)(ii)(D) of this section for the initial 
performance test for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, 
municipal waste combustor unit load level, and particulate matter 
control device inlet temperature.
    (2) The test report documenting the initial performance test 
recorded under paragraph (d)(9) of this section for particulate matter, 
opacity, cadmium, lead, mercury, dioxins/furans, hydrogen chloride, and 
fugitive ash emissions.
    (3) The performance evaluation of the continuous emission 
monitoring system using the applicable performance specifications in 
appendix B of this part.
    (4) The maximum demonstrated municipal waste combustor unit load 
and maximum demonstrated particulate matter control device inlet 
temperature(s) established during the initial dioxin/furan performance 
test as recorded under paragraph (d)(9) of this section.
    (5) For affected facilities that apply activated carbon injection 
for mercury control, the owner or operator shall submit the average 
carbon mass feed rate recorded under paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this 
section.
    (6) For those affected facilities that apply activated carbon 
injection for dioxin/furan control, the owner or 

[[Page 65436]]
operator shall submit the average carbon mass feed rate recorded under 
paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this section.
    (g) Following the first year of municipal combustor operation, the 
owner or operator of an affected facility located within a small or 
large municipal waste combustor plant shall submit an annual report 
including the information specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(4) 
of this section, as applicable, no later than February 1 of each year 
following the calendar year in which the data were collected (once the 
unit is subject to permitting requirements under Title V of the Act, 
the owner or operator of an affected facility must submit these reports 
semiannually).
    (1) A summary of data collected for all pollutants and parameters 
regulated under this subpart, which includes the information specified 
in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(v) of this section.
    (i) A list of the particulate matter, opacity, cadmium, lead, 
mercury, dioxins/furans, hydrogen chloride, and fugitive ash emission 
levels achieved during the performance tests recorded under paragraph 
(d)(9) of this section.
    (ii) A list of the highest emission level recorded for sulfur 
dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, municipal waste combustor 
unit load level, and particulate matter control device inlet 
temperature based on the data recorded under paragraphs (d)(2)(ii)(A) 
through (d)(2)(ii)(D) of this section.
    (iii) List the highest opacity level measured, based on the data 
recorded under paragraph (d)(2)(i)(A) of this section.
    (iv) The total number of days that the minimum number of hours of 
data for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, municipal 
waste combustor unit load, and particulate matter control device 
temperature data were not obtained based on the data recorded under 
paragraph (d)(6) of this section.
    (v) The total number of hours that data for sulfur dioxide, 
nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, municipal waste combustor unit load, 
and particulate matter control device temperature were excluded from 
the calculation of average emission concentrations or parameters based 
on the data recorded under paragraph (d)(7) of this section.
    (2) The summary of data reported under paragraph (g)(1) of this 
section shall also provide the types of data specified in paragraphs 
(g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(vi) of this section for the calendar year 
preceding the year being reported, in order to provide the 
Administrator with a summary of the performance of the affected 
facility over a 2-year period.
    (3) The summary of data including the information specified in 
paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this section shall highlight any 
emission or parameter levels that did not achieve the emission or 
parameter limits specified under this subpart.
    (4) A notification of intent to begin the reduced dioxin/furan 
performance testing schedule specified in Sec. 60.58b(g)(5)(iii) of 
this section during the following calendar year.
    (h) The owner or operator of an affected facility located within a 
small or large municipal waste combustor plant shall submit a 
semiannual report that includes the information specified in paragraphs 
(h)(1) through (h)(5) of this section for any recorded pollutant or 
parameter that does not comply with the pollutant or parameter limit 
specified under this subpart, according to the schedule specified under 
paragraph (h)(6) of this section.
    (1) The semiannual report shall include information recorded under 
paragraph (d)(3) of this section for sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, 
carbon monoxide, municipal waste combustor unit load level, particulate 
matter control device inlet temperature, and opacity.
    (2) For each date recorded as required by paragraph (d)(3) of this 
section and reported as required by paragraph (h)(1) of this section, 
the semiannual report shall include the sulfur dioxide, nitrogen 
oxides, carbon monoxide, municipal waste combustor unit load level, 
particulate matter control device inlet temperature, or opacity data, 
as applicable, recorded under paragraphs (d)(2)(ii)(A) through 
(d)(2)(ii)(D) and (d)(2)(i)(A) of this section, as applicable.
    (3) If the test reports recorded under paragraph (d)(9) of this 
section document any particulate matter, opacity, cadmium, lead, 
mercury, dioxins/furans, hydrogen chloride, and fugitive ash emission 
levels that were above the applicable pollutant limits, the semiannual 
report shall include a copy of the test report documenting the emission 
levels and the corrective actions taken.
    (4) The semiannual report shall include the information recorded 
under paragraph (d)(15) of this section for the carbon injection system 
operating parameter(s) that are the primary indicator(s) of carbon mass 
feed rate.
    (5) For each operating date reported as required by paragraph 
(h)(4) of this section, the semiannual report shall include the carbon 
feed rate data recorded under paragraph (d)(4)(iii) of this section.
    (6) Semiannual reports required by paragraph (h) of this section 
shall be submitted according to the schedule specified in paragraphs 
(h)(6)(i) and (h)(6)(ii) of this section.
    (i) If the data reported in accordance with paragraphs (h)(1) 
through (h)(5) of this section were collected during the first calendar 
half, then the report shall be submitted by August 1 following the 
first calendar half.
    (ii) If the data reported in accordance with paragraphs (h)(1) 
through (h)(5) of this section were collected during the second 
calendar half, then the report shall be submitted by February 1 
following the second calendar half.
    (i) The owner or operator of an air curtain incinerator subject to 
the opacity limit under Sec. 60.56b shall submit the results of the 
initial opacity performance test and all subsequent annual performance 
tests recorded under paragraph (e) of this section. Annual performance 
tests shall be submitted by February 1 of the year following the year 
of the performance test.
    (j) All reports specified under paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (f), (g), 
(h), and (i) of this section shall be submitted as a paper copy, 
postmarked on or before the submittal dates specified under these 
paragraphs, and maintained onsite as a paper copy for a period of 5 
years.
    (k) All records specified under paragraphs (d) and (e) of this 
section shall be maintained onsite in either paper copy or computer-
readable format, unless an alternative format is approved by the 
Administrator.
    (l) If an owner or operator would prefer to select a different 
annual or semiannual date for submitting the periodic reports required 
by paragraphs (g), (h) and (i) of this section, then the dates may be 
changed by mutual agreement between the owner or operator and the 
Administrator according to the procedures specified in Sec. 60.19(c) of 
subpart A of this part.

[FR Doc. 95-30257 Filed 12-18-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P