[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 71 (Friday, April 12, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21846-21849]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08648]



[[Page 21846]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R01-OAR-2013-0109; A-1-FRL-9800-1]


Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated 
Facilities and Pollutants: Connecticut; 111(d)/129 Revised State Plan 
for Large and Small Municipal Waste Combustors

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the Clean Air Act 111(d)/129 State Plan 
revisions for Large and Small Municipal Waste Combustors (MWC) 
submitted by the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental 
Protection (DEEP) on October 22, 2008. The revised Plan is in response 
to amended emission guidelines (EGs) and new source performance 
standards (NSPS) for Large MWCs promulgated on May 10, 2006. 
Connecticut DEEP's State Plan is for implementing and enforcing 
provisions at least as protective as the EGs applicable to existing 
Large and Small MWC units pursuant to 40 CFR part 60, Subparts Cb and 
BBBB, respectively.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective June 11, 2013, unless 
EPA receives adverse comments by May 13, 2013. If adverse comments are 
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule 
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not 
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R01-OAR-2013-0109 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: [email protected]
    3. Fax: (617) 918-0653.
    4. Mail: ``Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2013-0109,'' 
Ida McDonnell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England 
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, Toxic, & 
Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code 
OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Ida 
McDonnell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England 
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, Toxic, & 
Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code 
OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912. Such deliveries are only accepted 
during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional 
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 
4:30, excluding legal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-
2013-0109. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov, or 
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. 
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email 
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your 
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of 
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on 
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that 
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office 
Square--Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, 
you contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding 
legal holidays.
    In addition, copies of the state submittal are also available for 
public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the 
Bureau of Air Management, Department of Energy and Environmental 
Protection, State Office Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-
1630.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick Bird, Air Permits, Toxic, & 
Indoor Programs Unit, Air Programs Branch, Office of Ecosystem 
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, 5 Post 
Office Square, Mail Code: OEP05-2, Boston, MA, 02109-0287. The 
telephone number is (617) 918-1287. Mr. Bird can also be reached via 
electronic mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in 
this preamble.

I. What is a state plan?
II. Why does EPA need to approve state plans?
III. Why does EPA regulate air emissions from MWCs?
IV. What history does Connecticut DEEP have with MWC State Plans?
V. Why did Connecticut DEEP revise the MWC State Plan?
VI. What revisions have been made to the State Plan?
    A. Applicability
    B. Emission Limits
    C. Testing
    D. Monitoring
    E. Recordkeeping
    F. Compliance
VII. Why is EPA approving Connecticut DEEP's revised State Plan?
VIII. Final Action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is a State Plan?

    Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires pollutants 
controlled under new source performance standards (NSPS) also be 
controlled at existing sources in the same source category. Once an 
NSPS is issued, EPA then publishes emission guidelines (EGs) applicable 
to the control of the same pollutant for existing (designated) 
facilities. States with designated facilities must develop a state plan 
to adopt the EGs into their body of regulations. States must also 
include in their State Plans other elements, such as legal authority, 
inventories, and public participation documentation to demonstrate 
their ability to enforce the State Plans.

[[Page 21847]]

II. Why does EPA need to approve state plans?

    Under section 129 of the CAA, EGs are not federally enforceable. 
Section 129(b)(2) of the CAA requires states to submit state plans to 
EPA for approval. Each state must show that its state plan will carry 
out and enforce the EGs. State Plans must be at least as protective as 
the EGs and will become federally enforceable upon EPA's approval. The 
procedures for adopting and submitting state plans are in 40 CFR part 
60, Subpart B.

III. Why does EPA regulate air emissions from MWCs?

    When burned, municipal solid wastes emit various air pollutants, 
including hydrochloric acid, dioxin/furan, toxic metals (lead, cadmium, 
and mercury) and particulate matter. Mercury is highly hazardous and is 
of particular concern because it persists in the environment and 
bioaccumulates through the food web. Serious human health effects, 
primarily to the nervous system, have been associated with exposures to 
mercury. Harmful effects in wildlife have also been reported; these 
include nervous system damage and behavioral and reproductive deficits. 
Human and wildlife exposure to mercury occur mainly through eating of 
fish. When inhaled, mercury vapor attacks the lung tissue and is a 
cumulative poison. Short-term exposure to mercury in certain forms can 
cause hallucinations and impair consciousness. Long-term exposure to 
mercury in certain forms can affect the central nervous system and 
cause kidney damage.
    Exposure to particulate matter can aggravate existing respiratory 
and cardiovascular disease and increase risk of premature death. 
Hydrochloric acid is a clear colorless gas. Chronic exposure to 
hydrochloric acid has been reported to cause gastritis, chronic 
bronchitis, dermatitis, and photosensitization. Acute exposure to high 
levels of chlorine in humans may result in chest pain, vomiting, toxic 
pneumonitis, pulmonary edema, and death. At lower levels, chlorine is a 
potent irritant to the eyes, the upper respiratory tract, and lungs.
    Exposure to dioxin and furan can cause skin disorders, cancer, and 
reproductive effects such as endometriosis. These pollutants can also 
affect the immune system.

IV. What history does Connecticut DEEP have with MWC state plans?

    On May 15, 2000, the Connecticut Department of Energy and 
Environmental Protection (DEEP), formally known as the Connecticut 
Department of Environmental Protection, submitted a section 111(d)/129 
State Plan for implementing and enforcing EGs and NSPS for existing and 
new Large Municipal Waste Combustors (MWCs) pursuant to 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart Cb and Eb, respectively. While Subpart Cb and Eb applies only 
to Large MWCs capable of combusting greater than 250 tons of municipal 
solid waste (MSW) per day, Connecticut DEEP's State Plan and the Plan's 
enforceable mechanism, the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies 
section 22a-174-38 (Section 38), applies to all MWC units within the 
State of Connecticut, regardless of combusting capacity. EPA approved 
this plan on April 21, 2000 (65 FR 21354).
    Connecticut DEEP made four revisions to the Plan since it was 
originally approved. The first revision was submitted on November 28, 
2000, and the second was submitted on October 15, 2001. These revisions 
involved changes to Section 38, including revisions to nitrogen oxides 
(NOX) limits and related regulatory provisions in the 
State's ozone SIP to further reduce NOX emissions from MWCs. 
Changes made in the first and second revisions were approved by EPA on 
December 6, 2001 (66 FR 63311).
    On September 16, 2004, Connecticut DEEP submitted its third 
revision to the Plan. The third revision was in response to EPA's 
December 6, 2000 promulgation of NSPS and EGs for new and existing 
Small MWCs (40 CFR part 60, subpart AAAA and BBBB, respectively). Small 
MWCs are defined as MWCs capable of combusting between 35 and 250 tons 
of MSW per day. Certain monitoring, recordkeeping, and administrative 
requirements were added to Section 38 pursuant to the requirements of 
Subpart AAAA and BBBB. EPA approved this revised Plan on February 25, 
2005 (70 FR 9226).

V. Why did Connecticut DEEP revise the MWC state plan?

    Section 129(a)(5) of the CAA requires EPA to conduct a 5-year 
review of NSPS and EGs for solid waste incinerators and amend standards 
and requirements as appropriate. Accordingly, EPA promulgated amended 
standards and requirements for Large MWCs on May 10, 2006 (71 FR 
27324). This rulemaking included revised limits for dioxin/furan (only 
for units equipped with electrostatic precipitators), mercury, cadmium, 
lead, particulate matter, and nitrogen oxides (for some types of 
units). It also contained revisions to the compliance testing 
provisions to require increased data availability from continuous 
emissions monitoring systems (CEMS). CEMS are required to generate at 
least ninety-five percent (95%) data availability on a calendar year 
basis and at least ninety percent (90%) data availability on a calendar 
quarter basis. The compliance testing provisions have also been revised 
to allow the optional use of CEMS to monitor particulate matter and 
mercury. Other revisions include:
     Operator stand-in provisions to clarify how long a shift 
supervisor is allowed to be off site when a provisionally certified 
control room operator is standing in;
     An eight-hour block average for measuring activated carbon 
injection rate;
     A provision for waiver of operating parameter limits 
during the mercury performance test and for two weeks preceding the 
test, as is already allowed for dioxin testing;
     A revision to relative accuracy criterion for sulfur 
dioxide and carbon monoxide CEMS;
     Flexibility to the annual compliance testing schedule so 
that a facility tests once per calendar year, but no less than nine 
months and no more than 15 months since the previous test;
     Allowing use of parametric monitoring limits from an 
exceptionally well-operated MWC unit to be applied to all identical 
units at the same plant site without retesting for dioxin;
     The option of monitoring the activated carbon injection 
pressure or equivalent parameter; and
     Clarifying the exclusion of monitoring data from 
compliance calculations.
    In response, Connecticut DEEP revised Section 38 a fourth time and 
submitted the revised State Plan to EPA on October 22, 2008. The 
submittal only addresses those portions of the State Plan that have 
been updated since EPA's April 21, 2000, December 6, 2001, and February 
25, 2005 approvals. EPA is taking action on the October 22, 2008 State 
Plan revision in today's Federal Register.

VI. What revisions have been made to the state plan?

    In previous versions of Connecticut DEEP's State Plan for Large and 
Small MWCs, the Plan and its enforceable mechanism applied to existing 
and new source MWCs. Connecticut DEEP included the two sets of 
requirements cognizant that a state plan only requires a state to 
develop an enforceable mechanism for existing sources. NSPS are 
independently applicable and federally enforceable, and therefore

[[Page 21848]]

requirements for new units subject to the NSPS are not required in a 
state plan. The revised State Plan submitted to EPA on October 22, 2008 
eliminates requirements for new MWCs within the State of Connecticut. 
The title of the Plan is changed accordingly, eliminating reference to 
NSPS.
    Connecticut DEEP made several revisions to the enforceable 
mechanism (Section 38) of the State Plan. Revisions serve the primary 
purpose of amending the regulation in accordance with EPA's 2006 5-year 
amendments to Large MWC EGs (71 FR 27324). Connecticut DEEP has also 
made revisions outside the scope of EPA's 2006 revised MWC rule. The 
following subsections summarize the changes made to Section 38.

A. Applicability

    Requirements for new MWCs are eliminated from Section 38 because 
NSPS requirements are independently applicable and federally 
enforceable, and therefore redundant in a state regulation. 
Applicability requirements and a definition concerning co-fired 
combustors are eliminated from Section 38 because no existing co-fired 
combustors operate within Connecticut DEEP's jurisdiction. Revised 
NOX emission limits in Section 38 are more stringent than 
NOX limits in RCSA section 22a-174-22, a state regulation to 
control NOX emissions. Connecticut DEEP is eliminating units 
subject to Section 38 from the applicability of RCSA section 22a-174-22 
because of the more stringent NOX emission limits in Section 
38.

B. Emission Limits

    The emission limits for particulate matter, cadmium, and lead are 
reduced consistent with EPA's May 2006 EGs for Large MWCs. Emission 
limits for NOX and mercury were reduced beyond the limits 
set in EPA's May 2006 EGs for Large MWCs. The more stringent 
NOX and mercury limits are also being submitted for approval 
in the revised State Plan.

C. Testing

    Section 38's annual performance test schedule is revised consistent 
with EPA's May 2006 EGs for Large MWCs to allow annual performance 
tests to occur no less than nine and no more than 15 months following 
the previous performance test. Initial performance test requirements 
are removed from Section 38 because they are not applicable to existing 
MWCs.

D. Monitoring

    Relative accuracy criteria are added for sulfur dioxide and carbon 
monoxide, and operational indicator requirements are added to carbon 
injection systems used to control dioxin/furan or mercury. Revisions to 
monitoring requirements are consistent with EPA's May 2006 EGs for 
Large MWCs.

E. Recordkeeping

    New provisions (subdivision (12) and (13) of subsection (k)) are 
added to Section 38 requiring more stringent recordkeeping requirements 
for MWC owners. These new requirements are beyond the scope of EPA's 
Large and Small MWC recordkeeping requirements, and Connecticut DEEP 
did not submit these provisions for approval into the Plan.

F. Compliance

    Outdated compliance schedules are eliminated from Section 38.

VII. Why is EPA approving Connecticut DEEP's revised State plan?

    EPA has evaluated the MWC State Plan submitted by Connecticut DEEP 
for consistency with the Act, EPA guidelines and policy. EPA has 
determined that Connecticut DEEP's State Plan meets all requirements 
and, therefore, EPA is approving Connecticut DEEP's Plan to implement 
and enforce the EGs, as it applies to existing Large and Small MWCs.
    EPA's approval of Connecticut's State Plan is based on our findings 
that:
    (1) Connecticut DEEP provided adequate public notice of public 
hearings for the proposed rule-making that allows Connecticut to carry 
out and enforce provisions that are at least as protective as the EGs 
for Large and Small MWCs, and
    (2) Connecticut DEEP demonstrated legal authority to adopt emission 
standards and compliance schedules applicable to the designated 
facilities; enforce applicable laws, regulations, standards and 
compliance schedules; seek injunctive relief; obtain information 
necessary to determine compliance; require record keeping; conduct 
inspections and tests; require the use of monitors; require emission 
reports of owners and operators; and make emission data publicly 
available.

VIII. Final Action

    EPA is approving Connecticut DEEP's revised State Plan for existing 
Large and Small MWCs. EPA is publishing this action without prior 
proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment 
and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules 
section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a 
separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the State 
Plan should relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be 
effective June 11, 2013 without further notice unless the Agency 
receives relevant adverse comments by May 13, 2013.
    If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a notice 
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will 
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in 
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not 
institute a second comment period on the proposed rule. All parties 
interested in commenting on the proposed rule should do so at this 
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this 
rule will be effective on June 11, 2013 and no further action will be 
taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if EPA receives adverse 
comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that 
provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 
as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an 
adverse comment.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
State Plan submittal that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);

[[Page 21849]]

     does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 11, 2013. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of 
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for 
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness 
of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final 
rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel 
notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed 
rules section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an 
immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so 
that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in 
the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in 
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Administrative 
practice and procedure, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Waste treatment and 
disposal.

    Dated: March 27, 2013.
H. Curtis Spalding,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

    Title 40 Part 62 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as 
follows:

PART 62--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF STATE PLANS FOR DESIGNATED 
FACILITIES AND POLLUTANTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart H--Connecticut

0
2. Section 62.1500 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(4) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  62.1500  Identification of Plan.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Revised State Plan for Large and Small Municipal Waste 
Combustors was submitted on October 22, 2008. Revisions included 
amendments to Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies section 22a-
174-38 (Section 38) in response to amended emission guidelines for 
Large MWCs (40 CFR part 60, subpart Cb) published on May 10, 2006 (71 
FR 27324). Certain new provisions of Section 38 (subdivision (12) and 
(13) of subsection (k)) were revised in the state regulation, but not 
submitted for approval in the State Plan.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-08648 Filed 4-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P