Federal Plan Requirements for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills That Commenced Construction On or Before July 17, 2014, and Have Not Been Modified or Reconstructed Since July 17, 2014, 43745-43757 [2019-17822]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
‘‘(51)’’ in numerical order to read as
follows:
Subpart Q—Iowa
§ 52.820
2. In § 52.820, the table in paragraph
(e) is amended by adding the entry
■
*
*
43745
(e) * * *
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
EPA-APPROVED IOWA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS
Applicable
geographic
or nonattainment
area
Name of nonregulatory SIP revision
*
*
*
(51) Sections 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Prong Statewide
4 Requirements for the 2006 Fine Particulate Matter, 2012 Fine Particulate Matter,
2010 Nitrogen Dioxide, 2010 Sulfur Dioxide, 2008 Ozone, and 2015 Ozone NAAQS.
■
3. Revise § 52.842 to read as follows:
§ 52.842
Visibility protection.
The requirements of section 169A of
the Clean Air Act are met because the
Regional Haze plan submitted by Iowa
on March 25, 2008 and supplemented
on May 14, 2019, includes fully
approvable measures for meeting the
requirements of the Regional Haze Rule
including 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3) and
51.308(e) with respect to emissions of
NOX and SO2 from electric generating
units.
[FR Doc. 2019–18137 Filed 8–21–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0338; FRL–9998–62–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AU52
Federal Plan Requirements for
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills That
Commenced Construction On or
Before July 17, 2014, and Have Not
Been Modified or Reconstructed Since
July 17, 2014
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this action, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
proposes a federal plan to implement
the Emission Guidelines and
Compliance Times for Municipal Solid
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
State
submittal
date
EPA Approval date
*
*
1/17/2013; [Date of publication of
7/28/
the final rule in the
2013; 7/
Federal Register],
29/2013;
[Federal Register
7/29/
citation of the final
2013;
rule].
12/22/
2015;
11/30/
2018; 5/
14/2019.
Waste Landfills (2016 MSW Landfills
EG) for existing MSW landfills located
in states and Indian country where state
plans or tribal plans are not in effect.
This proposed MSW Landfills Federal
Plan includes the same elements as
required for a state plan: Identification
of legal authority and mechanisms for
implementation; inventory of
designated facilities; emissions
inventory; emission limits; compliance
schedules; a process for the EPA or state
review of design plans for site-specific
gas collection and control systems
(GCCS); testing, monitoring, reporting
and record keeping requirements; public
hearing requirements; and progress
reporting requirements. Additionally,
this action summarizes implementation
and delegation of authority of the MSW
Landfills Federal Plan.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be
received on or before October 7, 2019.
Public Hearing. We will hold a public
hearing on September 6, 2019 from 1:00
p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Daylight
Time) in Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina as specified in the ADDRESSES
section of this preamble. If no one
contacts the EPA requesting to speak at
the public hearing to be held concerning
this action by August 27, 2019, the
public hearing will not take place.
Information regarding whether or not a
hearing will be held will be posted on
the rule’s website located at https://
www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-airpollution/municipal-solid-wastelandfills-new-source-performancestandards. EPA does not intend to
publish any future documents in the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Explanation
*
*
This action approves the following CAA elements: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)—prong 4. [EPA–
R07–OAR–2019–0468; FRL–9998–40–Region 7].
Federal Register regarding a public
hearing on this proposed action and
directs all inquiries regarding a hearing
to the website and contact person. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for
information on registering and attending
a public hearing.
ADDRESSES: Comments. You may send
comments, identified by Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0338, by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov/ (our
preferred method). Follow the online
instrucations for submitting comments.
• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2019–0338 in the subject line of the
message.
• Fax: (202) 566–9744. Attention
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–
0338.
• Mail: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center,
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–
0338, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20460.
• Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket
Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20004. The Docket
Center’s hours of operation are 8:30
a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday (except
federal holidays).
• Public Hearing: A public hearing
will be held at the U.S. EPA’s North
Carolina campus located at 109 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711.
Instructions: All submisison received
must include the Docket ID No. for this
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
43746
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
rulemaking. Comments received may be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov/ including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions about this proposed action,
contact Andrew Sheppard, Sector
Policies and Programs Division (E143–
03), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone
number: (919) 541–4161; fax number:
(919) 541–0516; and email address:
sheppard.andrew@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public hearing. Please contact
Virginia Hunt at (919) 541–0832 or by
email at hunt.virginia@epa.gov to
register to speak at the public hearing,
or to inquire as to whether a public
hearing will be held.
Docket. The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0338. All
documents in the docket are listed on
Regulations.gov. Although listed, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(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. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in Regulations.gov
or in hard copy at the EPA Docket
Center, Room 3334, WJC West Building,
1301 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC. The Public Reading
Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566–1744, and the telephone number for
the EPA Docket Center is (202) 566–
1742.
Instructions. Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–
0338. The EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov/ or email. This
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
type of information should be submitted
by mail as discussed below.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e., on the Web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
The https://www.regulations.gov/
website allows you to submit your
comment anonymously, which means
the 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 the
EPA without going through https://
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, the EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
digital storage media you submit. If the
EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, the EPA may not
be able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should not include
special characters or any form of
encryption and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about the EPA’s public docket, visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
Submitting CBI. Do not submit
information containing CBI to the EPA
through https://www.regulations.gov/ or
email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI.
For CBI information on any digital
storage media that you mail to the EPA,
mark the outside of the digital storage
media as CBI and then identify
electronically within the digital storage
media the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comments that
includes information claimed as CBI,
you must submit a copy of the
comments that does not contain the
information claimed as CBI directly to
the public docket through the
procedures outlined in Instructions
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
above. If you submit any digital storage
media that does not contain CBI, mark
the outside of the digital storage media
clearly that it does not contain CBI.
Information not marked as CBI will be
included in the public docket and the
EPA’s electronic public docket without
prior notice. Information marked as CBI
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
part 2. Send or deliver information
identified as CBI only to the following
address: OAQPS Document Control
Officer (C404–02), OAQPS, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2019–0338.
Preamble acronyms and
abbreviations. We use multiple
acronyms and terms in this preamble.
While this list may not be exhaustive, to
ease the reading of this preamble and for
reference purposes, the EPA defines the
following terms and acronyms here:
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential Business Information
CDX Central Data Exchange
CEDRI Compliance and Emissions Data
Reporting Interface
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CHIEF Clearinghouse for Inventories and
Emissions Factors
EG Emission Guidelines
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ERT Electronic Reporting Tool
GCCS Gas Collection and Control System
LFG Landfill Gas
LFGCost Landfill Gas Energy Cost Model
m3 Cubic Meter
Mg Megagram
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
NAICS North American Industry
Classification System
NESHAP National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants
NMOC Nonmethane Organic Compounds
NSPS New Source Performance Standards
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards
OMB Office of Management and Budget
ppm Parts Per Million
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
RFA Regulatory Flexible Act
RIN Regulatory Information Number
SBAR Small Business Advocacy Review
SEM Surface Emissions Monitoring
TTN Technology Transfer Network
UMRA Unfunded Mandate Reform Act
U.S.C. United States Code
VCS Voluntary Consensus Standards
Organization of this document. The
information in this preamble is
organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. Where can I get a copy of this document
and other related information?
II. Background
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
43747
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
A. What is the regulatory development
background and legal authority for this
action?
B. What is the purpose of this action?
C. What is the status of state plan
submittals?
III. What are the designated facilities?
A. What is a designated MSW landfill?
B. How do I determine if my MSW landfill
is covered by an approved and effective
state plan?
IV. Elements of the MSW Landfills Federal
Plan
A. Legal Authority and Enforcement
Mechanism
B. Inventory of Designated MSW Landfills
C. Inventory of Emissions
D. Emission Limits and Operating Limits
E. Compliance Schedule
F. Process for Review and Approval of SiteSpecific Design Plans
G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping,
and Reporting Requirements
H. Requirement for Public Hearing
V. Summary of Proposed MSW Landfills
Federal Plan Requirements
A. What are the proposed applicability
requirements?
B. What are the proposed compliance
schedules?
C. What emissions and operating limits is
the EPA proposing to incorporate into
the federal plan?
D. What are the proposed performance
testing and monitoring requirements?
E. What are the proposed recordkeeping
and reporting requirements?
VI. Implementation of the Federal Plan and
Delegation
A. Background of Authority
B. Mechanisms for Transferring Authority
C. Implementing Authority
D. Delegation of the Federal Plan and
Retained Authorities
VII. Title V Operating Permits
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
part 51
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
to Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
This proposed action addresses
existing MSW landfills and associated
solid waste management programs. For
the purpose of this regulation, existing
MSW landfills are those that accepted
waste after November 8, 1987, and
commenced construction on or before
July 17, 2014. Table 1 of this preamble
lists the associated regulated industrial
source categories that are the subject of
this action. Table 1 of this preamble is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide for readers regarding
the entities that this proposed action is
likely to affect. The proposed standards,
once promulgated, will be directly
applicable to the designated facilities.
TABLE 1—REGULATED ENTITIES
Source category
Examples of potentially regulated entities
Industry: Air and water resource and solid waste management ..............
Industry: Refuse systems—solid waste landfills .......................................
State, local, and tribal government agencies ............................................
Solid waste landfills .....................................................
Solid waste landfills .....................................................
Administration of air and water resource and solid
waste management programs.
1 North
NAICS 1
924110
562212
924110
American Industry Classification System.
B. Where can I get a copy of this
document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the
docket, an electronic copy of this action
is available on the internet. Following
signature by the EPA Administrator, the
EPA will post a copy of this proposed
action at https://www.epa.gov/
stationary-sources-air-pollution/
municipal-solid-waste-landfills-newsource-performance-standards.
Following publication in the Federal
Register, the EPA will post the Federal
Register version of this proposed action
and key technical documents at this
same website.
As provided by the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)), the
EPA has generally described the
proposed changes to part 62 rather than
setting out the specific changes. For the
convenience of the reader, the EPA is
also providing regulatory text as it
would look with the proposed changes
in redline in the docket rather than in
this Federal Register document. See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
Proposed Regulatory Text for MSW
Landfills Federal Plan (40 CFR part 62,
subpart OOO), in Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2019–0338. Submit public
comments using the same mechanisms
described in the DATES and ADDRESSES
sections of this preamble.
II. Background
A. What is the regulatory development
background and legal authority for this
action?
Under authority of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), the EPA has promulgated several
regulations that apply to MSW landfills.
In 1996, under CAA section 111, the
EPA promulgated the original standards
of performance for new MSW landfills
(i.e., new source performance standards
or NSPS) at 40 CFR part 60, subpart
WWW, and EG for existing MSW
landfills at 40 CFR part 60, subpart Cc
(61 FR 9905; March 12, 1996). The
NSPS and EG are based on the
Administrator’s determination that
MSW landfills cause, or contribute
significantly to, air pollution that may
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
reasonably be anticipated to endanger
public health or welfare. In 1999, the
EPA promulgated a federal plan under
CAA section 111 to implement the 1996
EG for landfills located in states that did
not have approved and effective state
plans (40 CFR part 62, subpart GGG) (64
FR 60689, November 8, 1999). The
federal plan was necessary to
implement the 1996 EG for MSW
landfills located in states and Indian
country where state plans or tribal plans
were not in effect. In 2003, the EPA
promulgated national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP) under CAA section 112 to
regulate hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
emissions from MSW landfills (40 CFR
part 63, subpart AAAA) (68 FR 2227,
January 16, 2003). The 2003 NESHAP
fulfills the requirements of CAA section
112(d), which requires the EPA to
regulate HAP listed in CAA section
112(b) and helps implement the Urban
Air Toxics Strategy under CAA section
112(k). To control emissions of HAP
from area sources in urban areas, the
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
43748
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
EPA developed a strategy identifying 33
HAP that present the greatest threat to
public health in the largest number of
urban areas as the result of emissions
from area sources. MSW landfills were
listed on July 19, 1999, as an area source
category to be regulated pursuant to
CAA section 112(k) because 13 of the
listed HAP are emitted from MSW
landfills.
In 2016, the EPA reviewed and
revised the MSW Landfills NSPS at 40
CFR part 60, subpart XXX, and the EG
for existing MSW landfills at 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Cf (81 FR 59276 and
59332, August 29, 2016). For the 2016
rulemaking, the EPA reviewed the NSPS
and EG based on changes in the landfills
industry since the rules were first
promulgated in 1996, including changes
to the size and number of existing
landfills, industry practices, and gas
control methods and technologies.
Based on its review, the EPA made
several revisions to further reduce
emissions of landfill gas and its
components. The major changes
included reducing the emissions
threshold at which an MSW landfill
must install controls from 50 megagrams
(Mg) per year of nonmethane organic
compounds (NMOC) to 34 Mg per year
NMOC. Additionally, the EPA
developed a subcategory for closed
landfills because closed landfills do not
produce as much landfill gas (LFG) as
an active landfill. Landfills in this
subcategory remain subject to an NMOC
emission threshold of 50 Mg per year for
determining when controls must be
installed or can be removed. The EPA is
now proposing a federal plan for the
2016 MSW Landfills EG.
B. What is the purpose of this action?
On August 29, 2016, the EPA
promulgated revisions to the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG. The CAA regulations
implementing EG require states with
existing MSW landfills subject to the EG
to submit to the EPA state plans to
implement and enforce the EG. The
state plans to implement the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG were due on May 30, 2017.
For states that did not submit an
approvable plan by that deadline, CAA
section 111 and 40 CFR 60.27(c) and (d)
require the EPA to develop, implement,
and enforce a federal plan for existing
MSW landfills located in any state (i.e.,
state, territory, or protectorate) or Indian
country that does not have an approved
state plan that implements the 2016
MSW Landfills EG. This action proposes
an MSW Landfills Federal Plan to
implement the 2016 MSW Landfills EG
for those areas without an approved
state plan. For the purposes of this
preamble and the proposed MSW
Landfills Federal Plan, the word ‘‘state’’
means any of the 50 United States and
the protectorates of the United States.
The word ‘‘protectorate’’ means
American Samoa, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia,
Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands,
and the Virgin Islands.
C. What is the status of state plan
submittals?
The EPA has received eight plans to
implement the 2016 MSW Landfills EG,
which includes submittals form the
following: Arizona (one plan covering
Maricopa County, one covering Pinal
County, and another covering the
remainder of the state), California,
Delaware, New Mexico (one plan
covering Albuquerque–Bernalillo
County and another covering the rest of
the state), and West Virginia. The EPA
has proposed action on these state
plans, but the actions have not been
finalized. See e.g., 84 FR 32363 (July 8,
2019) (Arizona); 84 FR 32365 (July 8,
2019) (Pinal County, Arizona); 84 FR
31278 (July 1, 2019) (West Virginia); 84
FR 31279 (July 1, 2019) (Delaware); 84
FR 29138 (June 21, 2019) (New Mexico
and Albuquerque–Bernalillo County);
and 84 FR 36863 (July 30, 2019)
(California). The plan from Maricopa
County, Arizona, was withdrawn on
July 3, 2019. The EPA is not aware of
any tribes that have developed plans to
implement the 2016 MSW Landfills EG
or submitted negative declaration
letters. The EPA is proposing this MSW
Landfills Federal Plan to implement the
2016 MSW Landfills EG in states,
territories, protectorates, and Indian
country, that do not have an approved
and effective state or tribal plan.
The MSW landfills covered by the
state plans submitted to date would not
be subject to the MSW Landfills Federal
Plan once the state plan that includes
those MSW landfills has been approved
and becomes effective. However, MSW
landfills located in those states would
be subject to the federal plan (or
portions of the federal plan) in the event
that the state plan is subsequently
disapproved, in whole or in part. Table
2 of this preamble summarizes the
status of state plans and negative
declarations as of July 15, 2019.
TABLE 2—STATUS OF STATE PLANS
Status
States
I. EPA-Approved State Plans ..............................
II. Negative Declaration Submitted to the EPA ...
III. Final State Plans Submitted to the EPA ........
None.
None.
Arizona (one plan covering Pinal County, and another covering the remainder of the state),
California, Delaware, New Mexico (one plan covering Albuquerque and Bernalillo County
and another covering the rest of the state), and West Virginia.
Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois,
Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan,
Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah,
Vermont, Virginia, Virgin Islands, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming.
IV. EPA Has Not Received a Final State Plan or
Negative Declaration.
As the EPA Regional offices approve
implementation plans, they will also, in
the same action, amend the appropriate
subpart of 40 CFR part 62 to codify their
approvals. MSW landfill owners or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
operators can also contact the EPA
Regional office for the state in which
their MSW landfill is located to
determine whether there is an approved
and effective state plan in place.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Table 3 of this preamble lists the
addresses for the EPA Regional offices
and the states and Indian countries that
they cover.
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
43749
TABLE 3—EPA REGIONAL OFFICES
Region
Address
States and territories
Region I ............
5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109–3912 ...
Region II ...........
Region III ..........
290 Broadway, New York, NY 10007–1866 .............................
Air Protection Division, Mail Code 3AP00, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103–1129.
61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303–3104 .....................
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode
Island, Vermont.
New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands.
Virginia, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, West Virginia.
Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee.
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio.
Region IV .........
Region V ..........
Region IX .........
Mail Code A–17J, 77 West Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Il 60604–
3590.
1st International Building, 1201 Elm St., Dallas, TX 75270 .....
Air and Waste Management Division, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219.
Director, Air Program, Office of Partnerships and Regulatory
Assistance, Mail Code 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202–1129.
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105 .....................
Region X ..........
1200 6th Avenue, Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101 .....................
Region VI .........
Region VII ........
Region VIII .......
III. What are the designated facilities?
A. What is a designated MSW landfill?
The designated facility for this MSW
Landfills Federal Plan is each MSW
landfill that (1) commenced
construction, reconstruction, or
modification prior to July 17, 2014, and
has not been modified or reconstructed
since then, and (2) has accepted waste
since November 8, 1987, or has capacity
for future waste deposition.
This MSW Landfills Federal Plan will
apply to existing MSW landfills located
in: (1) Any state or portion of Indian
country for which a state or tribal plan
that implements the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG has not become effective in
whole or in part; (2) any state or portion
of Indian country for which the state or
tribe submitted a negative declaration;
(3) any state or portion of Indian
country with an effective state or tribal
plan that subsequently is vacated in
whole or in part; or (4) any state or
portion of Indian country with an
effective plan that subsequently revises
any component of the plan (e.g., the
underlying legal authority or
enforceable mechanism) such that the
state or tribal plan no longer meets the
requirements of the 2016 MSW Landfill
EG. An MSW landfill that meets any of
these criteria is covered by the MSW
Landfills Federal Plan until a state or
tribal plan to implement and enforce the
2016 MSW Landfills EG is approved
according to the requirements in 40 CFR
part 60, subpart B, and becomes
effective. If a state or tribal plan is
approved in part, portions of the federal
plan will apply to the designated MSW
landfills in lieu of the disapproved
portions of the plan until the state or
tribe addresses the deficiencies in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas.
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska.
Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming.
Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa,
Guam, Northern Mariana Islands.
Washington, Alaska, Idaho, Oregon.
plan and the revised plan is approved
by the EPA.
If an existing MSW landfill subject to
the federal plan increases its permitted
volume design capacity through vertical
or horizontal expansion (i.e., is
modified) on or after July 17, 2014, it
would be subject to the MSW Landfills
NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart XXX)
(see 81 FR 59332, August 29, 2016) and
would no longer be subject to the
federal plan. An existing MSW landfill
that makes operational changes without
increasing the horizontal or vertical
dimensions of the landfill would
continue to be subject to the federal or
state plan that implements the 2016
MSW Landfills EG, rather than the
NSPS.
B. How do I determine if my MSW
landfill is covered by an approved and
effective state plan?
An approved state or tribal plan is a
plan that the EPA has reviewed and
approved in whole or in part based on
the requirements in 40 CFR part 60,
subpart B, to implement and enforce the
2016 MSW Landfills EG. Throughout
this preamble, references to approved
state plans apply to both whole state
plans and portions of state plans. The
state plan becomes effective on the date
specified in the notice published in the
Federal Register announcing the EPA’s
approval. The effective date of this
action will be 30 days after the final
federal plan is published in the Federal
Register.
The 2016 MSW Landfills Federal Plan
will not apply to landfills appropriately
covered by an approved and effective
state or tribal plan. If a state or tribal
plan becomes effective before
promulgation of the federal plan, the
promulgated MSW Landfills Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Plan will not apply to landfills
appropriately covered by that plan.
Promulgation of this MSW Landfills
Federal Plan does not preclude a state
or tribe from submitting a plan later. If
a state or tribe submits a plan after
promulgation of the MSW Landfills
Federal Plan, the EPA will review and
approve or disapprove the plan. Upon
the effective date of the approved state
or tribal plan, the federal plan will no
longer apply. States and tribes are,
therefore, encouraged to continue their
efforts to develop and submit state and
tribal plans to the EPA for approval.
MSW landfill owners or operators can
contact the EPA Regional office for the
state or Indian country in which their
MSW landfill is located to determine
whether there is an approved and
effective state plan in place. Table 3 of
this preamble lists the addresses of the
EPA Regional offices and the states and
Indian countries that they cover.
IV. Elements of the MSW Landfills
Federal Plan
Section 111(d) of the CAA, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 7411(d), requires
states to develop and implement state
plans for MSW landfills to implement
and enforce the 2016 MSW Landfills
EG. This proposed federal plan will
establish standards in the absence of an
approved and effective state plan.
Because this proposed federal plan will
establish standards in the absence of an
approved and effective state plan, this
action includes the same elements as a
state plan: (1) Identification of legal
authority and mechanisms for
implementation; (2) inventory of
designated facilities; (3) inventory of
emissions; (4) emission limits; (5)
compliance schedules; (6) process for
the EPA or state review of site-specific
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
43750
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
design plans for GCCS; (7) testing,
monitoring, reporting, and
recordkeeping requirements; (8) public
hearing requirements; and (9) progress
reporting requirements. This section of
the preamble explains the proposed
federal plan elements. Additionally,
Table 4 of this preamble identifies each
element and indicates where it is
located or codified.
TABLE 4—LOCATION OF MSW LANDFILLS FEDERAL PLAN ELEMENTS
Element of the MSW landfills federal plan
Where located or codified
a. Identification of legal authority and mechanisms for implementation ..
b. Inventory of designated facilities ..........................................................
c. Inventory of emissions ..........................................................................
d. Emission limits ......................................................................................
e. Compliance schedules .........................................................................
f. Process for review and approval of site-specific design plans for
GCCS.
g. Testing, monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements ........
h. Public hearing requirements ................................................................
i. Progress reports ....................................................................................
A. Legal Authority and Enforcement
Mechanism
Section 111(d) of the CAA directs the
EPA to develop a federal plan for states
that do not submit approvable state
plans. Section 111 of the CAA provides
the EPA with the authority to
implement and enforce the federal plan
in cases where the state fails to submit
a fully satisfactory state plan.
B. Inventory of Designated MSW
Landfills
The docket for this action includes an
inventory of the MSW landfills that may
potentially be covered by this proposed
federal plan in the absence of approved
state or tribal plans. There are an
estimated 1,913 landfills potentially
covered by this proposed federal plan.
These landfills exist in all 50 states and
the U.S. territories of Puerto Rico and
the Virgin Islands. Additionally, one
tribal entity, the Salt River Pima
Maricopa Indian Community, would be
covered by this proposed federal plan.
The EPA developed the inventory of
landfills by identifying existing landfills
that are expected to be covered by the
federal plan as of July 15, 2019, using
the databases developed for the 2016
MSW Landfills EG and NSPS. For a
discussion of the sources, their
locations, and information used to
develop the source list, see the
memorandum, Developing a Federal
Plan Source and Emission Inventory,
which is available in the docket for this
action. Any MSW landfill that meets the
applicability criteria in this action will
be subject to the federal plan, regardless
of whether it is listed in the inventory
in Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–
0338. The EPA requests that states or
owners or operators identify additional
sources for inclusion on the list during
the comment period for this action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
Section 111(d)(2) of the CAA and section IV.A of this preamble.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0338.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0338.
40 CFR 62.714 of proposed subpart OOO.
40 CFR 62.712 of proposed subpart OOO.
Section IV.F of this preamble.
40 CFR 62.718, 62.722, 62.724, and 62.726 of proposed subpart OOO
and section IV.G of this preamble.
Section IV.H of this preamble.
Section IV.I of this preamble.
C. Inventory of Emissions
The EPA estimated the emissions
from the inventory of existing MSW
landfills that are expected to be covered
by the federal plan as of July 15, 2019.
Pollutant emissions are expressed in Mg
NMOC per year in calendar year 2019.
Table 5 of this preamble summarizes the
results of the inventory. Although the
EPA has proposed to approve some state
plans in whole or in part, to date none
of the actions on the proposed state
plans have been finalized. Therefore,
the inventory includes all existing MSW
landfills in the U.S. that meet the
applicable criteria. The inventory will
be updated before promulgation of the
federal plan to exclude sources and
emissions that are located in states for
which an approved state plan is
subsequently promulgated.
The EPA estimated emissions from
MSW landfills by first estimating the
LFG generation rates of landfills
identified in the source inventory, using
a first-order decay equation. The decay
equation uses default values from
Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors (AP–42) for the methane
generation potential (L0), the methane
generation rate (k), and the NMOC
concentration.1 Next, the EPA estimated
when the MSW landfills in the source
inventory would control emissions
under the previous regulatory level
(NMOC emissions of 50 Mg per year).
To determine the timing of these
controls, the EPA modeled emissions
using Tier 1 default values from 40 CFR
part 60, subpart WWW for the L0 and k,
but applied the NMOC concentration in
AP–42 for determining when MSW
landfills would meet the regulatory
1 U.S. EPA, AP–42, Fifth Edition, Compilation of
Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume 1:
Stationary Point and Area Sources. 1995. https://
www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NMOC emissions threshold. The Tier 1
default values in subpart WWW for L0
and k are conservatively high for the
purpose of estimating actual emissions;
therefore, they are used only for
estimating uncontrolled emissions to
determine when MSW landfills could
exceed the threshold and be required to
install a GCCS. The EPA also factored in
lag times to account for the initial 30month time period between when the
MSW landfill exceeds the emission rate
threshold until the MSW landfill must
install and operate controls, and the
periodic expansion of the GCCS into
new areas of waste placement (5 years
for active areas and 2 years for areas that
are closed or at final grade). After
determining the timing of controls
required by the regulation, the actual
amount of collected gas was estimated
using AP–42 defaults for L0, k, and
NMOC, and an assumed collection
efficiency of 85 percent and an assumed
destruction efficiency of 98 percent. The
remaining emissions, after considering
controls, represent the modeled NMOC
emissions based on LFG generation and
AP–42 default parameters minus the
emission reductions. See the
memorandum, Developing a Federal
Plan Source and Emission Inventory,
which is available in the docket for this
action, for the complete emissions
inventory, including detailed emissions
from MSW landfills in each state, and
details on the calculations used to
determine those emissions. These
estimates are based solely on the
modeled emissions remaining after
considering controls required by 40 CFR
part 60, subparts WWW and Cc, and do
not include any additional emissions
reductions from voluntary actions, such
as early installation of the GCCS.
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED
NMOC EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING
MSW LANDFILLS EXPECTED TO BE
COVERED BY THE FEDERAL PLAN
Region/state
2019 NMOC
emissions
(Mg per year)
TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED
NMOC EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING
MSW LANDFILLS EXPECTED TO BE
COVERED BY THE FEDERAL PLAN—
Continued
2019 NMOC
emissions
(Mg per year)
Region/state
Region 1
Connecticut ...........................
Maine ....................................
Massachusetts ......................
New Hampshire ....................
Rhode Island ........................
Vermont ................................
118
85
429
77
47
47
Region 9
Arizona ..................................
California ...............................
Hawaii ...................................
Nevada .................................
Region 10
Region 2
New Jersey ...........................
New York ..............................
Puerto Rico ...........................
Virgin Islands ........................
387
970
230
14
Region 3
Delaware ...............................
Maryland ...............................
Pennsylvania ........................
Virginia ..................................
West Virginia ........................
437
1,157
1,035
574
213
993
430
860
Region 5
Illinois ....................................
Indiana ..................................
Michigan ...............................
Minnesota .............................
Ohio ......................................
Wisconsin .............................
1,361
837
1,219
263
1,251
547
Region 6
Arkansas ...............................
Louisiana ..............................
New Mexico ..........................
Oklahoma .............................
Texas ....................................
346
563
201
324
2,045
Region 7
Iowa ......................................
Kansas ..................................
Missouri ................................
Nebraska ..............................
380
354
485
265
Region 8
Colorado ...............................
Montana ................................
North Dakota ........................
South Dakota ........................
Utah ......................................
Wyoming ...............................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Alaska ...................................
Idaho .....................................
Oregon ..................................
Washington ...........................
94
138
376
404
D. Emission Limits and Operating Limits
44
462
1,313
916
199
Region 4
Alabama ................................
Florida ...................................
Georgia .................................
Kentucky ...............................
Mississippi ............................
North Carolina ......................
South Carolina ......................
Tennessee ............................
597
3,018
111
38
742
86
51
78
287
48
Jkt 247001
This proposed federal plan contains
emission limits that correspond to the
2016 MSW Landfills EG, which are
summarized in section V.C of this
preamble. In accordance with 40 CFR
60.27(e), this action does not propose to
revise the final limits. Instead, it
proposes to implement the emission
limits as promulgated in the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG for existing sources in
states that do not have an approved state
plan.
E. Compliance Schedule
According to 40 CFR 60.24(e)(1),
increments of progress are required for
any compliance schedule that is longer
than 12 months. The proposed federal
plan would require owners or operators
of existing MSW landfills with design
capacities equal to or greater than 2.5
million Mg and 2.5 million cubic meters
(m3) to install GCCS within 30 months
of reaching or exceeding 34 Mg per year
NMOC. This proposed federal plan
would require owners or operators of
existing closed MSW landfills—those
that have submitted a closure report as
specified in 40 CFR 62.724(f) with
design capacities equal to or greater
than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million
m3—to install GCCS within 30 months
of reaching or exceeding 50 Mg per year
NMOC. This proposed federal plan
includes increments of progress, which
are the primary mechanisms for
ensuring progress toward final
compliance with the emission
guidelines. Each increment of progress
has a specified date for achievement
described in section V.B of this
preamble.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43751
F. Process for Review and Approval of
Site-Specific Design Plans
The 2016 MSW Landfills EG requires
plans to include a process for review
and approval of site-specific design
plans for required GCCS (see 40 CFR
60.38f(d)). As previously discussed, if
the existing MSW landfill has (1) a
design capacity equal to or greater than
2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3 and
(2) NMOC emissions equal to or
exceeding 34 Mg per year (50 Mg per
year for the closed landfill subcategory),
the landfill owner or operator must
submit the cover page containing the
engineer’s seal of the site-specific design
plan. The EPA Regional office will make
a decision within 90 days about whether
the entire plan should be submitted for
review. In cases where the state or tribe
has been delegated authority to
implement this aspect of the federal
plan, the state or tribe would review the
design plans. See section VI of this
preamble for a discussion of federal
plan delegation.
When the EPA opts to review the
entire plan, the EPA intends to review
design plans as expeditiously as
possible to allow sufficient time after
approval of the plans for the landfills to
install controls prior to the compliance
date. The EPA will initially review the
design plans for completeness and the
source will be notified if any items are
missing. The EPA will then review the
plans for acceptability, and, once that
review is completed, the EPA will notify
the source and the state or tribe in
writing of the acceptability of the plan.
If the plan is not acceptable, the source
will be given an appropriate amount of
time to make the necessary changes.
However, the date by which a GCCS
must be completed and in compliance
remains unchanged, i.e., 30 months after
the emission rate report first shows
NMOC emissions greater than or equal
to 34 Mg per year (50 Mg per year for
the closed landfill subcategory).
G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping,
and Reporting Requirements
The proposed federal plan includes
testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements, as described in
sections V.D and E of this preamble.
These proposed requirements
correspond with the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG. Testing, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements will assure initial and
ongoing compliance.
H. Requirement for Public Hearing
According to 40 CFR 60.27(f), the EPA
must provide the opportunity for a
public hearing prior to promulgation of
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
43752
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
a federal plan. For this MSW Landfills
Federal Plan, the EPA will offer the
opportunity for a public hearing in
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
as specified in the ADDRESSES and DATES
sections of this preamble.
V. Summary of Proposed MSW
Landfills Federal Plan Requirements
A. What are the proposed applicability
requirements?
The proposed federal plan
applicability criteria (40 CFR 62.711)
reflect the 2016 MSW Landfills EG (40
CFR 60.31f). The designated facility for
this MSW Landfills Federal Plan is
described in section III.A of this
preamble.
B. What are the proposed compliance
schedules?
Owners or operators of MSW landfills
subject to the federal plan will be
required to submit a design capacity
report within 90 days after the effective
date of the federal plan (40 CFR
62.724(a)). If the design capacity
indicates a capacity equal to or greater
than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3
of solid waste a landfill can accept, an
annual NMOC emission rate report must
also be submitted within 90 days after
the effective date of the federal plan and
then every 12 months until the landfill
installs a GCCS (40 CFR 62.724(c)).
If the first NMOC emission rate report
shows emissions less than 34 Mg per
year NMOC (50 Mg per year for the
closed landfill subcategory), then the
owner or operator must recalculate
NMOC emissions annually and submit
annual NMOC emission rate reports
unless the MSW landfill is closed. (See
40 CFR 62.718 for conditions under
which 5-year reports rather than annual
reports may be submitted.) If an
emission rate report shows that NMOC
emissions equal or exceed 34 Mg per
year, the owner or operator must begin
following enforceable increments of
progress to install a GCCS within 30
months of reaching or exceeding 34 Mg
per year NMOC (40 CFR 62.712).
Therefore, the generic schedule for the
increments of progress starts with the
date of the first annual emission rate
report that shows NMOC emissions
equal or exceed 34 Mg per year (50 Mg
per year for the closed landfill
subcategory) (40 CFR 62.712(c)).
Alternatively, a landfill may follow Tier
4 as discussed later in this section (40
CFR 62.718(a)(6)). For the closed
landfill subcategory, if an emission rate
report shows that NMOC emissions
equal or exceed 50 Mg per year, the
owner or operator must begin following
enforceable increments of progress to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
install a GCCS within 30 months of
reaching or exceeding 50 Mg per year
NMOC.
This proposed MSW Landfills Federal
Plan includes the five increments of
progress and provides flexibility to
establish the increment dates (40 CFR
62.712). The proposed MSW Landfills
Federal Plan contains a generic
compliance schedule (Table 1 to 40 CFR
part 62, subpart OOO) that applies to
designated MSW landfills unless the
EPA approves an alternative schedule
according to the criteria in 40 CFR
60.27(e)(2).
The five mandatory increments of
progress are as follows:
1. Submit final control plan (design
plan)—1 year after the first annual
emission rate report showing NMOC
emissions ≥34 Mg per year (≥50 Mg per
year for the closed landfill subcategory).
2. Award contracts for control systems
or orders for purchase of components—
20 months after the first annual
emission rate report showing NMOC
emissions ≥34 Mg per year (≥50 Mg per
year for the closed landfill subcategory).
3. Begin on-site construction or
installation of the GCCS—24 months
after the first annual emission rate
report showing NMOC emissions ≥34
Mg per year (≥50 Mg per year for the
closed landfill subcategory).
4. Complete on-site construction or
installation of the GCCS—30 months
after the first annual emission rate
report showing NMOC emissions ≥34
Mg per year (≥50 Mg per year for the
closed landfill subcategory).
5. Achieve final compliance—30
months after the first annual emission
rate report showing NMOC emissions
≥34 Mg per year (≥50 Mg per year for the
closed landfill subcategory). Note that
the initial performance test to
demonstrate compliance must be
conducted within 180 days after the
date the landfill is required to achieve
final compliance.
The date for the first, fourth, and fifth
increments is established in the 2016
MSW Landfill EG. According to 40 CFR
60.27(e)(1), federal plan compliance
times may be no less stringent than
those established in the EG.
The EPA selected the proposed dates
for the middle two increments
(awarding contract and initiating on-site
construction) to allow a reasonable
period of time for MSW landfills to
complete these activities. These
increments of progress are required by
40 CFR 60.24, but dates are not
specified in the 2016 MSW Landfills
EG. The EPA established these dates to
match the dates included in the
previous federal plan for MSW landfills
(40 CFR part 62, subpart GGG) because
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the two plans require the same
increments of progress to achieve
compliance. The proposed date for
awarding contracts is 20 months after
the first annual NMOC emission rate
report showing NMOC emissions greater
than or equal to 34 Mg per year (50 Mg
per year for the closed landfill
subcategory), which is 8 months after
the proposed date that the design plan
is due. This 8-month time frame would
allow adequate time for the regulatory
agency to review and approve the
design plan and for the MSW landfill
owner or operator to solicit bids based
on the design plan and award the
contract(s).
The proposed date for initiating onsite construction is 24 months after the
first annual emission report showing
NMOC emissions greater than or equal
to 34 Mg per year (50 Mg per year for
the closed landfill subcategory) is due (4
months after contract award). This 4month period would allow time for the
contractor to mobilize and obtain
materials necessary to begin
construction. A later date would not be
practical because the date for
completing on-site construction and
final compliance is 30 months after the
first annual emission rate report
showing NMOC emissions greater than
or equal to 34 Mg per year (50 Mg per
year for the closed landfill subcategory).
If construction is not initiated by 24
months after the first annual emission
rate report showing NMOC emissions
greater than or equal to 34 Mg per year
(50 Mg per year for the closed landfill
subcategory), it is unlikely that the
construction could be completed by the
final compliance date. Some MSW
landfills may want to initiate on-site
construction earlier to assure that they
can meet the final compliance date. The
fourth increment, completion of on-site
construction, would need to be
completed by the final compliance date
(increment 5) in order for the landfill to
achieve compliance.
Owners and operators employing Tier
4 would follow the generic compliance
schedule for Tier 4 landfills in Table 1
to 40 CFR part 62, subpart OOO.
Increment 1 is triggered by the first
measured concentration of methane of
500 parts per million (ppm) or greater,
rather than the initial NMOC emission
rate report showing NMOC emissions 34
Mg per year or greater. Landfills
employing Tier 4 would continue to
submit an annual NMOC emission rate
report (40 CFR 62.724(c)). Timing of
increments 2 through 5 for Tier 4
landfills are based on the most recent
NMOC emission rate report showing
NMOC emissions 34 Mg per year or
greater.
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
For all landfills, the EPA recognizes
that flexibility may be needed for
increment 2 (award contract) and
increment 3 (begin construction) given
facility-specific GCCS considerations
and constraints. Therefore, the EPA will
accept facility-specific compliance
schedules from MSW landfill owners or
operators, as allowed under 40 CFR
60.27(e)(2).
The MSW landfill owner or operator
would submit alternative dates for
increments 2 and 3 and a justification to
the EPA at the time the final control
plan is due (40 CFR 62.724(p)). If the
MSW landfill owner or operator is
submitting the alternative dates for
these increments, the owner or operator
should also send a copy to the
appropriate state or tribe. The EPA is
allowing alternative dates for
increments 2 and 3 to provide flexibility
to MSW landfill owners or operators.
However, owners or operators using
alternate dates for increments 2 and 3
must continue to meet the required
dates for increments 1, 4, and 5. The
EPA would review the schedule and
coordinate with the owner or operator.
C. What emissions and operating limits
is the EPA proposing to incorporate into
the federal plan?
The EPA is proposing that an MSW
landfill subject to the federal plan must
install and operate a GCCS that meets
specified emissions and operating limits
(40 CFR 62.714 and 40 CFR 62.716), if
the NMOC emissions rate is 34 Mg per
year or more (50 Mg per year or more
for the closed landfill subcategory). The
standards would require owners or
operators to operate the GCCS at a
negative pressure at each wellhead
(except during certain specified
conditions), operate the interior
wellhead at a temperature less than 55
degrees Celsius (131 degrees
Fahrenheit), and operate the collection
system so that the methane
concentration is less than 500 ppm
above background at the surface of the
landfill (40 CFR 62.716(b–(d)). The
owner or operator of a landfill must
control the collected gas by routing it to
either: (1) A non-enclosed flare designed
and operated according to the
requirements of 40 CFR 60.18, (2) an
enclosed control device achieving 98percent NMOC reduction or an outlet
concentration of 20 ppm NMOC by
volume or less, or (3) a gas treatment
system that processes the collected gas
for subsequent sale or beneficial use (40
CFR 62.714(c)).
The proposed requirements of the
federal plan are the same as the
requirements of the 2016 MSW Landfills
EG as published on August 29, 2016 (81
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
FR 59276). However, this proposed
federal plan applies a technical
correction to the compliance provisions
section and the corresponding reporting
requirement in the reporting section.
Those corrections appear in this
proposed federal plan at 40 CFR
62.720(a)(3)(ii) and 40 CFR 62.724(h)(7)
and would ensure that the owner or
operator conducts a corrective action
analysis, develops an implementation
schedule, and reports corrective
action(s) to address not only positive
pressure, but also elevated temperature.
D. What are the proposed performance
testing and monitoring requirements?
1. NMOC Emissions Rate
The EPA proposes that, to determine
if a GCCS is required, the owner or
operator must determine NMOC
emissions using one or both of the two
emission rate equations in the rule and
one of four optional methods to
determine the model inputs (referred to
as tier methods in the rule) (40 CFR
62.718(a)). Tier 1 uses default
assumptions for methane generation rate
and NMOC concentration in the
emissions model (40 CFR 62.718(a)(2)).
Tier 2 requires testing to determine a
site-specific NMOC concentration. Tier
3 requires testing to determine a sitespecific NMOC concentration and
methane generation rate (40 CFR
62.718(a)(4)). Any MSW landfill that
exceeds the NMOC emissions threshold
using Tier 2 or 3 would install a GCCS,
unless the owner or operator chooses to
use Tier 4 (40 CFR 62.718(a)(6)).
Tier 4 is based on surface emissions
monitoring (SEM) to demonstrate that
surface emissions are low (40 CFR
62.718(a)(6)). An owner or operator can
use Tier 4 only if the MSW landfill
owner or operator can demonstrate that
NMOC emissions are greater than or
equal to 34 Mg per year but less than 50
Mg per year using Tier 1 or Tier 2. An
MSW landfill employing Tier 4 that can
demonstrate that surface emissions are
below 500 ppm for four consecutive
quarters would not trigger the
requirement to install a GCCS even if
Tier 1, 2, or 3 calculations indicate that
the 34 Mg per year threshold has been
exceeded. However, once SEM
demonstrates emissions exceeding 500
ppm (40 CFR 62.718(a)(6)(v)), the MSW
landfill would be required to install a
GCCS according to the schedule in
section V.B. of this preamble and Table
1 to subpart OOO of part 62.
2. Gas Collection System Monitoring
The EPA proposes that the landfill gas
collection system must be equipped
with a sampling or access port and the
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43753
owner or operator must periodically
monitor gauge pressure in the gas
collection header, monitor nitrogen or
oxygen content in the landfill gas, and
monitor temperature of the landfill gas
(40 CFR 62.722(a)).
3. Flare Monitoring
The EPA proposes that, if a flare is
used, the owner or operator must
monitor the flare using a heat sensing
device that indicates presence of a flame
and a device that records flow to the
flare and any bypass lines (40 CFR
62.722(c)).
4. Control Device Testing and
Monitoring
The EPA proposes that, if an enclosed
control device is used, the owner or
operator must conduct an initial
performance test (40 CFR 62.714(c)).
The owner or operator must then
operate the device as required by the
manufacturer’s specifications, install a
temperature monitoring device, and
install a device that records flow to the
control device and any bypass lines (40
CFR 62.722(b)). A temperature
monitoring device is not required for
boilers or process heaters with a design
heat capacity of 44 megawatts or greater
(40 CFR 62.722(b)(1)).
E. What are the proposed recordkeeping
and reporting requirements?
The EPA proposes that owners and
operators must retain records of all
required monitor readings (40 CFR
62.726). Owners or operators must
submit certain required performance
test reports, NMOC emission rate
reports, and annual reports
documenting compliance and any
deviations from the operating standards
in the federal plan (40 CFR 62.724). All
required reports must be submitted
through the EPA’s Central Data
Exchange (CDX) using the Compliance
and Emissions Data Reporting Interface
(CEDRI) (40 CFR 62.724(j)). Owners or
operators are allowed to maintain
electronic copies of the records in lieu
of hardcopies to satisfy federal
recordkeeping requirements.
The requirement to submit
performance test data electronically to
the EPA would apply only to those
performance tests conducted using test
methods that are supported by the
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT). A
listing of the pollutants and test
methods supported by the ERT is
available at: https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/
chief/ert/ert_info.html. When the EPA
adds new methods to the ERT, a notice
will be sent out through the
Clearinghouse for Inventories and
Emissions Factors (CHIEF) Listserv
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
43754
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
(https://www.epa.gov/airemissionsinventories/emissionsinventorylistservs) and a notice of availability will
be added to the ERT website. You are
encouraged to check the ERT website
regularly for up-to-date information on
methods supported by the ERT.
VI. Implementation of the Federal Plan
and Delegation
A. Background of Authority
Under section 111(d) of the CAA, the
EPA is required to adopt EG that are
applicable to existing MSW landfills.
These EG are implemented when the
EPA approves a state or tribal plan or
adopts a federal plan that implements
and enforces the EG. As discussed
above, this action would regulate
existing MSW landfills in states or
Indian country that do not have
approved plans in effect to implement
the EG.
Congress has determined that the
primary responsibility for air pollution
prevention and control rests with state,
tribal and local agencies. See CAA
section 101(a)(3). Consistent with that
overall determination, Congress
established CAA section 111(d) with the
intent that state, tribal and local
agencies take the primary responsibility
for ensuring that the standards of
performance and other requirements in
the EG are achieved. Also, Congress
explicitly required that the EPA
establish procedures that are like those
under CAA section 110 for state
implementation plans. Although
Congress required the EPA to propose
and promulgate a federal plan for states
and tribes that fail to submit approvable
state plans on time, states may submit
plans after promulgation of this federal
plan. The EPA strongly encourages
states and tribes that are unable to
submit approvable plans to request
delegation of the federal plan so that
they can have primary responsibility for
implementing the 2016 MSW Landfills
EG, consistent with the intent of
Congress.
The preferred outcome under the
statute and the regulations results when
the state, tribal, and local agencies
implement an EPA-approved state or
tribal plan because state, tribal, and
local agencies not only have the
responsibility to implement the 2016
MSW Landfills EG, but also have the
practical knowledge and enforcement
resources critical to achieving the
highest rate of compliance. In cases
where states are unable to develop and
submit approvable state or tribal plans,
it is still preferable for the state, tribal
and local agencies to be the
implementing agency. For these reasons,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
the EPA will do all that it can to
expedite delegation of the federal plan
to state, tribal, and local agencies,
whenever possible, in cases where states
or tribes are unable to develop and
submit approvable state or tribal plans.
The EPA will also continue to review
and approve state or tribal plans after
promulgation of this federal plan.
B. Mechanisms for Transferring
Authority
There are two mechanisms for
transferring implementation authority to
state, tribal, and local agencies: (1) The
EPA’s approval of a state plan after the
federal plan is in effect; and (2) if a state
does not submit or obtain approval of its
own plan, the EPA’s delegation to a
state, tribe, or local agency is transferred
with the authority to implement certain
portions of this federal plan to the
extent appropriate and if allowed by
state law. Both options are described in
more detail below.
1. Federal Plan Becomes Effective Prior
to Approval of a State Plan
After MSW landfills in a state become
subject to the federal plan, the state or
tribal agency may still adopt and submit
a state or tribal plan to the EPA. If the
EPA determines that the state or tribal
plan meets the requirements of the 2016
MSW Landfills EG, the EPA will
approve the state or tribal plan. If the
EPA determines that the plan does not
meet the requirements of the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG, the EPA will approve the
portions of the plan that are consistent
with the 2016 MSW Landfills EG. If a
state or tribal plan is approved in part,
portions of the federal plan will apply
to the designated MSW landfills in lieu
of the disapproved portions of the state
or tribal plan until the state or tribe
addresses the deficiencies in the state or
tribal plan and the revised plan is
approved by the EPA. Prior to any
disapproval, the EPA will work with
states and tribes in an attempt to
reconcile areas of the plan that remain
inconsistent with the EG.
Upon the effective date of a state or
tribal plan, the federal plan will no
longer apply to MSW landfills covered
by such a plan. The state, tribe, territory,
or local agency would implement and
enforce the state plan in lieu of the
federal plan. When an EPA Regional
office approves a state or tribal plan, it
will amend the appropriate subpart of
40 CFR part 62 to indicate such
approval.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2. State, Tribe, Territory, or Local
Agency Taking Delegation of the Federal
Plan
The EPA, in its discretion, may
delegate to state, tribe, territorial, or
local agencies the authority to
implement this proposed federal plan.
As discussed above, the EPA has
concluded that it is advantageous and
the best use of resources for states,
tribes, territories, or local agencies to
agree to undertake, on the EPA’s behalf,
administrative and substantive roles in
implementing the federal plan to the
extent appropriate and where
authorized by federal, state, tribal,
territorial, or local law. If a state, tribe,
territory, or local agency requests
delegation, the EPA will generally
delegate the entire federal plan to the
state, tribe, territory, or local agency.
These functions include administration
and oversight of compliance, reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, MSW
landfill inspections, and preparation of
draft notices of violation, but will not
include any authorities retained by the
EPA. Agencies that have taken
delegation, as well as the EPA, will have
responsibility for bringing enforcement
actions against sources violating federal
plan provisions.
C. Implementing Authority
The EPA Regional Administrators
have been delegated the authority for
implementing the MSW Landfills
Federal Plan. All reports required by the
federal plan should be submitted to the
appropriate Regional Administrator.
Table 3 of this preamble lists the
addresses for the EPA Regional offices
and the states they cover.
D. Delegation of the Federal Plan and
Retained Authorities
If a state, tribe, territory, or local
agency intends to take delegation of the
federal plan, the state, tribe, territory, or
local agency should submit a written
request for delegation of authority to the
appropriate EPA regional office. The
state, tribe, territory, or local agency
should explain how it meets the criteria
for delegation. See Good Practices
Manual for Delegation of NSPS and
NESHAP (U.S. EPA, February 1983).
The letter requesting delegation of
authority to implement the federal plan
should: (1) Demonstrate that the state,
tribe, territory, or local agency has
adequate resources, as well as the legal
authority to administer and enforce the
program; (2) include an inventory of
designated MSW landfills, which
includes those that have ceased
operation, but have not been dismantled
or rendered inoperable, and an
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
inventory of the designated units’ air
emissions and a provision for progress
reports to the EPA; (3) certify that a
public hearing was held on the state,
tribe, territory, or local agency
delegation request; and (4) include a
memorandum of agreement between the
state, tribe, territory, or local agency and
the EPA that sets forth the terms and
conditions of the delegation, the
effective date of the agreement, and the
mechanism to transfer authority. Upon
signature of the agreement, the
appropriate EPA regional office would
publish an approval notice in the
Federal Register, thereby incorporating
the delegation of authority into the
appropriate subpart of 40 CFR part 62.
If authority is not delegated to a state,
tribe, territory, or local agency, the EPA
will implement the federal plan. Also, if
a state, tribe, territory, or local agency
fails to properly implement a delegated
portion of the federal plan, the EPA will
assume direct implementation and
enforcement of that portion. The EPA
will continue to hold enforcement
authority along with the state, tribe,
territory, or local agency even when the
agency has received delegation of the
federal plan. In all cases where the
federal plan is delegated, the EPA will
retain and will not transfer authority to
a state, tribe, or local agency to approve
the following items promulgated in 40
CFR 62.710(b)): (1) Approval of
alternative methods to determine the
site-specific NMOC concentration or a
site-specific methane generation rate
constant (k); (2) alternative emission
standards; (3) major alternatives to test
methods (Major alternatives to test
methods or to monitoring are
modifications made to a federally
enforceable test method or to a federal
monitoring requirement. These changes
would involve the use of unproven
technology or procedures or an entirely
new method, which is sometimes
necessary when the required test
method or monitoring requirement is
unsuitable.); and (4) waivers of
recordkeeping.
Any MSW landfill owners or
operators who wish to petition the
agency for an alternative requirement to
those in 40 CFR 62.710(b) should
submit a request to the appropriate
Regional Administrator with a copy sent
to the appropriate state.
VII. Title V Operating Permits
Existing landfills with design
capacities less than 2.5 million Mg or
2.5 million m3 are not required to have
a title V operating permit, unless they
are a major source or are subject to title
V (part 70 or part 71) for some other
reason (e.g., subject to a CAA section
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
112 NESHAP or to another CAA section
111 NSPS). All existing MSW landfills
with design capacities equal to or
greater than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5
million m3 must have a title V operating
permit. Existing MSW landfills that are
not currently subject to title V
permitting because their design capacity
is less than 2.5 million Mg or 2.5
million m3 may trigger the requirement
to apply for a title V permit in the future
if the landfill’s design capacity increases
to equal or exceed 2.5 million Mg and
2.5 million m3. Such sources, newly
subject to the requirement to obtain a
title V permit for operating the MSW
landfill at or above the 2.5 million Mg
or 2.5 million m3 capacity, become
subject to the title V program 90 days
after the effective date of this federal
plan, even if the design capacity report
is submitted prior to that date. This date
that triggers title V applicability is
consistent with the published EG. The
requirements of a federal plan are
applicable requirements for title V
sources covered by a federal plan.
Additional information for filing a
timely title V application should be
obtained at the permitting authority. See
40 CFR 70.5(a)(1)(i) or 71.5(a)(1)(i).
An MSW landfill that is closed and is
no longer subject to title V as a result
of this federal plan, once finalized, may
remain subject to title V permitting
requirements for another reason or
reasons. See 40 CFR 62.711(e) and 40
CFR 70.3 or 71.3. In such circumstances,
the landfill would be required to
continue operating in compliance with
a title V permit.
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was, therefore, not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
This action is not expected to be an
Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this action is not significant
under Executive Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new
information collection burden under the
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43755
PRA. This action simply proposes the
MSW Landfills Federal Plan to
implement the 2016 MSW Landfills EG
for those states that do not have a state
plan implementing the EG. OMB has
previously reviewed the information
collection activities contained in the
2016 MSW Landfills EG and has
assigned OMB control number 2060–
0720.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. The small entities
subject to the requirements of this
action are small MSW landfills. The
Agency has determined that up to 15
small entities, representing
approximately 13 percent of the total
number of small entities subject to the
proposal, may experience an impact of
greater than 3 percent of sales or
revenues. A summary of this analysis is
available in the memorandum, Small
Entity Screening Assessment for
Proposed Federal Plan for Emission
Guidelines and Compliance Times for
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, which
is available in the docket for this action.
More details of the general economic
analysis of the EG, which this action
implements, are available in the docket
for the 2016 MSW Landfills EG (Docket
ID Item No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0451–
0225).
Although not required by the RFA to
convene a Small Business Advocacy
Review (SBAR) Panel because the EPA
has now determined that this proposal
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities, there was substantial interest in
the revision of the EG among small
entities. Thus, during development of
the 2016 MSW Landfills EG, the EPA
conducted stakeholder outreach as
detailed in sections XI.C and XI.E of the
preamble to the proposed Standards of
Performance for MSW Landfills (79 FR
41828–41829; July 17, 2014) and in
sections VIII.C and VIII.E of the
preamble to the 2016 MSW Landfills EG
(81 FR 59309–59310; August 29, 2016).
The EPA convened an SBAR Panel in
2013 for the MSW Landfills NSPS and
EG rulemakings. The EPA originally
planned a review of the EG and NSPS
in one action, but the actions were
subsequently divided into separate
rulemakings. The SBAR Panel evaluated
the assembled materials and small
entity comments on issues related to the
rule’s potential effects and significant
alternative regulatory approaches. A
copy of the Summary of Small Entity
Outreach is available in the docket for
the 2016 MSW Landfills EG (Docket ID
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
43756
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Item No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0451–
0012). While formulating the provisions
of the EG, the EPA considered the input
provided over the course of the
stakeholder outreach as well as the
input provided in the many public
comments and incorporated many of the
suggestions in the 2016 MSW Landfills
EG.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538. This action
implements mandates specifically and
explicitly set forth in 40 CFR 60.27
without the exercise of any policy
discretion by the EPA.
We note, however, that the EG may
affect small governments because small
governments operate landfills (80 FR
52146, August 27, 2015). This action
implements the promulgated EG. In
developing the final 2016 MSW
Landfills EG, the EPA consulted with
small governments pursuant to a plan
established under section 203 of the
UMRA to address impacts of regulatory
requirements in the rule that might
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The EPA also held
meetings as discussed in section VIII.F
of this preamble.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
The EPA has concluded that this
action may have federalism
implications, because the rule imposes
substantial direct compliance costs on
state or local governments, and the
federal government will not provide the
funds necessary to pay those costs. The
EPA provided the following federalism
summary impact statement for the 2016
MSW Landfills EG. The EPA consulted
with state and local officials early in the
process of developing the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG to permit them to have
meaningful and timely input into its
development. In developing the
regulatory options reflected in the
proposed and final 2016 MSW Landfills
EG, the EPA consulted with eight
national organizations representing state
and local elected officials. Additionally,
the Environmental Council of the States,
the National Association of Clean Air
Agencies, and the Association of State
and Territorial Solid Waste Management
Officials participated in preproposal
briefings. Finally, in addition to these
associations, over 140 officials
representing state and local
governments across the nation
participated in at least one of three
preproposal briefings in the fall of 2013
(September 10, 2013, November 7, 2013,
and November 14, 2013), which is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
summarized in the docket for the 2016
MSW Landfills EG (Docket ID Item No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0451–0013). The
EPA received comments from over 40
entities representing state and local
governments. The EPA conducted an
additional Federalism outreach meeting
on April 15, 2015.
The principal intergovernmental
concerns raised during the preproposal
consultations, as well as during the
proposed rule’s public comment period,
include: (1) Implementation concerns
associated with shortening of GCCS
installation and/or expansion
timeframes; (2) concerns regarding
significant lowering of the design
capacity or emission thresholds; (3) the
need for clarifications associated with
wellhead operating parameters; and (4)
the need for consistent, clear, and
rigorous surface monitoring
requirements. In response to these
comments and based upon the available
data, the EPA decided not to adjust the
design capacity or significantly lower
the emission threshold. The EPA also
decided not to adjust the time allotted
for installation of the GCCS or
expansion of the wellfield. In the
proposed MSW Landfills EG (80 FR
52121, August 27, 2015), the EPA
highlighted specific concerns raised by
commenters, which included state
agencies as well as landfill owners and
operators, about the interaction between
shortened lag times and design plan
approvals, costs, and safety concerns
associated with reduced lag times, and
the need for flexibility for lag time
adjustments. The EPA adjusted
wellhead operating parameters to limit
corrective action requirements to
negative pressure and temperature. The
EPA also acknowledged concerns about
wellhead operating parameters in 80 FR
52121 (August 27, 2015) and considered
public comments in favor of and against
retention of the parameters.
A complete list of the comments from
state and local governments was
provided to OMB and was placed in the
docket for the 2016 MSW Landfills EG
(Final Report of the Small Business
Advocacy Review Panel on EPA’s
Planned Proposed Rules Standards of
Performance for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills and Review of Emissions
Guidelines for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills, Docket ID Item No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2014–0451–0139). In addition, the
detailed response to comments from
these entities is contained in the EPA’s
Response to Comments document for
the 2016 MSW Landfills EG (Docket ID
Item No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0451–
0229). As required by section 8(a) of
Executive Order 13132, the EPA
included a certification from its
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Federalism official stating that the EPA
had met the Executive Order’s
requirements in a meaningful and
timely manner when it sent the draft of
the 2016 MSW Landfills EG to OMB for
review pursuant to Executive Order
12866. A copy of the certification is
included in the record for the 2016
MSW Landfills EG (Outreach under
Executive Order 13132 for MSW
Landfills, Docket ID Item Nos. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2014–0451–0013 and EPA–
HQ–OAR–2014–0451–0100).
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action has tribal implications as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
This action will neither impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
federally recognized tribal governments
nor preempt tribal law. The database
used to estimate impacts of the 2016
MSW Landfills EG, identified one tribe,
the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian
Community, which owns three landfills
potentially subject to this federal plan.
One of these landfills is open, the Salt
River Landfill, and is already
controlling emissions under the current
NSPS/EG framework, so while subject to
this subpart, the costs of this proposal
are not substantial. The two other
landfills are closed and anticipated to
meet the definition of the closed landfill
subcategory. One of the closed landfills,
the Tri Cities Landfill, is already
controlling emissions under the current
NSPS/EG framework and will not incur
substantial additional compliance costs
under the federal plan. The other
landfill, North Center Street Landfill, is
not estimated to install controls under
the federal plan. The EPA will consult
with tribal officials under the EPA
Policy on Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribes in the
process of developing this action to
permit them to have meaningful and
timely input into its development. A
summary of that consultation will be
provided in the docket for this action
once completed.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern
environmental health or safety risks that
the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
because it implements a previously
promulgated federal standard.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
Part 51
This action involves technical
standards. The EPA proposes to use
EPA Methods 2, 2E, 3, 3A, 3C, 18, 21,
25, 25A, and 25C of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A. The EPA identified 15
voluntary consensus standards (VCS) as
being potentially applicable (ASTM
D3154–00 (2006), ASTM D3464–96
(2007), ASTM D3796–90 (2001), ANSI/
ASME PTC 19–10–1981 Part 10, ASME
B133.9–1994 (2001), ISO 10396:1993
(2007), ISO 12039:2001, ISO
10780:1994, ASTM D5835–95 (2013),
ASTM D6522–11, ASTM D6420–99
(2010), CAN/CSA Z223.2–M86 (1999),
ASTM D6060–96 (2009), ISO
14965:2000(E), EN 12619(1999)). The
EPA determined that 14 of the 15
candidate VCS identified for measuring
emissions of pollutants or their
surrogates subject to emission standards
in the rule would not be practical due
to lack of equivalency, documentation,
validation data, and other important
technical and policy considerations.
The agency identified no equivalent
standards for EPA Methods 2E, 21, and
25C. However, one VCS was identified
as an acceptable alternative to EPA
Method 3A.
The VCS ASTM D6522–11, ‘‘Standard
Test Method for the Determination of
Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon Monoxide, and
Oxygen Concentrations in Emissions
from Natural Gas-Fired Reciprocating
Engines, Combustion Turbines, Boilers,
and Process Heaters Using Portable
Analyzers,’’ is an acceptable alternative
to EPA Method 3A when used at the
wellhead before combustion. It is
advisable to know the flammability and
check the lower explosive limit of the
flue gas constituents, prior to sampling,
in order to avoid undesired ignition of
the gas. The results of ASTM D6522–11
may be used to determine nitrogen
oxides and carbon monoxide emission
concentrations from natural gas
combustion at stationary sources. This
test method may also be used to monitor
emissions during short-term emission
tests or periodically in order to optimize
process operation for nitrogen oxides
and carbon monoxide control. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
EPA’s review, including review of
comments for these 15 methods, is
documented in the memorandum,
Voluntary Consensus Standard Results
for Emission Guidelines and
Compliance Times for Municipal Solid
Waste Landfills, 2016, which is
available in the docket for the 2016
MSW Landfills EG (Docket ID Item No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0451–0206).
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does
not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations, lowincome populations, and/or indigenous
peoples, as specified in Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The EPA has determined that because
this action increases the level of
environmental protection for all affected
populations without having any
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on any population, including any
minority, low-income, or indigenous
populations. To the extent that any
minority, low-income, or indigenous
subpopulation is disproportionately
impacted by landfill gas emissions due
to the proximity of their homes to
sources of these emissions, that
subpopulation also stands to see
increased environmental and health
benefit from the emission reductions
called for by this action. The results of
the demographic analysis are presented
in the EJ Screening Report for Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills, July 2016, a copy
of which is available in the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG docket (Docket ID Item No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0451–0223).
Dated: August 14, 2019.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019–17822 Filed 8–21–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43757
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0464; FRL–9998–54–
OAR]
Error Correction of the Area
Designations for the 2010 1-Hour
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
in Freestone and Anderson Counties,
Rusk and Panola Counties, and Titus
County in Texas
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to correct an
error in the designations for three areas
in Texas: Freestone and Anderson
Counties, Rusk and Panola Counties,
and Titus County. On December 13,
2016, portions of Freestone and
Anderson Counties, Rusk and Panola
Counties, and Titus County were
designated as nonattainment for the
2010 primary sulfur dioxide (SO2)
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS). Under our Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act) authority to correct errors,
the EPA is proposing that we erred in
not giving greater weight to Texas’
preference to characterize air quality
through monitoring, and steps
undertaken by Texas to begin
monitoring in these three areas, when
considering all available information; in
relying on available air quality analyses
in making the initial designations that
the EPA recognizes included certain
limitations; or a combination of these
two issues. Therefore, to correct these
errors, the EPA is proposing that the
previously designated nonattainment
areas in Freestone and Anderson
Counties, Rusk and Panola Counties,
and Titus County in Texas each be
revised to be designated as
unclassifiable.
Comments must be received on
or before September 23, 2019. Please
refer to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for
additional information on the comment
period.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2014–0464, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to our public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 163 (Thursday, August 22, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43745-43757]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17822]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0338; FRL-9998-62-OAR]
RIN 2060-AU52
Federal Plan Requirements for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
That Commenced Construction On or Before July 17, 2014, and Have Not
Been Modified or Reconstructed Since July 17, 2014
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this action, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
proposes a federal plan to implement the Emission Guidelines and
Compliance Times for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (2016 MSW
Landfills EG) for existing MSW landfills located in states and Indian
country where state plans or tribal plans are not in effect. This
proposed MSW Landfills Federal Plan includes the same elements as
required for a state plan: Identification of legal authority and
mechanisms for implementation; inventory of designated facilities;
emissions inventory; emission limits; compliance schedules; a process
for the EPA or state review of design plans for site-specific gas
collection and control systems (GCCS); testing, monitoring, reporting
and record keeping requirements; public hearing requirements; and
progress reporting requirements. Additionally, this action summarizes
implementation and delegation of authority of the MSW Landfills Federal
Plan.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before October 7,
2019.
Public Hearing. We will hold a public hearing on September 6, 2019
from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Daylight Time) in Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina as specified in the ADDRESSES section of
this preamble. If no one contacts the EPA requesting to speak at the
public hearing to be held concerning this action by August 27, 2019,
the public hearing will not take place. Information regarding whether
or not a hearing will be held will be posted on the rule's website
located at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/municipal-solid-waste-landfills-new-source-performance-standards. EPA
does not intend to publish any future documents in the Federal Register
regarding a public hearing on this proposed action and directs all
inquiries regarding a hearing to the website and contact person. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for information on registering and attending
a public hearing.
ADDRESSES: Comments. You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0338, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov/
(our preferred method). Follow the online instrucations for submitting
comments.
Email: [email protected]. Include Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2019-0338 in the subject line of the message.
Fax: (202) 566-9744. Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2019-0338.
Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket
Center, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0338, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket Center, WJC West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004.
The Docket Center's hours of operation are 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m., Monday-
Friday (except federal holidays).
Public Hearing: A public hearing will be held at the U.S.
EPA's North Carolina campus located at 109 T.W. Alexander Drive,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
Instructions: All submisison received must include the Docket ID
No. for this
[[Page 43746]]
rulemaking. Comments received may be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov/ including any personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending comments and additional information on
the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this proposed
action, contact Andrew Sheppard, Sector Policies and Programs Division
(E143-03), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-4161; fax number: (919) 541-0516;
and email address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public hearing. Please contact Virginia Hunt at (919) 541-0832 or
by email at [email protected] to register to speak at the public
hearing, or to inquire as to whether a public hearing will be held.
Docket. The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0338. All documents in the docket are
listed on Regulations.gov. Although listed, some information is not
publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (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. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically in
Regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, Room 3334,
WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the EPA
Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.
Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2019-0338. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or
otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov/ or email. This
type of information should be submitted by mail as discussed below.
The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
The https://www.regulations.gov/ website allows you to submit your
comment anonymously, which means the 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 the EPA without going through
https://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, the EPA recommends that you include your name and
other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
digital storage media you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment
due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification,
the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files
should not include special characters or any form of encryption and be
free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about the
EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
Submitting CBI. Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA
through https://www.regulations.gov/ or email. Clearly mark the part or
all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on
any digital storage media that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of
the digital storage media as CBI and then identify electronically
within the digital storage media the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comments
that includes information claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy of the
comments that does not contain the information claimed as CBI directly
to the public docket through the procedures outlined in Instructions
above. If you submit any digital storage media that does not contain
CBI, mark the outside of the digital storage media clearly that it does
not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the
public docket and the EPA's electronic public docket without prior
notice. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the
following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02), OAQPS,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0338.
Preamble acronyms and abbreviations. We use multiple acronyms and
terms in this preamble. While this list may not be exhaustive, to ease
the reading of this preamble and for reference purposes, the EPA
defines the following terms and acronyms here:
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential Business Information
CDX Central Data Exchange
CEDRI Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CHIEF Clearinghouse for Inventories and Emissions Factors
EG Emission Guidelines
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ERT Electronic Reporting Tool
GCCS Gas Collection and Control System
LFG Landfill Gas
LFGCost Landfill Gas Energy Cost Model
m\3\ Cubic Meter
Mg Megagram
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NMOC Nonmethane Organic Compounds
NSPS New Source Performance Standards
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OMB Office of Management and Budget
ppm Parts Per Million
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
RFA Regulatory Flexible Act
RIN Regulatory Information Number
SBAR Small Business Advocacy Review
SEM Surface Emissions Monitoring
TTN Technology Transfer Network
UMRA Unfunded Mandate Reform Act
U.S.C. United States Code
VCS Voluntary Consensus Standards
Organization of this document. The information in this preamble is
organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
II. Background
[[Page 43747]]
A. What is the regulatory development background and legal
authority for this action?
B. What is the purpose of this action?
C. What is the status of state plan submittals?
III. What are the designated facilities?
A. What is a designated MSW landfill?
B. How do I determine if my MSW landfill is covered by an
approved and effective state plan?
IV. Elements of the MSW Landfills Federal Plan
A. Legal Authority and Enforcement Mechanism
B. Inventory of Designated MSW Landfills
C. Inventory of Emissions
D. Emission Limits and Operating Limits
E. Compliance Schedule
F. Process for Review and Approval of Site-Specific Design Plans
G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and Reporting
Requirements
H. Requirement for Public Hearing
V. Summary of Proposed MSW Landfills Federal Plan Requirements
A. What are the proposed applicability requirements?
B. What are the proposed compliance schedules?
C. What emissions and operating limits is the EPA proposing to
incorporate into the federal plan?
D. What are the proposed performance testing and monitoring
requirements?
E. What are the proposed recordkeeping and reporting
requirements?
VI. Implementation of the Federal Plan and Delegation
A. Background of Authority
B. Mechanisms for Transferring Authority
C. Implementing Authority
D. Delegation of the Federal Plan and Retained Authorities
VII. Title V Operating Permits
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and
1 CFR part 51
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
This proposed action addresses existing MSW landfills and
associated solid waste management programs. For the purpose of this
regulation, existing MSW landfills are those that accepted waste after
November 8, 1987, and commenced construction on or before July 17,
2014. Table 1 of this preamble lists the associated regulated
industrial source categories that are the subject of this action. Table
1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide for readers regarding the entities that this proposed
action is likely to affect. The proposed standards, once promulgated,
will be directly applicable to the designated facilities.
Table 1--Regulated Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of
Source category potentially NAICS \1\
regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry: Air and water resource Solid waste 924110
and solid waste management. landfills.
Industry: Refuse systems--solid Solid waste 562212
waste landfills. landfills.
State, local, and tribal Administration of 924110
government agencies. air and water
resource and solid
waste management
programs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this action is available on the internet. Following signature by the
EPA Administrator, the EPA will post a copy of this proposed action at
https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/municipal-solid-waste-landfills-new-source-performance-standards. Following publication
in the Federal Register, the EPA will post the Federal Register version
of this proposed action and key technical documents at this same
website.
As provided by the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)), the EPA has generally described the proposed changes to
part 62 rather than setting out the specific changes. For the
convenience of the reader, the EPA is also providing regulatory text as
it would look with the proposed changes in redline in the docket rather
than in this Federal Register document. See Proposed Regulatory Text
for MSW Landfills Federal Plan (40 CFR part 62, subpart OOO), in Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0338. Submit public comments using the same
mechanisms described in the DATES and ADDRESSES sections of this
preamble.
II. Background
A. What is the regulatory development background and legal authority
for this action?
Under authority of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the EPA has promulgated
several regulations that apply to MSW landfills. In 1996, under CAA
section 111, the EPA promulgated the original standards of performance
for new MSW landfills (i.e., new source performance standards or NSPS)
at 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW, and EG for existing MSW landfills at 40
CFR part 60, subpart Cc (61 FR 9905; March 12, 1996). The NSPS and EG
are based on the Administrator's determination that MSW landfills
cause, or contribute significantly to, air pollution that may
reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. In
1999, the EPA promulgated a federal plan under CAA section 111 to
implement the 1996 EG for landfills located in states that did not have
approved and effective state plans (40 CFR part 62, subpart GGG) (64 FR
60689, November 8, 1999). The federal plan was necessary to implement
the 1996 EG for MSW landfills located in states and Indian country
where state plans or tribal plans were not in effect. In 2003, the EPA
promulgated national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP) under CAA section 112 to regulate hazardous air pollutant
(HAP) emissions from MSW landfills (40 CFR part 63, subpart AAAA) (68
FR 2227, January 16, 2003). The 2003 NESHAP fulfills the requirements
of CAA section 112(d), which requires the EPA to regulate HAP listed in
CAA section 112(b) and helps implement the Urban Air Toxics Strategy
under CAA section 112(k). To control emissions of HAP from area sources
in urban areas, the
[[Page 43748]]
EPA developed a strategy identifying 33 HAP that present the greatest
threat to public health in the largest number of urban areas as the
result of emissions from area sources. MSW landfills were listed on
July 19, 1999, as an area source category to be regulated pursuant to
CAA section 112(k) because 13 of the listed HAP are emitted from MSW
landfills.
In 2016, the EPA reviewed and revised the MSW Landfills NSPS at 40
CFR part 60, subpart XXX, and the EG for existing MSW landfills at 40
CFR part 60, subpart Cf (81 FR 59276 and 59332, August 29, 2016). For
the 2016 rulemaking, the EPA reviewed the NSPS and EG based on changes
in the landfills industry since the rules were first promulgated in
1996, including changes to the size and number of existing landfills,
industry practices, and gas control methods and technologies. Based on
its review, the EPA made several revisions to further reduce emissions
of landfill gas and its components. The major changes included reducing
the emissions threshold at which an MSW landfill must install controls
from 50 megagrams (Mg) per year of nonmethane organic compounds (NMOC)
to 34 Mg per year NMOC. Additionally, the EPA developed a subcategory
for closed landfills because closed landfills do not produce as much
landfill gas (LFG) as an active landfill. Landfills in this subcategory
remain subject to an NMOC emission threshold of 50 Mg per year for
determining when controls must be installed or can be removed. The EPA
is now proposing a federal plan for the 2016 MSW Landfills EG.
B. What is the purpose of this action?
On August 29, 2016, the EPA promulgated revisions to the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG. The CAA regulations implementing EG require states with
existing MSW landfills subject to the EG to submit to the EPA state
plans to implement and enforce the EG. The state plans to implement the
2016 MSW Landfills EG were due on May 30, 2017. For states that did not
submit an approvable plan by that deadline, CAA section 111 and 40 CFR
60.27(c) and (d) require the EPA to develop, implement, and enforce a
federal plan for existing MSW landfills located in any state (i.e.,
state, territory, or protectorate) or Indian country that does not have
an approved state plan that implements the 2016 MSW Landfills EG. This
action proposes an MSW Landfills Federal Plan to implement the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG for those areas without an approved state plan. For the
purposes of this preamble and the proposed MSW Landfills Federal Plan,
the word ``state'' means any of the 50 United States and the
protectorates of the United States. The word ``protectorate'' means
American Samoa, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the District of
Columbia, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands.
C. What is the status of state plan submittals?
The EPA has received eight plans to implement the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG, which includes submittals form the following: Arizona
(one plan covering Maricopa County, one covering Pinal County, and
another covering the remainder of the state), California, Delaware, New
Mexico (one plan covering Albuquerque-Bernalillo County and another
covering the rest of the state), and West Virginia. The EPA has
proposed action on these state plans, but the actions have not been
finalized. See e.g., 84 FR 32363 (July 8, 2019) (Arizona); 84 FR 32365
(July 8, 2019) (Pinal County, Arizona); 84 FR 31278 (July 1, 2019)
(West Virginia); 84 FR 31279 (July 1, 2019) (Delaware); 84 FR 29138
(June 21, 2019) (New Mexico and Albuquerque-Bernalillo County); and 84
FR 36863 (July 30, 2019) (California). The plan from Maricopa County,
Arizona, was withdrawn on July 3, 2019. The EPA is not aware of any
tribes that have developed plans to implement the 2016 MSW Landfills EG
or submitted negative declaration letters. The EPA is proposing this
MSW Landfills Federal Plan to implement the 2016 MSW Landfills EG in
states, territories, protectorates, and Indian country, that do not
have an approved and effective state or tribal plan.
The MSW landfills covered by the state plans submitted to date
would not be subject to the MSW Landfills Federal Plan once the state
plan that includes those MSW landfills has been approved and becomes
effective. However, MSW landfills located in those states would be
subject to the federal plan (or portions of the federal plan) in the
event that the state plan is subsequently disapproved, in whole or in
part. Table 2 of this preamble summarizes the status of state plans and
negative declarations as of July 15, 2019.
Table 2--Status of State Plans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. EPA-Approved State Plans....... None.
II. Negative Declaration Submitted None.
to the EPA.
III. Final State Plans Submitted Arizona (one plan covering Pinal
to the EPA. County, and another covering the
remainder of the state),
California, Delaware, New Mexico
(one plan covering Albuquerque and
Bernalillo County and another
covering the rest of the state),
and West Virginia.
IV. EPA Has Not Received a Final Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado,
State Plan or Negative Connecticut, Florida, Georgia,
Declaration. Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana,
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi,
Missouri, Montana, Nebraska,
Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
New York, North Carolina, North
Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode
Island, South Carolina, South
Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah,
Vermont, Virginia, Virgin Islands,
Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the EPA Regional offices approve implementation plans, they will
also, in the same action, amend the appropriate subpart of 40 CFR part
62 to codify their approvals. MSW landfill owners or operators can also
contact the EPA Regional office for the state in which their MSW
landfill is located to determine whether there is an approved and
effective state plan in place.
Table 3 of this preamble lists the addresses for the EPA Regional
offices and the states and Indian countries that they cover.
[[Page 43749]]
Table 3--EPA Regional Offices
------------------------------------------------------------------------
States and
Region Address territories
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region I.................... 5 Post Office Connecticut,
Square--Suite 100, Massachusetts,
Boston, MA 02109- Maine, New
3912. Hampshire, Rhode
Island, Vermont.
Region II................... 290 Broadway, New New York, New
York, NY 10007-1866. Jersey, Puerto
Rico, Virgin
Islands.
Region III.................. Air Protection Virginia, Delaware,
Division, Mail Code District of
3AP00, 1650 Arch Columbia, Maryland,
Street, Pennsylvania, West
Philadelphia, PA Virginia.
19103-1129.
Region IV................... 61 Forsyth Street Florida, Georgia,
SW, Atlanta, GA North Carolina,
30303-3104. Alabama, Kentucky,
Mississippi, South
Carolina,
Tennessee.
Region V.................... Mail Code A-17J, 77 Minnesota,
West Jackson Blvd., Wisconsin,
Chicago, Il 60604- Illinois, Indiana,
3590. Michigan, Ohio.
Region VI................... 1st International Arkansas, Louisiana,
Building, 1201 Elm New Mexico,
St., Dallas, TX Oklahoma, Texas.
75270.
Region VII.................. Air and Waste Iowa, Kansas,
Management Missouri, Nebraska.
Division, 11201
Renner Boulevard,
Lenexa, Kansas
66219.
Region VIII................. Director, Air Colorado, Montana,
Program, Office of North Dakota, South
Partnerships and Dakota, Utah,
Regulatory Wyoming.
Assistance, Mail
Code 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street,
Denver, CO 80202-
1129.
Region IX................... 75 Hawthorne Street, Arizona, California,
San Francisco, CA Hawaii, Nevada,
94105. American Samoa,
Guam, Northern
Mariana Islands.
Region X.................... 1200 6th Avenue, Washington, Alaska,
Suite 155, Seattle, Idaho, Oregon.
WA 98101.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. What are the designated facilities?
A. What is a designated MSW landfill?
The designated facility for this MSW Landfills Federal Plan is each
MSW landfill that (1) commenced construction, reconstruction, or
modification prior to July 17, 2014, and has not been modified or
reconstructed since then, and (2) has accepted waste since November 8,
1987, or has capacity for future waste deposition.
This MSW Landfills Federal Plan will apply to existing MSW
landfills located in: (1) Any state or portion of Indian country for
which a state or tribal plan that implements the 2016 MSW Landfills EG
has not become effective in whole or in part; (2) any state or portion
of Indian country for which the state or tribe submitted a negative
declaration; (3) any state or portion of Indian country with an
effective state or tribal plan that subsequently is vacated in whole or
in part; or (4) any state or portion of Indian country with an
effective plan that subsequently revises any component of the plan
(e.g., the underlying legal authority or enforceable mechanism) such
that the state or tribal plan no longer meets the requirements of the
2016 MSW Landfill EG. An MSW landfill that meets any of these criteria
is covered by the MSW Landfills Federal Plan until a state or tribal
plan to implement and enforce the 2016 MSW Landfills EG is approved
according to the requirements in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B, and becomes
effective. If a state or tribal plan is approved in part, portions of
the federal plan will apply to the designated MSW landfills in lieu of
the disapproved portions of the plan until the state or tribe addresses
the deficiencies in the plan and the revised plan is approved by the
EPA.
If an existing MSW landfill subject to the federal plan increases
its permitted volume design capacity through vertical or horizontal
expansion (i.e., is modified) on or after July 17, 2014, it would be
subject to the MSW Landfills NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart XXX) (see 81
FR 59332, August 29, 2016) and would no longer be subject to the
federal plan. An existing MSW landfill that makes operational changes
without increasing the horizontal or vertical dimensions of the
landfill would continue to be subject to the federal or state plan that
implements the 2016 MSW Landfills EG, rather than the NSPS.
B. How do I determine if my MSW landfill is covered by an approved and
effective state plan?
An approved state or tribal plan is a plan that the EPA has
reviewed and approved in whole or in part based on the requirements in
40 CFR part 60, subpart B, to implement and enforce the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG. Throughout this preamble, references to approved state
plans apply to both whole state plans and portions of state plans. The
state plan becomes effective on the date specified in the notice
published in the Federal Register announcing the EPA's approval. The
effective date of this action will be 30 days after the final federal
plan is published in the Federal Register.
The 2016 MSW Landfills Federal Plan will not apply to landfills
appropriately covered by an approved and effective state or tribal
plan. If a state or tribal plan becomes effective before promulgation
of the federal plan, the promulgated MSW Landfills Federal Plan will
not apply to landfills appropriately covered by that plan. Promulgation
of this MSW Landfills Federal Plan does not preclude a state or tribe
from submitting a plan later. If a state or tribe submits a plan after
promulgation of the MSW Landfills Federal Plan, the EPA will review and
approve or disapprove the plan. Upon the effective date of the approved
state or tribal plan, the federal plan will no longer apply. States and
tribes are, therefore, encouraged to continue their efforts to develop
and submit state and tribal plans to the EPA for approval.
MSW landfill owners or operators can contact the EPA Regional
office for the state or Indian country in which their MSW landfill is
located to determine whether there is an approved and effective state
plan in place. Table 3 of this preamble lists the addresses of the EPA
Regional offices and the states and Indian countries that they cover.
IV. Elements of the MSW Landfills Federal Plan
Section 111(d) of the CAA, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7411(d), requires
states to develop and implement state plans for MSW landfills to
implement and enforce the 2016 MSW Landfills EG. This proposed federal
plan will establish standards in the absence of an approved and
effective state plan. Because this proposed federal plan will establish
standards in the absence of an approved and effective state plan, this
action includes the same elements as a state plan: (1) Identification
of legal authority and mechanisms for implementation; (2) inventory of
designated facilities; (3) inventory of emissions; (4) emission limits;
(5) compliance schedules; (6) process for the EPA or state review of
site-specific
[[Page 43750]]
design plans for GCCS; (7) testing, monitoring, reporting, and
recordkeeping requirements; (8) public hearing requirements; and (9)
progress reporting requirements. This section of the preamble explains
the proposed federal plan elements. Additionally, Table 4 of this
preamble identifies each element and indicates where it is located or
codified.
Table 4--Location of MSW Landfills Federal Plan Elements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Element of the MSW landfills federal
plan Where located or codified
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Identification of legal authority Section 111(d)(2) of the CAA
and mechanisms for implementation. and section IV.A of this
preamble.
b. Inventory of designated facilities.. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0338.
c. Inventory of emissions.............. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0338.
d. Emission limits..................... 40 CFR 62.714 of proposed
subpart OOO.
e. Compliance schedules................ 40 CFR 62.712 of proposed
subpart OOO.
f. Process for review and approval of Section IV.F of this preamble.
site-specific design plans for GCCS.
g. Testing, monitoring, reporting, and 40 CFR 62.718, 62.722, 62.724,
recordkeeping requirements. and 62.726 of proposed subpart
OOO and section IV.G of this
preamble.
h. Public hearing requirements......... Section IV.H of this preamble.
i. Progress reports.................... Section IV.I of this preamble.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Legal Authority and Enforcement Mechanism
Section 111(d) of the CAA directs the EPA to develop a federal plan
for states that do not submit approvable state plans. Section 111 of
the CAA provides the EPA with the authority to implement and enforce
the federal plan in cases where the state fails to submit a fully
satisfactory state plan.
B. Inventory of Designated MSW Landfills
The docket for this action includes an inventory of the MSW
landfills that may potentially be covered by this proposed federal plan
in the absence of approved state or tribal plans. There are an
estimated 1,913 landfills potentially covered by this proposed federal
plan. These landfills exist in all 50 states and the U.S. territories
of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Additionally, one tribal entity,
the Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community, would be covered by this
proposed federal plan. The EPA developed the inventory of landfills by
identifying existing landfills that are expected to be covered by the
federal plan as of July 15, 2019, using the databases developed for the
2016 MSW Landfills EG and NSPS. For a discussion of the sources, their
locations, and information used to develop the source list, see the
memorandum, Developing a Federal Plan Source and Emission Inventory,
which is available in the docket for this action. Any MSW landfill that
meets the applicability criteria in this action will be subject to the
federal plan, regardless of whether it is listed in the inventory in
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0338. The EPA requests that states or
owners or operators identify additional sources for inclusion on the
list during the comment period for this action.
C. Inventory of Emissions
The EPA estimated the emissions from the inventory of existing MSW
landfills that are expected to be covered by the federal plan as of
July 15, 2019. Pollutant emissions are expressed in Mg NMOC per year in
calendar year 2019. Table 5 of this preamble summarizes the results of
the inventory. Although the EPA has proposed to approve some state
plans in whole or in part, to date none of the actions on the proposed
state plans have been finalized. Therefore, the inventory includes all
existing MSW landfills in the U.S. that meet the applicable criteria.
The inventory will be updated before promulgation of the federal plan
to exclude sources and emissions that are located in states for which
an approved state plan is subsequently promulgated.
The EPA estimated emissions from MSW landfills by first estimating
the LFG generation rates of landfills identified in the source
inventory, using a first-order decay equation. The decay equation uses
default values from Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-
42) for the methane generation potential (L0), the methane
generation rate (k), and the NMOC concentration.\1\ Next, the EPA
estimated when the MSW landfills in the source inventory would control
emissions under the previous regulatory level (NMOC emissions of 50 Mg
per year). To determine the timing of these controls, the EPA modeled
emissions using Tier 1 default values from 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW
for the L0 and k, but applied the NMOC concentration in AP-
42 for determining when MSW landfills would meet the regulatory NMOC
emissions threshold. The Tier 1 default values in subpart WWW for
L0 and k are conservatively high for the purpose of
estimating actual emissions; therefore, they are used only for
estimating uncontrolled emissions to determine when MSW landfills could
exceed the threshold and be required to install a GCCS. The EPA also
factored in lag times to account for the initial 30-month time period
between when the MSW landfill exceeds the emission rate threshold until
the MSW landfill must install and operate controls, and the periodic
expansion of the GCCS into new areas of waste placement (5 years for
active areas and 2 years for areas that are closed or at final grade).
After determining the timing of controls required by the regulation,
the actual amount of collected gas was estimated using AP-42 defaults
for L0, k, and NMOC, and an assumed collection efficiency of
85 percent and an assumed destruction efficiency of 98 percent. The
remaining emissions, after considering controls, represent the modeled
NMOC emissions based on LFG generation and AP-42 default parameters
minus the emission reductions. See the memorandum, Developing a Federal
Plan Source and Emission Inventory, which is available in the docket
for this action, for the complete emissions inventory, including
detailed emissions from MSW landfills in each state, and details on the
calculations used to determine those emissions. These estimates are
based solely on the modeled emissions remaining after considering
controls required by 40 CFR part 60, subparts WWW and Cc, and do not
include any additional emissions reductions from voluntary actions,
such as early installation of the GCCS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. EPA, AP-42, Fifth Edition, Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors, Volume 1: Stationary Point and Area Sources. 1995.
https://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/.
[[Page 43751]]
Table 5--Summary of Estimated NMOC Emissions From Existing MSW Landfills
Expected To Be Covered by the Federal Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2019 NMOC
Region/state emissions (Mg
per year)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connecticut............................................. 118
Maine................................................... 85
Massachusetts........................................... 429
New Hampshire........................................... 77
Rhode Island............................................ 47
Vermont................................................. 47
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Jersey.............................................. 387
New York................................................ 970
Puerto Rico............................................. 230
Virgin Islands.......................................... 14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delaware................................................ 44
Maryland................................................ 462
Pennsylvania............................................ 1,313
Virginia................................................ 916
West Virginia........................................... 199
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama................................................. 437
Florida................................................. 1,157
Georgia................................................. 1,035
Kentucky................................................ 574
Mississippi............................................. 213
North Carolina.......................................... 993
South Carolina.......................................... 430
Tennessee............................................... 860
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Illinois................................................ 1,361
Indiana................................................. 837
Michigan................................................ 1,219
Minnesota............................................... 263
Ohio.................................................... 1,251
Wisconsin............................................... 547
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arkansas................................................ 346
Louisiana............................................... 563
New Mexico.............................................. 201
Oklahoma................................................ 324
Texas................................................... 2,045
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iowa.................................................... 380
Kansas.................................................. 354
Missouri................................................ 485
Nebraska................................................ 265
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colorado................................................ 742
Montana................................................. 86
North Dakota............................................ 51
South Dakota............................................ 78
Utah.................................................... 287
Wyoming................................................. 48
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona................................................. 597
California.............................................. 3,018
Hawaii.................................................. 111
Nevada.................................................. 38
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska.................................................. 94
Idaho................................................... 138
Oregon.................................................. 376
Washington.............................................. 404
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Emission Limits and Operating Limits
This proposed federal plan contains emission limits that correspond
to the 2016 MSW Landfills EG, which are summarized in section V.C of
this preamble. In accordance with 40 CFR 60.27(e), this action does not
propose to revise the final limits. Instead, it proposes to implement
the emission limits as promulgated in the 2016 MSW Landfills EG for
existing sources in states that do not have an approved state plan.
E. Compliance Schedule
According to 40 CFR 60.24(e)(1), increments of progress are
required for any compliance schedule that is longer than 12 months. The
proposed federal plan would require owners or operators of existing MSW
landfills with design capacities equal to or greater than 2.5 million
Mg and 2.5 million cubic meters (m\3\) to install GCCS within 30 months
of reaching or exceeding 34 Mg per year NMOC. This proposed federal
plan would require owners or operators of existing closed MSW
landfills--those that have submitted a closure report as specified in
40 CFR 62.724(f) with design capacities equal to or greater than 2.5
million Mg and 2.5 million m\3\--to install GCCS within 30 months of
reaching or exceeding 50 Mg per year NMOC. This proposed federal plan
includes increments of progress, which are the primary mechanisms for
ensuring progress toward final compliance with the emission guidelines.
Each increment of progress has a specified date for achievement
described in section V.B of this preamble.
F. Process for Review and Approval of Site-Specific Design Plans
The 2016 MSW Landfills EG requires plans to include a process for
review and approval of site-specific design plans for required GCCS
(see 40 CFR 60.38f(d)). As previously discussed, if the existing MSW
landfill has (1) a design capacity equal to or greater than 2.5 million
Mg and 2.5 million m\3\ and (2) NMOC emissions equal to or exceeding 34
Mg per year (50 Mg per year for the closed landfill subcategory), the
landfill owner or operator must submit the cover page containing the
engineer's seal of the site-specific design plan. The EPA Regional
office will make a decision within 90 days about whether the entire
plan should be submitted for review. In cases where the state or tribe
has been delegated authority to implement this aspect of the federal
plan, the state or tribe would review the design plans. See section VI
of this preamble for a discussion of federal plan delegation.
When the EPA opts to review the entire plan, the EPA intends to
review design plans as expeditiously as possible to allow sufficient
time after approval of the plans for the landfills to install controls
prior to the compliance date. The EPA will initially review the design
plans for completeness and the source will be notified if any items are
missing. The EPA will then review the plans for acceptability, and,
once that review is completed, the EPA will notify the source and the
state or tribe in writing of the acceptability of the plan. If the plan
is not acceptable, the source will be given an appropriate amount of
time to make the necessary changes. However, the date by which a GCCS
must be completed and in compliance remains unchanged, i.e., 30 months
after the emission rate report first shows NMOC emissions greater than
or equal to 34 Mg per year (50 Mg per year for the closed landfill
subcategory).
G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements
The proposed federal plan includes testing, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements, as described in sections V.D
and E of this preamble. These proposed requirements correspond with the
2016 MSW Landfills EG. Testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements will assure initial and ongoing compliance.
H. Requirement for Public Hearing
According to 40 CFR 60.27(f), the EPA must provide the opportunity
for a public hearing prior to promulgation of
[[Page 43752]]
a federal plan. For this MSW Landfills Federal Plan, the EPA will offer
the opportunity for a public hearing in Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina, as specified in the ADDRESSES and DATES sections of this
preamble.
V. Summary of Proposed MSW Landfills Federal Plan Requirements
A. What are the proposed applicability requirements?
The proposed federal plan applicability criteria (40 CFR 62.711)
reflect the 2016 MSW Landfills EG (40 CFR 60.31f). The designated
facility for this MSW Landfills Federal Plan is described in section
III.A of this preamble.
B. What are the proposed compliance schedules?
Owners or operators of MSW landfills subject to the federal plan
will be required to submit a design capacity report within 90 days
after the effective date of the federal plan (40 CFR 62.724(a)). If the
design capacity indicates a capacity equal to or greater than 2.5
million Mg and 2.5 million m\3\ of solid waste a landfill can accept,
an annual NMOC emission rate report must also be submitted within 90
days after the effective date of the federal plan and then every 12
months until the landfill installs a GCCS (40 CFR 62.724(c)).
If the first NMOC emission rate report shows emissions less than 34
Mg per year NMOC (50 Mg per year for the closed landfill subcategory),
then the owner or operator must recalculate NMOC emissions annually and
submit annual NMOC emission rate reports unless the MSW landfill is
closed. (See 40 CFR 62.718 for conditions under which 5-year reports
rather than annual reports may be submitted.) If an emission rate
report shows that NMOC emissions equal or exceed 34 Mg per year, the
owner or operator must begin following enforceable increments of
progress to install a GCCS within 30 months of reaching or exceeding 34
Mg per year NMOC (40 CFR 62.712). Therefore, the generic schedule for
the increments of progress starts with the date of the first annual
emission rate report that shows NMOC emissions equal or exceed 34 Mg
per year (50 Mg per year for the closed landfill subcategory) (40 CFR
62.712(c)). Alternatively, a landfill may follow Tier 4 as discussed
later in this section (40 CFR 62.718(a)(6)). For the closed landfill
subcategory, if an emission rate report shows that NMOC emissions equal
or exceed 50 Mg per year, the owner or operator must begin following
enforceable increments of progress to install a GCCS within 30 months
of reaching or exceeding 50 Mg per year NMOC.
This proposed MSW Landfills Federal Plan includes the five
increments of progress and provides flexibility to establish the
increment dates (40 CFR 62.712). The proposed MSW Landfills Federal
Plan contains a generic compliance schedule (Table 1 to 40 CFR part 62,
subpart OOO) that applies to designated MSW landfills unless the EPA
approves an alternative schedule according to the criteria in 40 CFR
60.27(e)(2).
The five mandatory increments of progress are as follows:
1. Submit final control plan (design plan)--1 year after the first
annual emission rate report showing NMOC emissions >=34 Mg per year
(>=50 Mg per year for the closed landfill subcategory).
2. Award contracts for control systems or orders for purchase of
components--20 months after the first annual emission rate report
showing NMOC emissions >=34 Mg per year (>=50 Mg per year for the
closed landfill subcategory).
3. Begin on-site construction or installation of the GCCS--24
months after the first annual emission rate report showing NMOC
emissions >=34 Mg per year (>=50 Mg per year for the closed landfill
subcategory).
4. Complete on-site construction or installation of the GCCS--30
months after the first annual emission rate report showing NMOC
emissions >=34 Mg per year (>=50 Mg per year for the closed landfill
subcategory).
5. Achieve final compliance--30 months after the first annual
emission rate report showing NMOC emissions >=34 Mg per year (>=50 Mg
per year for the closed landfill subcategory). Note that the initial
performance test to demonstrate compliance must be conducted within 180
days after the date the landfill is required to achieve final
compliance.
The date for the first, fourth, and fifth increments is established
in the 2016 MSW Landfill EG. According to 40 CFR 60.27(e)(1), federal
plan compliance times may be no less stringent than those established
in the EG.
The EPA selected the proposed dates for the middle two increments
(awarding contract and initiating on-site construction) to allow a
reasonable period of time for MSW landfills to complete these
activities. These increments of progress are required by 40 CFR 60.24,
but dates are not specified in the 2016 MSW Landfills EG. The EPA
established these dates to match the dates included in the previous
federal plan for MSW landfills (40 CFR part 62, subpart GGG) because
the two plans require the same increments of progress to achieve
compliance. The proposed date for awarding contracts is 20 months after
the first annual NMOC emission rate report showing NMOC emissions
greater than or equal to 34 Mg per year (50 Mg per year for the closed
landfill subcategory), which is 8 months after the proposed date that
the design plan is due. This 8-month time frame would allow adequate
time for the regulatory agency to review and approve the design plan
and for the MSW landfill owner or operator to solicit bids based on the
design plan and award the contract(s).
The proposed date for initiating on-site construction is 24 months
after the first annual emission report showing NMOC emissions greater
than or equal to 34 Mg per year (50 Mg per year for the closed landfill
subcategory) is due (4 months after contract award). This 4-month
period would allow time for the contractor to mobilize and obtain
materials necessary to begin construction. A later date would not be
practical because the date for completing on-site construction and
final compliance is 30 months after the first annual emission rate
report showing NMOC emissions greater than or equal to 34 Mg per year
(50 Mg per year for the closed landfill subcategory). If construction
is not initiated by 24 months after the first annual emission rate
report showing NMOC emissions greater than or equal to 34 Mg per year
(50 Mg per year for the closed landfill subcategory), it is unlikely
that the construction could be completed by the final compliance date.
Some MSW landfills may want to initiate on-site construction earlier to
assure that they can meet the final compliance date. The fourth
increment, completion of on-site construction, would need to be
completed by the final compliance date (increment 5) in order for the
landfill to achieve compliance.
Owners and operators employing Tier 4 would follow the generic
compliance schedule for Tier 4 landfills in Table 1 to 40 CFR part 62,
subpart OOO. Increment 1 is triggered by the first measured
concentration of methane of 500 parts per million (ppm) or greater,
rather than the initial NMOC emission rate report showing NMOC
emissions 34 Mg per year or greater. Landfills employing Tier 4 would
continue to submit an annual NMOC emission rate report (40 CFR
62.724(c)). Timing of increments 2 through 5 for Tier 4 landfills are
based on the most recent NMOC emission rate report showing NMOC
emissions 34 Mg per year or greater.
[[Page 43753]]
For all landfills, the EPA recognizes that flexibility may be
needed for increment 2 (award contract) and increment 3 (begin
construction) given facility-specific GCCS considerations and
constraints. Therefore, the EPA will accept facility-specific
compliance schedules from MSW landfill owners or operators, as allowed
under 40 CFR 60.27(e)(2).
The MSW landfill owner or operator would submit alternative dates
for increments 2 and 3 and a justification to the EPA at the time the
final control plan is due (40 CFR 62.724(p)). If the MSW landfill owner
or operator is submitting the alternative dates for these increments,
the owner or operator should also send a copy to the appropriate state
or tribe. The EPA is allowing alternative dates for increments 2 and 3
to provide flexibility to MSW landfill owners or operators. However,
owners or operators using alternate dates for increments 2 and 3 must
continue to meet the required dates for increments 1, 4, and 5. The EPA
would review the schedule and coordinate with the owner or operator.
C. What emissions and operating limits is the EPA proposing to
incorporate into the federal plan?
The EPA is proposing that an MSW landfill subject to the federal
plan must install and operate a GCCS that meets specified emissions and
operating limits (40 CFR 62.714 and 40 CFR 62.716), if the NMOC
emissions rate is 34 Mg per year or more (50 Mg per year or more for
the closed landfill subcategory). The standards would require owners or
operators to operate the GCCS at a negative pressure at each wellhead
(except during certain specified conditions), operate the interior
wellhead at a temperature less than 55 degrees Celsius (131 degrees
Fahrenheit), and operate the collection system so that the methane
concentration is less than 500 ppm above background at the surface of
the landfill (40 CFR 62.716(b-(d)). The owner or operator of a landfill
must control the collected gas by routing it to either: (1) A non-
enclosed flare designed and operated according to the requirements of
40 CFR 60.18, (2) an enclosed control device achieving 98-percent NMOC
reduction or an outlet concentration of 20 ppm NMOC by volume or less,
or (3) a gas treatment system that processes the collected gas for
subsequent sale or beneficial use (40 CFR 62.714(c)).
The proposed requirements of the federal plan are the same as the
requirements of the 2016 MSW Landfills EG as published on August 29,
2016 (81 FR 59276). However, this proposed federal plan applies a
technical correction to the compliance provisions section and the
corresponding reporting requirement in the reporting section. Those
corrections appear in this proposed federal plan at 40 CFR
62.720(a)(3)(ii) and 40 CFR 62.724(h)(7) and would ensure that the
owner or operator conducts a corrective action analysis, develops an
implementation schedule, and reports corrective action(s) to address
not only positive pressure, but also elevated temperature.
D. What are the proposed performance testing and monitoring
requirements?
1. NMOC Emissions Rate
The EPA proposes that, to determine if a GCCS is required, the
owner or operator must determine NMOC emissions using one or both of
the two emission rate equations in the rule and one of four optional
methods to determine the model inputs (referred to as tier methods in
the rule) (40 CFR 62.718(a)). Tier 1 uses default assumptions for
methane generation rate and NMOC concentration in the emissions model
(40 CFR 62.718(a)(2)). Tier 2 requires testing to determine a site-
specific NMOC concentration. Tier 3 requires testing to determine a
site-specific NMOC concentration and methane generation rate (40 CFR
62.718(a)(4)). Any MSW landfill that exceeds the NMOC emissions
threshold using Tier 2 or 3 would install a GCCS, unless the owner or
operator chooses to use Tier 4 (40 CFR 62.718(a)(6)).
Tier 4 is based on surface emissions monitoring (SEM) to
demonstrate that surface emissions are low (40 CFR 62.718(a)(6)). An
owner or operator can use Tier 4 only if the MSW landfill owner or
operator can demonstrate that NMOC emissions are greater than or equal
to 34 Mg per year but less than 50 Mg per year using Tier 1 or Tier 2.
An MSW landfill employing Tier 4 that can demonstrate that surface
emissions are below 500 ppm for four consecutive quarters would not
trigger the requirement to install a GCCS even if Tier 1, 2, or 3
calculations indicate that the 34 Mg per year threshold has been
exceeded. However, once SEM demonstrates emissions exceeding 500 ppm
(40 CFR 62.718(a)(6)(v)), the MSW landfill would be required to install
a GCCS according to the schedule in section V.B. of this preamble and
Table 1 to subpart OOO of part 62.
2. Gas Collection System Monitoring
The EPA proposes that the landfill gas collection system must be
equipped with a sampling or access port and the owner or operator must
periodically monitor gauge pressure in the gas collection header,
monitor nitrogen or oxygen content in the landfill gas, and monitor
temperature of the landfill gas (40 CFR 62.722(a)).
3. Flare Monitoring
The EPA proposes that, if a flare is used, the owner or operator
must monitor the flare using a heat sensing device that indicates
presence of a flame and a device that records flow to the flare and any
bypass lines (40 CFR 62.722(c)).
4. Control Device Testing and Monitoring
The EPA proposes that, if an enclosed control device is used, the
owner or operator must conduct an initial performance test (40 CFR
62.714(c)). The owner or operator must then operate the device as
required by the manufacturer's specifications, install a temperature
monitoring device, and install a device that records flow to the
control device and any bypass lines (40 CFR 62.722(b)). A temperature
monitoring device is not required for boilers or process heaters with a
design heat capacity of 44 megawatts or greater (40 CFR 62.722(b)(1)).
E. What are the proposed recordkeeping and reporting requirements?
The EPA proposes that owners and operators must retain records of
all required monitor readings (40 CFR 62.726). Owners or operators must
submit certain required performance test reports, NMOC emission rate
reports, and annual reports documenting compliance and any deviations
from the operating standards in the federal plan (40 CFR 62.724). All
required reports must be submitted through the EPA's Central Data
Exchange (CDX) using the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting
Interface (CEDRI) (40 CFR 62.724(j)). Owners or operators are allowed
to maintain electronic copies of the records in lieu of hardcopies to
satisfy federal recordkeeping requirements.
The requirement to submit performance test data electronically to
the EPA would apply only to those performance tests conducted using
test methods that are supported by the Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT).
A listing of the pollutants and test methods supported by the ERT is
available at: https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_info.html. When
the EPA adds new methods to the ERT, a notice will be sent out through
the Clearinghouse for Inventories and Emissions Factors (CHIEF)
Listserv
[[Page 43754]]
(https://www.epa.gov/airemissions-inventories/emissionsinventory-listservs) and a notice of availability will be added to the ERT
website. You are encouraged to check the ERT website regularly for up-
to-date information on methods supported by the ERT.
VI. Implementation of the Federal Plan and Delegation
A. Background of Authority
Under section 111(d) of the CAA, the EPA is required to adopt EG
that are applicable to existing MSW landfills. These EG are implemented
when the EPA approves a state or tribal plan or adopts a federal plan
that implements and enforces the EG. As discussed above, this action
would regulate existing MSW landfills in states or Indian country that
do not have approved plans in effect to implement the EG.
Congress has determined that the primary responsibility for air
pollution prevention and control rests with state, tribal and local
agencies. See CAA section 101(a)(3). Consistent with that overall
determination, Congress established CAA section 111(d) with the intent
that state, tribal and local agencies take the primary responsibility
for ensuring that the standards of performance and other requirements
in the EG are achieved. Also, Congress explicitly required that the EPA
establish procedures that are like those under CAA section 110 for
state implementation plans. Although Congress required the EPA to
propose and promulgate a federal plan for states and tribes that fail
to submit approvable state plans on time, states may submit plans after
promulgation of this federal plan. The EPA strongly encourages states
and tribes that are unable to submit approvable plans to request
delegation of the federal plan so that they can have primary
responsibility for implementing the 2016 MSW Landfills EG, consistent
with the intent of Congress.
The preferred outcome under the statute and the regulations results
when the state, tribal, and local agencies implement an EPA-approved
state or tribal plan because state, tribal, and local agencies not only
have the responsibility to implement the 2016 MSW Landfills EG, but
also have the practical knowledge and enforcement resources critical to
achieving the highest rate of compliance. In cases where states are
unable to develop and submit approvable state or tribal plans, it is
still preferable for the state, tribal and local agencies to be the
implementing agency. For these reasons, the EPA will do all that it can
to expedite delegation of the federal plan to state, tribal, and local
agencies, whenever possible, in cases where states or tribes are unable
to develop and submit approvable state or tribal plans. The EPA will
also continue to review and approve state or tribal plans after
promulgation of this federal plan.
B. Mechanisms for Transferring Authority
There are two mechanisms for transferring implementation authority
to state, tribal, and local agencies: (1) The EPA's approval of a state
plan after the federal plan is in effect; and (2) if a state does not
submit or obtain approval of its own plan, the EPA's delegation to a
state, tribe, or local agency is transferred with the authority to
implement certain portions of this federal plan to the extent
appropriate and if allowed by state law. Both options are described in
more detail below.
1. Federal Plan Becomes Effective Prior to Approval of a State Plan
After MSW landfills in a state become subject to the federal plan,
the state or tribal agency may still adopt and submit a state or tribal
plan to the EPA. If the EPA determines that the state or tribal plan
meets the requirements of the 2016 MSW Landfills EG, the EPA will
approve the state or tribal plan. If the EPA determines that the plan
does not meet the requirements of the 2016 MSW Landfills EG, the EPA
will approve the portions of the plan that are consistent with the 2016
MSW Landfills EG. If a state or tribal plan is approved in part,
portions of the federal plan will apply to the designated MSW landfills
in lieu of the disapproved portions of the state or tribal plan until
the state or tribe addresses the deficiencies in the state or tribal
plan and the revised plan is approved by the EPA. Prior to any
disapproval, the EPA will work with states and tribes in an attempt to
reconcile areas of the plan that remain inconsistent with the EG.
Upon the effective date of a state or tribal plan, the federal plan
will no longer apply to MSW landfills covered by such a plan. The
state, tribe, territory, or local agency would implement and enforce
the state plan in lieu of the federal plan. When an EPA Regional office
approves a state or tribal plan, it will amend the appropriate subpart
of 40 CFR part 62 to indicate such approval.
2. State, Tribe, Territory, or Local Agency Taking Delegation of the
Federal Plan
The EPA, in its discretion, may delegate to state, tribe,
territorial, or local agencies the authority to implement this proposed
federal plan. As discussed above, the EPA has concluded that it is
advantageous and the best use of resources for states, tribes,
territories, or local agencies to agree to undertake, on the EPA's
behalf, administrative and substantive roles in implementing the
federal plan to the extent appropriate and where authorized by federal,
state, tribal, territorial, or local law. If a state, tribe, territory,
or local agency requests delegation, the EPA will generally delegate
the entire federal plan to the state, tribe, territory, or local
agency. These functions include administration and oversight of
compliance, reporting and recordkeeping requirements, MSW landfill
inspections, and preparation of draft notices of violation, but will
not include any authorities retained by the EPA. Agencies that have
taken delegation, as well as the EPA, will have responsibility for
bringing enforcement actions against sources violating federal plan
provisions.
C. Implementing Authority
The EPA Regional Administrators have been delegated the authority
for implementing the MSW Landfills Federal Plan. All reports required
by the federal plan should be submitted to the appropriate Regional
Administrator. Table 3 of this preamble lists the addresses for the EPA
Regional offices and the states they cover.
D. Delegation of the Federal Plan and Retained Authorities
If a state, tribe, territory, or local agency intends to take
delegation of the federal plan, the state, tribe, territory, or local
agency should submit a written request for delegation of authority to
the appropriate EPA regional office. The state, tribe, territory, or
local agency should explain how it meets the criteria for delegation.
See Good Practices Manual for Delegation of NSPS and NESHAP (U.S. EPA,
February 1983). The letter requesting delegation of authority to
implement the federal plan should: (1) Demonstrate that the state,
tribe, territory, or local agency has adequate resources, as well as
the legal authority to administer and enforce the program; (2) include
an inventory of designated MSW landfills, which includes those that
have ceased operation, but have not been dismantled or rendered
inoperable, and an
[[Page 43755]]
inventory of the designated units' air emissions and a provision for
progress reports to the EPA; (3) certify that a public hearing was held
on the state, tribe, territory, or local agency delegation request; and
(4) include a memorandum of agreement between the state, tribe,
territory, or local agency and the EPA that sets forth the terms and
conditions of the delegation, the effective date of the agreement, and
the mechanism to transfer authority. Upon signature of the agreement,
the appropriate EPA regional office would publish an approval notice in
the Federal Register, thereby incorporating the delegation of authority
into the appropriate subpart of 40 CFR part 62.
If authority is not delegated to a state, tribe, territory, or
local agency, the EPA will implement the federal plan. Also, if a
state, tribe, territory, or local agency fails to properly implement a
delegated portion of the federal plan, the EPA will assume direct
implementation and enforcement of that portion. The EPA will continue
to hold enforcement authority along with the state, tribe, territory,
or local agency even when the agency has received delegation of the
federal plan. In all cases where the federal plan is delegated, the EPA
will retain and will not transfer authority to a state, tribe, or local
agency to approve the following items promulgated in 40 CFR 62.710(b)):
(1) Approval of alternative methods to determine the site-specific NMOC
concentration or a site-specific methane generation rate constant (k);
(2) alternative emission standards; (3) major alternatives to test
methods (Major alternatives to test methods or to monitoring are
modifications made to a federally enforceable test method or to a
federal monitoring requirement. These changes would involve the use of
unproven technology or procedures or an entirely new method, which is
sometimes necessary when the required test method or monitoring
requirement is unsuitable.); and (4) waivers of recordkeeping.
Any MSW landfill owners or operators who wish to petition the
agency for an alternative requirement to those in 40 CFR 62.710(b)
should submit a request to the appropriate Regional Administrator with
a copy sent to the appropriate state.
VII. Title V Operating Permits
Existing landfills with design capacities less than 2.5 million Mg
or 2.5 million m\3\ are not required to have a title V operating
permit, unless they are a major source or are subject to title V (part
70 or part 71) for some other reason (e.g., subject to a CAA section
112 NESHAP or to another CAA section 111 NSPS). All existing MSW
landfills with design capacities equal to or greater than 2.5 million
Mg and 2.5 million m\3\ must have a title V operating permit. Existing
MSW landfills that are not currently subject to title V permitting
because their design capacity is less than 2.5 million Mg or 2.5
million m\3\ may trigger the requirement to apply for a title V permit
in the future if the landfill's design capacity increases to equal or
exceed 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m\3\. Such sources, newly subject
to the requirement to obtain a title V permit for operating the MSW
landfill at or above the 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m\3\ capacity,
become subject to the title V program 90 days after the effective date
of this federal plan, even if the design capacity report is submitted
prior to that date. This date that triggers title V applicability is
consistent with the published EG. The requirements of a federal plan
are applicable requirements for title V sources covered by a federal
plan. Additional information for filing a timely title V application
should be obtained at the permitting authority. See 40 CFR
70.5(a)(1)(i) or 71.5(a)(1)(i).
An MSW landfill that is closed and is no longer subject to title V
as a result of this federal plan, once finalized, may remain subject to
title V permitting requirements for another reason or reasons. See 40
CFR 62.711(e) and 40 CFR 70.3 or 71.3. In such circumstances, the
landfill would be required to continue operating in compliance with a
title V permit.
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was,
therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This action is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771
regulatory action because this action is not significant under
Executive Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the PRA. This action simply proposes the MSW Landfills Federal
Plan to implement the 2016 MSW Landfills EG for those states that do
not have a state plan implementing the EG. OMB has previously reviewed
the information collection activities contained in the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0720.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. The
small entities subject to the requirements of this action are small MSW
landfills. The Agency has determined that up to 15 small entities,
representing approximately 13 percent of the total number of small
entities subject to the proposal, may experience an impact of greater
than 3 percent of sales or revenues. A summary of this analysis is
available in the memorandum, Small Entity Screening Assessment for
Proposed Federal Plan for Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, which is available in the docket for
this action. More details of the general economic analysis of the EG,
which this action implements, are available in the docket for the 2016
MSW Landfills EG (Docket ID Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0451-0225).
Although not required by the RFA to convene a Small Business
Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel because the EPA has now determined that
this proposal would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, there was substantial interest in
the revision of the EG among small entities. Thus, during development
of the 2016 MSW Landfills EG, the EPA conducted stakeholder outreach as
detailed in sections XI.C and XI.E of the preamble to the proposed
Standards of Performance for MSW Landfills (79 FR 41828-41829; July 17,
2014) and in sections VIII.C and VIII.E of the preamble to the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG (81 FR 59309-59310; August 29, 2016). The EPA convened an
SBAR Panel in 2013 for the MSW Landfills NSPS and EG rulemakings. The
EPA originally planned a review of the EG and NSPS in one action, but
the actions were subsequently divided into separate rulemakings. The
SBAR Panel evaluated the assembled materials and small entity comments
on issues related to the rule's potential effects and significant
alternative regulatory approaches. A copy of the Summary of Small
Entity Outreach is available in the docket for the 2016 MSW Landfills
EG (Docket ID
[[Page 43756]]
Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0451-0012). While formulating the provisions
of the EG, the EPA considered the input provided over the course of the
stakeholder outreach as well as the input provided in the many public
comments and incorporated many of the suggestions in the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538. This action implements mandates specifically
and explicitly set forth in 40 CFR 60.27 without the exercise of any
policy discretion by the EPA.
We note, however, that the EG may affect small governments because
small governments operate landfills (80 FR 52146, August 27, 2015).
This action implements the promulgated EG. In developing the final 2016
MSW Landfills EG, the EPA consulted with small governments pursuant to
a plan established under section 203 of the UMRA to address impacts of
regulatory requirements in the rule that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. The EPA also held meetings as
discussed in section VIII.F of this preamble.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
The EPA has concluded that this action may have federalism
implications, because the rule imposes substantial direct compliance
costs on state or local governments, and the federal government will
not provide the funds necessary to pay those costs. The EPA provided
the following federalism summary impact statement for the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG. The EPA consulted with state and local officials early in
the process of developing the 2016 MSW Landfills EG to permit them to
have meaningful and timely input into its development. In developing
the regulatory options reflected in the proposed and final 2016 MSW
Landfills EG, the EPA consulted with eight national organizations
representing state and local elected officials. Additionally, the
Environmental Council of the States, the National Association of Clean
Air Agencies, and the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste
Management Officials participated in preproposal briefings. Finally, in
addition to these associations, over 140 officials representing state
and local governments across the nation participated in at least one of
three preproposal briefings in the fall of 2013 (September 10, 2013,
November 7, 2013, and November 14, 2013), which is summarized in the
docket for the 2016 MSW Landfills EG (Docket ID Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2014-0451-0013). The EPA received comments from over 40 entities
representing state and local governments. The EPA conducted an
additional Federalism outreach meeting on April 15, 2015.
The principal intergovernmental concerns raised during the
preproposal consultations, as well as during the proposed rule's public
comment period, include: (1) Implementation concerns associated with
shortening of GCCS installation and/or expansion timeframes; (2)
concerns regarding significant lowering of the design capacity or
emission thresholds; (3) the need for clarifications associated with
wellhead operating parameters; and (4) the need for consistent, clear,
and rigorous surface monitoring requirements. In response to these
comments and based upon the available data, the EPA decided not to
adjust the design capacity or significantly lower the emission
threshold. The EPA also decided not to adjust the time allotted for
installation of the GCCS or expansion of the wellfield. In the proposed
MSW Landfills EG (80 FR 52121, August 27, 2015), the EPA highlighted
specific concerns raised by commenters, which included state agencies
as well as landfill owners and operators, about the interaction between
shortened lag times and design plan approvals, costs, and safety
concerns associated with reduced lag times, and the need for
flexibility for lag time adjustments. The EPA adjusted wellhead
operating parameters to limit corrective action requirements to
negative pressure and temperature. The EPA also acknowledged concerns
about wellhead operating parameters in 80 FR 52121 (August 27, 2015)
and considered public comments in favor of and against retention of the
parameters.
A complete list of the comments from state and local governments
was provided to OMB and was placed in the docket for the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG (Final Report of the Small Business Advocacy Review Panel
on EPA's Planned Proposed Rules Standards of Performance for Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills and Review of Emissions Guidelines for Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills, Docket ID Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0451-0139).
In addition, the detailed response to comments from these entities is
contained in the EPA's Response to Comments document for the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG (Docket ID Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0451-0229). As
required by section 8(a) of Executive Order 13132, the EPA included a
certification from its Federalism official stating that the EPA had met
the Executive Order's requirements in a meaningful and timely manner
when it sent the draft of the 2016 MSW Landfills EG to OMB for review
pursuant to Executive Order 12866. A copy of the certification is
included in the record for the 2016 MSW Landfills EG (Outreach under
Executive Order 13132 for MSW Landfills, Docket ID Item Nos. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2014-0451-0013 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0451-0100).
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action has tribal implications as specified in Executive Order
13175. This action will neither impose substantial direct compliance
costs on federally recognized tribal governments nor preempt tribal
law. The database used to estimate impacts of the 2016 MSW Landfills
EG, identified one tribe, the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian
Community, which owns three landfills potentially subject to this
federal plan. One of these landfills is open, the Salt River Landfill,
and is already controlling emissions under the current NSPS/EG
framework, so while subject to this subpart, the costs of this proposal
are not substantial. The two other landfills are closed and anticipated
to meet the definition of the closed landfill subcategory. One of the
closed landfills, the Tri Cities Landfill, is already controlling
emissions under the current NSPS/EG framework and will not incur
substantial additional compliance costs under the federal plan. The
other landfill, North Center Street Landfill, is not estimated to
install controls under the federal plan. The EPA will consult with
tribal officials under the EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribes in the process of developing this action to permit
them to have meaningful and timely input into its development. A
summary of that consultation will be provided in the docket for this
action once completed.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045
[[Page 43757]]
because it implements a previously promulgated federal standard.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
Part 51
This action involves technical standards. The EPA proposes to use
EPA Methods 2, 2E, 3, 3A, 3C, 18, 21, 25, 25A, and 25C of 40 CFR part
60, appendix A. The EPA identified 15 voluntary consensus standards
(VCS) as being potentially applicable (ASTM D3154-00 (2006), ASTM
D3464-96 (2007), ASTM D3796-90 (2001), ANSI/ASME PTC 19-10-1981 Part
10, ASME B133.9-1994 (2001), ISO 10396:1993 (2007), ISO 12039:2001, ISO
10780:1994, ASTM D5835-95 (2013), ASTM D6522-11, ASTM D6420-99 (2010),
CAN/CSA Z223.2-M86 (1999), ASTM D6060-96 (2009), ISO 14965:2000(E), EN
12619(1999)). The EPA determined that 14 of the 15 candidate VCS
identified for measuring emissions of pollutants or their surrogates
subject to emission standards in the rule would not be practical due to
lack of equivalency, documentation, validation data, and other
important technical and policy considerations. The agency identified no
equivalent standards for EPA Methods 2E, 21, and 25C. However, one VCS
was identified as an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 3A.
The VCS ASTM D6522-11, ``Standard Test Method for the Determination
of Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon Monoxide, and Oxygen Concentrations in
Emissions from Natural Gas-Fired Reciprocating Engines, Combustion
Turbines, Boilers, and Process Heaters Using Portable Analyzers,'' is
an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 3A when used at the wellhead
before combustion. It is advisable to know the flammability and check
the lower explosive limit of the flue gas constituents, prior to
sampling, in order to avoid undesired ignition of the gas. The results
of ASTM D6522-11 may be used to determine nitrogen oxides and carbon
monoxide emission concentrations from natural gas combustion at
stationary sources. This test method may also be used to monitor
emissions during short-term emission tests or periodically in order to
optimize process operation for nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide
control. The EPA's review, including review of comments for these 15
methods, is documented in the memorandum, Voluntary Consensus Standard
Results for Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills, 2016, which is available in the docket for the
2016 MSW Landfills EG (Docket ID Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0451-0206).
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The
EPA has determined that because this action increases the level of
environmental protection for all affected populations without having
any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on any population, including any minority, low-income, or
indigenous populations. To the extent that any minority, low-income, or
indigenous subpopulation is disproportionately impacted by landfill gas
emissions due to the proximity of their homes to sources of these
emissions, that subpopulation also stands to see increased
environmental and health benefit from the emission reductions called
for by this action. The results of the demographic analysis are
presented in the EJ Screening Report for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills, July 2016, a copy of which is available in the 2016 MSW
Landfills EG docket (Docket ID Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0451-0223).
Dated: August 14, 2019.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-17822 Filed 8-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P