Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Oklahoma; Control of Emissions From Existing Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units, 58685-58689 [2024-15448]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 139 / Friday, July 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules
and low-income populations to the
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect
to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further
defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ‘‘no group of people should bear a
disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’ The air agency did not
evaluate environmental justice
considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation.
EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and
did not consider EJ in this action.
Consideration of EJ is not required as
part of this action, and there is no
information in the record inconsistent
with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of
achieving environmental justice for
people of color, low-income
populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: July 15, 2024.
David Cash,
Regional Administrator, Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2024–15857 Filed 7–18–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
[EPA–R06–OAR–2020–0610; FRL–11996–
01–R6]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Air Quality Plans for Designated
Facilities and Pollutants; Oklahoma;
Control of Emissions From Existing
Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste
Incineration Units
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to the Federal Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is proposing to approve the CAA section
111(d)/129 state plan revision submitted
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:39 Jul 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
by the State of Oklahoma for sources
subject to the Commercial and
Industrial Solid Waste Incineration
units (CISWI) Emission Guidelines (EG).
The Oklahoma CISWI plan was
submitted to fulfill state obligations
under CAA section 111(d)/129 to
implement and enforce the
requirements under the CISWI EG. The
EPA is proposing to approve the state
plan and amend the agency regulations
in accordance with the requirements of
the CAA.
Written comments must be
received on or before August 19, 2024.
DATES:
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2020–0610, at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
ruan-lei.karolina@epa.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 its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. 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, please
contact Karolina Ruan Lei, (214) 665–
7346, ruan-lei.karolina@epa.gov. For 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.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
www.regulations.gov. While all
documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may not be
publicly available due to docket file size
restrictions or content (e.g., CBI).
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karolina Ruan Lei, EPA Region 6 Office,
Air and Radiation Division—State
Planning and Implementation Branch
(R6–ARSH), (214) 665–7346, ruanlei.karolina@epa.gov. We encourage the
public to submit comments via https://
www.regulations.gov. Please call or
email the contact listed above if you
need alternative access to material
indexed but not provided in the docket.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58685
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document wherever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
the EPA.
I. Background
A. Clean Air Act Section 111(d)/129
Requirements
Sections 111(d) and 129 of the CAA
require states to submit plans to control
certain pollutants (designated
pollutants) at existing solid waste
combustor facilities (designated
facilities) whenever standards of
performance have been established
under section 111(b) for new sources of
the same type, and the EPA has
established emission guidelines for such
existing sources. CAA section 129
directs the EPA to establish standards of
performance for new sources (NSPS)
and emissions guidelines (EG) for
existing 1 sources for each category of
solid waste incinerator specified in CAA
section 129. Under CAA section 129,
NSPS and EG must contain numerical
emissions limitations for particulate
matter, opacity (as appropriate), sulfur
dioxide, hydrogen chloride, oxides of
nitrogen, carbon monoxide, lead,
cadmium, mercury, and dioxins and
dibenzofurans. While NSPS are directly
applicable to new sources, EG for
existing sources (designated facilities)
are intended for states to use to develop
a state plan to submit to the EPA. When
designated facilities are located in a
state, the state must then develop and
submit a plan for the control of the
designated pollutants.
State plan submittals and revisions
under CAA section 111(d) must be
consistent with the applicable EG and
the requirements of 40 CFR part 60,
subpart B, and part 62, subpart A. The
regulations at 40 CFR part 60, subpart B,
contain general provisions applicable to
the adoption and submittal of state
plans and plan revisions under CAA
section 111(d). Additionally, 40 CFR
part 62, subpart A, provides the
procedural framework by which the
EPA will approve or disapprove such
plans and plan revisions submitted by a
state. Once approved by the EPA, the
state plan becomes federally
enforceable. If a state does not submit an
approvable state plan to the EPA, the
EPA is responsible for developing,
implementing, and enforcing a federal
plan. However, 40 CFR 60.23(b) and 40
CFR 62.06 provide that if there are no
1 In this context and for purposes under CAA
section 111(d)/129, the term ‘‘existing’’ source is
synonymous with designated facility. These are
sources that were constructed, reconstructed, or
modified on or before the date specified in the
emission guideline the source applies to.
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
58686
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 139 / Friday, July 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules
designated facilities of the designated
pollutant(s) in the state, the state may
submit a letter of certification to that
effect (i.e., negative declaration) in lieu
of a plan. The negative declaration
exempts the state from the requirements
of subpart B that require the submittal
of a CAA section 111(d)/129 plan.
B. Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incineration Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
On December 1, 2000, EPA
promulgated the CISWI NSPS at 40 CFR
part 60, subpart CCCC, and the CISWI
EG at 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD (65
FR 75338). On March 21, 2011, after
voluntarily remanding the 2000 CISWI
NSPS and EG, the EPA promulgated
revised CISWI NSPS and EG in a final
rule (76 FR 15704). Correspondingly, on
the same date, EPA promulgated a final
rule under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) to identify
which non-hazardous secondary
materials, when used as fuels or
ingredients in combustion units, are
‘‘solid wastes’’ (76 FR 15456).2 EPA
subsequently promulgated amendments
to both March 21, 2011 rules on
February 7, 2013, to clarify several
provisions in order to implement the
non-hazardous secondary materials rule
as EPA originally intended (78 FR
9112). Reconsideration of certain
aspects of the final CISWI rule resulted
in minor amendments (81 FR 40956,
June 23, 2016).3 On April 16, 2019, EPA
finalized further amendments to the
CISWI NSPS and EG in order to provide
clarity and address implementation
issues (84 FR 15846).4
The CISWI NSPS and EG were
significantly revised in the March 21,
2011, and February 7, 2013,
rulemakings, and the subsequent final
rulemakings on June 23, 2016, and April
16, 2019, contained minor amendments
2 See 40 CFR part 241, Solid Wastes Used as Fuels
or Ingredients in Combustion Units, also known as
the ‘‘Non-Hazardous Secondary Material Rule.’’ The
identification of solid waste in the Non-Hazardous
Secondary Material Rule is used to determine
whether a combustion unit is required to meet the
emissions standards for solid waste incineration
units issued under sections 111 and 129 of the Act,
or meet the emissions standards for commercial,
industrial, and institutional boilers issued under
section 112 of the Act.
3 In the June 23, 2016, final action, the EPA
finalized amendments on these four topics:
Definition of ‘‘continuous emission monitoring
system (CEMS) data during startup and shutdown
periods;’’ particulate matter (PM) limit for the
waste-burning kiln subcategory; fuel variability
factor (FVF) for coal-burning energy recovery units
(ERUs); and the definition of ‘‘kiln.’’
4 In the April 16, 2019, final action, the EPA made
technical amendments to correct and clarify various
parts of the June 23, 2016, final rule; this includes
issues with implementation of the standards, testing
and monitoring issues and inconsistencies, and
other regulatory provisions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:39 Jul 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
to the CISWI rules that did not make
any changes to the applicability of the
designated facilitates, including 40 CFR
60.2505, ‘‘Am I affected by this
subpart?’’. As provided by 40 CFR
60.2505, the designated facilities to
which the CISWI EG apply are CISWI
and air curtain incinerators (ACI) 5 that
commenced construction on or before
June 4, 2010, or for which modification
or reconstruction was commenced on or
before August 7, 2013, with limited
exceptions as provided under 40 CFR
60.2555.
C. Oklahoma CAA Section 111(d)/129
CISWI Plan Approval History
On June 29, 2005, the Oklahoma
Department of Environmental Quality
(ODEQ) submitted a CISWI state plan to
address the 2000 CISWI EG
requirements and fulfill obligations
under CAA sections 111(d) and 129.
Oklahoma’s 2005 CISWI plan controlled
emissions from sources subject to the
2000 CISWI EG, found at 40 CFR part
60, subpart DDDD, within the State of
Oklahoma. Oklahoma’s 2005 CISWI
plan was approved by EPA on October
4, 2005 (70 FR 57764).
D. Oklahoma’s CAA Section 111(d)/129
CISWI Plan Submittal for This
Rulemaking
In order to address the most recent
CISWI EG requirements and fulfill
obligations under CAA sections 111(d)
and 129, ODEQ submitted a state plan
revision for the control of emissions
from sources subject to the CISWI EG for
the State of Oklahoma on November 16,
2020. The Oklahoma 2020 CISWI plan
implements and enforces the applicable
provisions under the CISWI EG at 40
CFR part 60, subpart DDDD, most
recently amended on April 16, 2019,
and additionally meets the relevant
requirements of the CAA section 111(d)
implementing regulations at 40 CFR part
60, subpart B. A copy of the Oklahoma
submittal is included in the docket for
this rulemaking.
E. Impact on Areas of Indian Country
Following the U.S. Supreme Court
decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma, 140 S.
Ct. 2452 (2020), the Governor of the
State of Oklahoma requested approval
under Section 10211(a) of the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act of 2005: A
Legacy for Users, Public Law 109–59,
119 Stat. 1144, 1937 (August 10, 2005)
(‘‘SAFETEA’’), to administer in certain
5 These air curtain incinerators (ACI) that are
subject to the CISWI EG at 40 CFR part 60, subpart
DDDD, are those ACI that may not fit the definition
of a ‘‘CISWI’’ under the CISWI EG. See 40 CFR
60.2875.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
areas of Indian country (as defined at 18
U.S.C. 1151) the State’s environmental
regulatory programs that were
previously approved by the EPA for
areas outside of Indian country. The
State’s request excluded certain areas of
Indian country further described below.
In addition, the State only sought
approval to the extent that such
approval is necessary for the State to
administer a program in light of
Oklahoma Dept. of Environmental
Quality v. EPA, 740 F.3d 185 (D.C. Cir.
2014).6
On October 1, 2020, the EPA
approved Oklahoma’s SAFETEA request
to administer all the State’s EPAapproved environmental regulatory
programs, including Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants
under sections 111(d) and 129, in the
requested areas of Indian country. As
requested by Oklahoma, the EPA’s
approval under SAFETEA does not
include Indian country lands, including
rights-of-way running through the same,
that: (1) qualify as Indian allotments, the
Indian titles to which have not been
extinguished, under 18 U.S.C. 1151(c);
(2) are held in trust by the United States
on behalf of an individual Indian or
Tribe; or (3) are owned in fee by a Tribe,
if the Tribe (a) acquired that fee title to
such land, or an area that included such
land, in accordance with a treaty with
the United States to which such Tribe
was a party, and (b) never allotted the
land to a member or citizen of the Tribe
(collectively ‘‘excluded Indian country
lands’’).
EPA’s approval under SAFETEA
expressly provided that to the extent
EPA’s prior approvals of Oklahoma’s
environmental programs excluded
Indian country, any such exclusions are
superseded for the geographic areas of
Indian country covered by the EPA’s
approval of Oklahoma’s SAFETEA
request.7 The approval also provided
that future revisions or amendments to
Oklahoma’s approved environmental
6 In ODEQ v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit held that
under the CAA, a state has the authority to
implement a SIP in non-reservation areas of Indian
country in the state, where there has been no
demonstration of tribal jurisdiction. Under the D.C.
Circuit’s decision, the CAA does not provide
authority to states to implement SIPs in Indian
reservations. ODEQ did not, however, substantively
address the separate authority in Indian country
provided specifically to Oklahoma under
SAFETEA. That separate authority was not invoked
until the State submitted its request under
SAFETEA, and was not approved until EPA’s
decision, described in this section, on October 1,
2020.
7 EPA’s prior approvals relating to Oklahoma’s
CAA section 111(d)/129 plans did not apply in
areas of Indian country located in the state. See,
e.g., 70 FR 57764 (October 4, 2005). Such prior
expressed limitations are superseded by the EPA’s
approval of Oklahoma’s SAFETEA request.
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 139 / Friday, July 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules
regulatory programs would extend to
the covered areas of Indian country
(without any further need for additional
requests under SAFETEA).8
As explained earlier in this action, the
EPA is proposing to approve the
Oklahoma CAA section 111(d)/129
CISWI state plan that was submitted by
the State of Oklahoma on November 16,
2020. More specifically, we are
proposing to approve Oklahoma’s
CISWI plan addressing CAA section
111(d)/129 requirements for CISWI
under the CISWI EG codified at 40 CFR
part 60, subpart DDDD. Consistent with
the EPA’s October 1, 2020, SAFETEA
approval, if this approval is finalized as
proposed, this Oklahoma CISWI plan
will apply to all Indian country within
Oklahoma, other than the excluded
Indian country lands, as described
earlier. The Oklahoma CISWI plan
applies statewide, but only affects
specific types of facilities, as discussed
earlier in this notice. ODEQ has only
identified one existing facility, located
within the Muscogee Nation reservation,
that is affected by the Oklahoma CISWI
plan we are proposing to approve. Any
newly constructed incinerators subject
to the CISWI EG would be subject to the
CISWI NSPS, not the CISWI plan
implementing the CISWI EG
requirements.
II. The EPA’s Evaluation
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
The EPA has evaluated the Oklahoma
CISWI plan to determine whether the
plan meets applicable requirements
from the CISWI EG at 40 CFR part 60,
subpart DDDD, and the CAA section
111(d) implementing regulations at 40
CFR part 60, subpart B.
Section 60.2515 of the CISWI EG
addresses what must be included in
state plan submittals. These
requirements include:
8 In accordance with Executive Order 13990, EPA
is currently reviewing our October 1, 2020,
SAFETEA approval. On December 22, 2021, EPA
proposed to withdraw and reconsider the October
1, 2020, SAFETEA approval. See https://
www.epa.gov/ok/proposed-withdrawal-andreconsideration-and-supporting-information. EPA
expects to have further discussions with tribal
governments and State of Oklahoma as part of this
reconsideration. EPA also notes that the October 1,
2020, approval is the subject of a pending challenge
in federal court. Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma v.
Regan, No. 20–9635 (10th Cir.). Pending completion
of EPA’s review, EPA is proceeding with this
proposed action in accordance with the October 1,
2020, approval. EPA may make further changes to
the approval of Oklahoma’s plan to reflect the
outcome of the proposed withdrawal and
reconsideration of the October 1, 2020 SAFETEA
approval. To the extent any change occurs in the
scope of Oklahoma’s CAA 111(d)/129 authority in
Indian country before the finalization of this
proposed rule, such a change may affect the scope
of the EPA’s final action on the proposed rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:39 Jul 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
(1) Inventory of affected CISWI,
including those that have ceased
operation but have not been dismantled.
(2) Inventory of emissions from
affected CISWI in the State.
(3) Compliance schedules for each
affected CISWI.
(4) Emission limitations, operator
training and qualification requirements,
a waste management plan, and
operating limits for affected CISWIs that
are at least as protective as the emission
guidelines contained in this subpart.
(5) Performance testing,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements.
(6) Certification that the hearing on
the state plan was held, a list of
witnesses and their organizational
affiliations, if any, appearing at the
hearing, and a brief written summary of
each presentation or written
submission.
(7) Provision for State progress reports
to EPA.
(8) Identification of enforceable State
mechanisms that the State selected for
implementing the emission guidelines
of this subpart.
(9) Demonstration of the state’s legal
authority to carry out the sections
111(d) and 129 in the state plan.
Section 60.2515 of the CISWI EG also
requires the state plan to demonstrate
that it is at least as protective as the
CISWI EG if it deviates from the format
and content of the EG in 40 CFR part 60,
subpart DDDD. The state plan must also
follow the requirements of 40 CFR part
60, subpart B.
The EPA’s detailed rationale and
discussion on the Oklahoma CISWI plan
and how the plan meets these
requirements can be found in the
Technical Support Document (TSD),
located in the docket for this
rulemaking.
III. Proposed Action
The EPA is proposing to approve the
Oklahoma CISWI plan, submitted by
ODEQ on November 16, 2020, and
amend 40 CFR part 62 in accordance
with the requirements under sections
111(d) and 129 of the CAA. The EPA is
proposing to find that the Oklahoma
CISWI plan is at least as protective as
the Federal requirements provided
under the CISWI EG, codified at 40 CFR
part 60, subpart DDDD. Once approved
by the EPA, the Oklahoma CISWI plan
will become federally enforceable.
IV. Environmental Justice
Considerations
Information on Executive Order 12898
(Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58687
Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994) and how EPA defines
environmental justice can be found in
the section titled ‘‘Statutory and
Executive Order Reviews’’ in this
proposed rule. EPA is providing
additional analysis of environmental
justice associated with this action. The
results of this analysis are being
provided for informational and
transparency purposes, not as a basis of
our proposed action.
EPA conducted screening analyses
using EJSCREEN, an environmental
justice mapping and screening tool that
provides EPA with a nationally
consistent dataset and approach for
combining various environmental and
demographic indicators.9 The
EJSCREEN tool presents these indicators
at a Census block group (CBG) level or
a larger user-specified ‘‘buffer’’ area that
covers multiple CBGs.10 An individual
CBG is a cluster of contiguous blocks
within the same census tract and
generally contains between 600 and
3,000 people. EJSCREEN is not a tool for
performing in-depth risk analysis, but is
instead a screening tool that provides an
initial representation of indicators
related to environmental justice and is
subject to uncertainty in some
underlying data (e.g., some
environmental indicators are based on
monitoring data which are not
uniformly available; others are based on
self-reported data).11 To help mitigate
this uncertainty, we have summarized
EJSCREEN data within larger ‘‘buffer’’
areas covering multiple block groups
and representing the average resident
within the buffer areas surrounding the
sources. We present EJSCREEN
environmental indicators to help screen
for locations where residents may
experience a higher overall pollution
burden than would be expected for a
block group with the same total
population. These indicators of overall
pollution burden include estimates of
ambient particulate matter (PM2.5) and
ozone concentration, a score for traffic
proximity and volume, percentage of
pre-1960 housing units (lead paint
indicator), and scores for proximity to
Superfund sites, risk management plan
9 The EJSCREEN tool is available at https://
www.epa.gov/ejscreen.
10 See https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/
geography/about/glossary.html.
11 In addition, EJSCREEN relies on the five-year
block group estimates from the U.S. Census
American Community Survey. The advantage of
using five-year over single-year estimates is
increased statistical reliability of the data (i.e.,
lower sampling error), particularly for small
geographic areas and population groups. For more
information, see https://www.census.gov/content/
dam/Census/library/publications/2020/acs/acs_
general_handbook_2020.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
58688
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 139 / Friday, July 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules
(RMP) sites, and hazardous waste
facilities.12 EJSCREEN also provides
information on demographic indicators,
including percent low-income,
communities of color, linguistic
isolation, and education.
The EPA prepared EJSCREEN reports
covering a buffer area of approximately
3-mile radius around the incinerator
identified by ODEQ as subject to the
CAA section 111(d)/129 CISWI plan.
Table 1 presents a summary of results
from the EPA’s screening-level analysis
for the areas surrounding the affected
incinerator in Oklahoma compared to
the U.S. as a whole. The full, detailed
EJSCREEN report is provided in the
docket for this rulemaking.
TABLE 1—EJSCREEN ANALYSIS SUMMARY FOR THE EXISTING INCINERATOR IN OKLAHOMA SUBJECT TO THE CISWI EG
Values for buffer areas (radius) for each affected
incinerator and the U.S.
(percentile within U.S. where indicated)
Variables
Henryetta Pallet Company
(Henryetta, 3 miles)
U.S.
Pollution Burden Indicators
Particulate matter (PM2.5), annual average ...................................................................
Ozone, summer seasonal average of daily 8-hour max ...............................................
Traffic proximity and volume score * .............................................................................
Lead paint (percentage pre-1960 housing) ...................................................................
Superfund proximity score * ...........................................................................................
RMP proximity score * ...................................................................................................
Hazardous waste proximity score * ...............................................................................
8.63 μg/m3 (62nd %ile) ......
61.2 ppb (50th %ile) ...........
43 (37th %ile) .....................
0.42% (68th %ile) ...............
0.81 (97th %ile) ..................
0.051 (10th %ile) ................
0.055 (10th %ile) ................
8.08 μg/m3 (—).
61.6 ppb (—).
210 (—).
0.3% (—).
0.13 (—).
0.43 (—).
1.9 (—).
34% (53rd %ile) .................
48% (79th %ile) ..................
0% (0h %ile) .......................
18% (77th %ile) ..................
7% (66th %ile) ....................
22% (74th %ile) ..................
39% (—).
31% (—).
5% (—).
12% (—).
6% (—).
17% (—).
Demographic Indicators
People of color population .............................................................................................
Low-income population ..................................................................................................
Linguistically isolated population ...................................................................................
Population with less than high school education ..........................................................
Population under 5 years of age ...................................................................................
Population over 64 years of age ...................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
* The traffic proximity and volume indicator is a score calculated by daily traffic count divided by distance in meters to the road. The Superfund
proximity, RMP proximity, and hazardous waste proximity indicators are all scores calculated by site or facility counts divided by distance in
kilometers.
A discussion on how Oklahoma’s
CISWI plan meets Federal requirements,
including CISWI EG requirements, is
provided under the section titled ‘‘The
EPA’s Evaluation’’ in this proposed rule.
CISWI EG requirements result in
emission reductions for nine specified
pollutants: particulate matter (PM),
sulfur dioxide (SO2), hydrogen chloride
(HCl), nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon
monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), cadmium
(Cd), mercury (Hg), and dioxins/furans,
and they additionally provide for
opacity limits. Information on emissions
controlled by the CISWI EG, its
relationship to negative health impacts,
and the estimated benefits from the
CISWI EG, can be found at the Federal
Register document titled ‘‘Commercial
and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration
Units: Reconsideration and Final
Amendments; Non-Hazardous
Secondary Materials That Are Solid
Waste’’ (78 FR 9112, February 7, 2013)
and its associated Regulatory Impact
Analysis.13 We expect that this action
will generally have positive
environmental and health impacts on all
populations, including people of color
and low-income populations, in
Oklahoma that are located near an
existing incinerator subject to the CISWI
EG. At a minimum, this action would
not worsen any existing air quality and
is expected to ensure the area is meeting
requirements to attain air quality
standards. Further, there is no
information in the record indicating that
this action is expected to have
disproportionately high or adverse
human health or environmental effects
on a particular group of people.
12 For additional information on environmental
indicators and proximity scores in EJSCREEN, see
‘‘EJSCREEN Environmental Justice Mapping and
Screening Tool: EJSCREEN Technical
Documentation,’’ Chapter 3 (October 2022) at
https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-04/
documents/ejscreen_technical_document.pdf.
13 See https://www.regulations.gov/document/
EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0119-2493. See also https://
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:39 Jul 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this action, we are proposing to
include in a final rule regulatory text
that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with the
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are
proposing to incorporate by reference
revisions to the Oklahoma regulations as
described in the section titled
‘‘Proposed Action’’ in this proposed
rule. The Oklahoma regulations at OAC
252:100–17, Part 9, Commercial and
Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators,
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
contains Oklahoma’s CAA section
111(d)/129 plan provisions for sources
subject to the Commercial and
Industrial Solid Waste Incineration
Units Emission Guidelines at 40 CFR
part 60, subpart DDDD. We have made,
and will continue to make, these
documents generally available
electronically through
www.regulations.gov (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a CAA section
111(d)/129 submission that complies
with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42
U.S.C. 7411(d); 42 U.S.C. 7429; 40 CFR
part 60, subparts B and Cf; and 40 CFR
part 62, subpart A. Thus, in reviewing
CAA section 111(d)/129 state plan
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Act and implementing
www.epa.gov/air-quality-management-process/
managing-air-quality-human-health-environmentaland-economic#what.
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 139 / Friday, July 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules
regulations. Accordingly, this action
merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason:
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory
Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993), as amended by
Executive Order 14094 (88 FR 21879,
April 11, 2023), and was therefore not
subject to a requirement for Executive
Order 12866 review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) because it
does not contain any information
collection activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
This action is certified to not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
This action will approve a state plan
pursuant to CAA section 111(d)/129 and
will therefore have no net regulatory
burden for all directly regulated small
entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. This action imposes no
enforceable duty on any State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
This action does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). It will not have substantial direct
effects on the states, on the relationship
between the national government and
the states, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.
E.O. 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000). However, this action will neither
impose substantial direct compliance
costs on federally recognized tribal
governments, nor preempt tribal law.
This action will not impose substantial
direct compliance costs on federally
recognized tribal governments because
no actions will be required of tribal
governments. This action will also not
preempt tribal law as no Oklahoma tribe
implements a regulatory program under
the CAA, and thus does not have
applicable or related tribal laws.
Consistent with the EPA Policy on
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribes (May 4, 2011), the EPA
has offered consultation to tribal
governments that may be affected by
this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that EPA has
reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definitions of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. Therefore, this action
is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it approves a state program.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution and Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22,
2001), because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards. This action is not
subject to requirements of Section 12(d)
of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) because application of those
requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
This proposal to approve the
Oklahoma CISWI plan will apply, if
finalized as proposed, to certain areas of
Indian country throughout Oklahoma as
discussed in the preamble, and therefore
has tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal
agencies to identify and address
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:39 Jul 18, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58689
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on minority populations
and low-income populations to the
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect
to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further
defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ‘‘no group of people should bear a
disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’
The air agency did not evaluate
environmental justice considerations as
part of its submittal; the CAA and
applicable implementing regulations
neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. The EPA performed an
environmental justice analysis, as
described in the section titled
‘‘Environmental Justice Considerations’’
in this proposed rule. The analysis was
done for the purpose of providing
additional context and information
about this rulemaking to the public, not
as a basis of the action. Due to the
nature of the action being taken here,
this action is expected to have a neutral
impact on the air quality of the affected
area. In addition, there is no information
in the record upon which this action is
based inconsistent with the stated goal
of E.O. 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for people of
color, low-income populations, and
Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Waste treatment and
disposal.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 9, 2024.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2024–15448 Filed 7–18–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\19JYP1.SGM
19JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 139 (Friday, July 19, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58685-58689]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-15448]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[EPA-R06-OAR-2020-0610; FRL-11996-01-R6]
Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Oklahoma; Control of Emissions
From Existing Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the CAA
section 111(d)/129 state plan revision submitted by the State of
Oklahoma for sources subject to the Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incineration units (CISWI) Emission Guidelines (EG). The Oklahoma
CISWI plan was submitted to fulfill state obligations under CAA section
111(d)/129 to implement and enforce the requirements under the CISWI
EG. The EPA is proposing to approve the state plan and amend the agency
regulations in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 19, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2020-0610, at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to [email protected]. 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 its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. 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, please contact Karolina Ruan Lei, (214)
665-7346, [email protected]. For 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.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov. While all documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may not be publicly
available due to docket file size restrictions or content (e.g., CBI).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karolina Ruan Lei, EPA Region 6
Office, Air and Radiation Division--State Planning and Implementation
Branch (R6-ARSH), (214) 665-7346, [email protected]. We
encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov. Please call or email the contact listed above if
you need alternative access to material indexed but not provided in the
docket.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.
I. Background
A. Clean Air Act Section 111(d)/129 Requirements
Sections 111(d) and 129 of the CAA require states to submit plans
to control certain pollutants (designated pollutants) at existing solid
waste combustor facilities (designated facilities) whenever standards
of performance have been established under section 111(b) for new
sources of the same type, and the EPA has established emission
guidelines for such existing sources. CAA section 129 directs the EPA
to establish standards of performance for new sources (NSPS) and
emissions guidelines (EG) for existing \1\ sources for each category of
solid waste incinerator specified in CAA section 129. Under CAA section
129, NSPS and EG must contain numerical emissions limitations for
particulate matter, opacity (as appropriate), sulfur dioxide, hydrogen
chloride, oxides of nitrogen, carbon monoxide, lead, cadmium, mercury,
and dioxins and dibenzofurans. While NSPS are directly applicable to
new sources, EG for existing sources (designated facilities) are
intended for states to use to develop a state plan to submit to the
EPA. When designated facilities are located in a state, the state must
then develop and submit a plan for the control of the designated
pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In this context and for purposes under CAA section 111(d)/
129, the term ``existing'' source is synonymous with designated
facility. These are sources that were constructed, reconstructed, or
modified on or before the date specified in the emission guideline
the source applies to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
State plan submittals and revisions under CAA section 111(d) must
be consistent with the applicable EG and the requirements of 40 CFR
part 60, subpart B, and part 62, subpart A. The regulations at 40 CFR
part 60, subpart B, contain general provisions applicable to the
adoption and submittal of state plans and plan revisions under CAA
section 111(d). Additionally, 40 CFR part 62, subpart A, provides the
procedural framework by which the EPA will approve or disapprove such
plans and plan revisions submitted by a state. Once approved by the
EPA, the state plan becomes federally enforceable. If a state does not
submit an approvable state plan to the EPA, the EPA is responsible for
developing, implementing, and enforcing a federal plan. However, 40 CFR
60.23(b) and 40 CFR 62.06 provide that if there are no
[[Page 58686]]
designated facilities of the designated pollutant(s) in the state, the
state may submit a letter of certification to that effect (i.e.,
negative declaration) in lieu of a plan. The negative declaration
exempts the state from the requirements of subpart B that require the
submittal of a CAA section 111(d)/129 plan.
B. Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Rules
On December 1, 2000, EPA promulgated the CISWI NSPS at 40 CFR part
60, subpart CCCC, and the CISWI EG at 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD (65
FR 75338). On March 21, 2011, after voluntarily remanding the 2000
CISWI NSPS and EG, the EPA promulgated revised CISWI NSPS and EG in a
final rule (76 FR 15704). Correspondingly, on the same date, EPA
promulgated a final rule under the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) to identify which non-hazardous secondary materials, when
used as fuels or ingredients in combustion units, are ``solid wastes''
(76 FR 15456).\2\ EPA subsequently promulgated amendments to both March
21, 2011 rules on February 7, 2013, to clarify several provisions in
order to implement the non-hazardous secondary materials rule as EPA
originally intended (78 FR 9112). Reconsideration of certain aspects of
the final CISWI rule resulted in minor amendments (81 FR 40956, June
23, 2016).\3\ On April 16, 2019, EPA finalized further amendments to
the CISWI NSPS and EG in order to provide clarity and address
implementation issues (84 FR 15846).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 40 CFR part 241, Solid Wastes Used as Fuels or
Ingredients in Combustion Units, also known as the ``Non-Hazardous
Secondary Material Rule.'' The identification of solid waste in the
Non-Hazardous Secondary Material Rule is used to determine whether a
combustion unit is required to meet the emissions standards for
solid waste incineration units issued under sections 111 and 129 of
the Act, or meet the emissions standards for commercial, industrial,
and institutional boilers issued under section 112 of the Act.
\3\ In the June 23, 2016, final action, the EPA finalized
amendments on these four topics: Definition of ``continuous emission
monitoring system (CEMS) data during startup and shutdown periods;''
particulate matter (PM) limit for the waste-burning kiln
subcategory; fuel variability factor (FVF) for coal-burning energy
recovery units (ERUs); and the definition of ``kiln.''
\4\ In the April 16, 2019, final action, the EPA made technical
amendments to correct and clarify various parts of the June 23,
2016, final rule; this includes issues with implementation of the
standards, testing and monitoring issues and inconsistencies, and
other regulatory provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CISWI NSPS and EG were significantly revised in the March 21,
2011, and February 7, 2013, rulemakings, and the subsequent final
rulemakings on June 23, 2016, and April 16, 2019, contained minor
amendments to the CISWI rules that did not make any changes to the
applicability of the designated facilitates, including 40 CFR 60.2505,
``Am I affected by this subpart?''. As provided by 40 CFR 60.2505, the
designated facilities to which the CISWI EG apply are CISWI and air
curtain incinerators (ACI) \5\ that commenced construction on or before
June 4, 2010, or for which modification or reconstruction was commenced
on or before August 7, 2013, with limited exceptions as provided under
40 CFR 60.2555.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ These air curtain incinerators (ACI) that are subject to the
CISWI EG at 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD, are those ACI that may not
fit the definition of a ``CISWI'' under the CISWI EG. See 40 CFR
60.2875.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Oklahoma CAA Section 111(d)/129 CISWI Plan Approval History
On June 29, 2005, the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
(ODEQ) submitted a CISWI state plan to address the 2000 CISWI EG
requirements and fulfill obligations under CAA sections 111(d) and 129.
Oklahoma's 2005 CISWI plan controlled emissions from sources subject to
the 2000 CISWI EG, found at 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD, within the
State of Oklahoma. Oklahoma's 2005 CISWI plan was approved by EPA on
October 4, 2005 (70 FR 57764).
D. Oklahoma's CAA Section 111(d)/129 CISWI Plan Submittal for This
Rulemaking
In order to address the most recent CISWI EG requirements and
fulfill obligations under CAA sections 111(d) and 129, ODEQ submitted a
state plan revision for the control of emissions from sources subject
to the CISWI EG for the State of Oklahoma on November 16, 2020. The
Oklahoma 2020 CISWI plan implements and enforces the applicable
provisions under the CISWI EG at 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD, most
recently amended on April 16, 2019, and additionally meets the relevant
requirements of the CAA section 111(d) implementing regulations at 40
CFR part 60, subpart B. A copy of the Oklahoma submittal is included in
the docket for this rulemaking.
E. Impact on Areas of Indian Country
Following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma,
140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020), the Governor of the State of Oklahoma requested
approval under Section 10211(a) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005: A Legacy for Users, Public
Law 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1937 (August 10, 2005) (``SAFETEA''), to
administer in certain areas of Indian country (as defined at 18 U.S.C.
1151) the State's environmental regulatory programs that were
previously approved by the EPA for areas outside of Indian country. The
State's request excluded certain areas of Indian country further
described below. In addition, the State only sought approval to the
extent that such approval is necessary for the State to administer a
program in light of Oklahoma Dept. of Environmental Quality v. EPA, 740
F.3d 185 (D.C. Cir. 2014).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ In ODEQ v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit held that under the CAA, a
state has the authority to implement a SIP in non-reservation areas
of Indian country in the state, where there has been no
demonstration of tribal jurisdiction. Under the D.C. Circuit's
decision, the CAA does not provide authority to states to implement
SIPs in Indian reservations. ODEQ did not, however, substantively
address the separate authority in Indian country provided
specifically to Oklahoma under SAFETEA. That separate authority was
not invoked until the State submitted its request under SAFETEA, and
was not approved until EPA's decision, described in this section, on
October 1, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 1, 2020, the EPA approved Oklahoma's SAFETEA request to
administer all the State's EPA-approved environmental regulatory
programs, including Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants
under sections 111(d) and 129, in the requested areas of Indian
country. As requested by Oklahoma, the EPA's approval under SAFETEA
does not include Indian country lands, including rights-of-way running
through the same, that: (1) qualify as Indian allotments, the Indian
titles to which have not been extinguished, under 18 U.S.C. 1151(c);
(2) are held in trust by the United States on behalf of an individual
Indian or Tribe; or (3) are owned in fee by a Tribe, if the Tribe (a)
acquired that fee title to such land, or an area that included such
land, in accordance with a treaty with the United States to which such
Tribe was a party, and (b) never allotted the land to a member or
citizen of the Tribe (collectively ``excluded Indian country lands'').
EPA's approval under SAFETEA expressly provided that to the extent
EPA's prior approvals of Oklahoma's environmental programs excluded
Indian country, any such exclusions are superseded for the geographic
areas of Indian country covered by the EPA's approval of Oklahoma's
SAFETEA request.\7\ The approval also provided that future revisions or
amendments to Oklahoma's approved environmental
[[Page 58687]]
regulatory programs would extend to the covered areas of Indian country
(without any further need for additional requests under SAFETEA).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ EPA's prior approvals relating to Oklahoma's CAA section
111(d)/129 plans did not apply in areas of Indian country located in
the state. See, e.g., 70 FR 57764 (October 4, 2005). Such prior
expressed limitations are superseded by the EPA's approval of
Oklahoma's SAFETEA request.
\8\ In accordance with Executive Order 13990, EPA is currently
reviewing our October 1, 2020, SAFETEA approval. On December 22,
2021, EPA proposed to withdraw and reconsider the October 1, 2020,
SAFETEA approval. See https://www.epa.gov/ok/proposed-withdrawal-and-reconsideration-and-supporting-information. EPA expects to have
further discussions with tribal governments and State of Oklahoma as
part of this reconsideration. EPA also notes that the October 1,
2020, approval is the subject of a pending challenge in federal
court. Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma v. Regan, No. 20-9635 (10th Cir.).
Pending completion of EPA's review, EPA is proceeding with this
proposed action in accordance with the October 1, 2020, approval.
EPA may make further changes to the approval of Oklahoma's plan to
reflect the outcome of the proposed withdrawal and reconsideration
of the October 1, 2020 SAFETEA approval. To the extent any change
occurs in the scope of Oklahoma's CAA 111(d)/129 authority in Indian
country before the finalization of this proposed rule, such a change
may affect the scope of the EPA's final action on the proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained earlier in this action, the EPA is proposing to
approve the Oklahoma CAA section 111(d)/129 CISWI state plan that was
submitted by the State of Oklahoma on November 16, 2020. More
specifically, we are proposing to approve Oklahoma's CISWI plan
addressing CAA section 111(d)/129 requirements for CISWI under the
CISWI EG codified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD. Consistent with the
EPA's October 1, 2020, SAFETEA approval, if this approval is finalized
as proposed, this Oklahoma CISWI plan will apply to all Indian country
within Oklahoma, other than the excluded Indian country lands, as
described earlier. The Oklahoma CISWI plan applies statewide, but only
affects specific types of facilities, as discussed earlier in this
notice. ODEQ has only identified one existing facility, located within
the Muscogee Nation reservation, that is affected by the Oklahoma CISWI
plan we are proposing to approve. Any newly constructed incinerators
subject to the CISWI EG would be subject to the CISWI NSPS, not the
CISWI plan implementing the CISWI EG requirements.
II. The EPA's Evaluation
The EPA has evaluated the Oklahoma CISWI plan to determine whether
the plan meets applicable requirements from the CISWI EG at 40 CFR part
60, subpart DDDD, and the CAA section 111(d) implementing regulations
at 40 CFR part 60, subpart B.
Section 60.2515 of the CISWI EG addresses what must be included in
state plan submittals. These requirements include:
(1) Inventory of affected CISWI, including those that have ceased
operation but have not been dismantled.
(2) Inventory of emissions from affected CISWI in the State.
(3) Compliance schedules for each affected CISWI.
(4) Emission limitations, operator training and qualification
requirements, a waste management plan, and operating limits for
affected CISWIs that are at least as protective as the emission
guidelines contained in this subpart.
(5) Performance testing, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.
(6) Certification that the hearing on the state plan was held, a
list of witnesses and their organizational affiliations, if any,
appearing at the hearing, and a brief written summary of each
presentation or written submission.
(7) Provision for State progress reports to EPA.
(8) Identification of enforceable State mechanisms that the State
selected for implementing the emission guidelines of this subpart.
(9) Demonstration of the state's legal authority to carry out the
sections 111(d) and 129 in the state plan.
Section 60.2515 of the CISWI EG also requires the state plan to
demonstrate that it is at least as protective as the CISWI EG if it
deviates from the format and content of the EG in 40 CFR part 60,
subpart DDDD. The state plan must also follow the requirements of 40
CFR part 60, subpart B.
The EPA's detailed rationale and discussion on the Oklahoma CISWI
plan and how the plan meets these requirements can be found in the
Technical Support Document (TSD), located in the docket for this
rulemaking.
III. Proposed Action
The EPA is proposing to approve the Oklahoma CISWI plan, submitted
by ODEQ on November 16, 2020, and amend 40 CFR part 62 in accordance
with the requirements under sections 111(d) and 129 of the CAA. The EPA
is proposing to find that the Oklahoma CISWI plan is at least as
protective as the Federal requirements provided under the CISWI EG,
codified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart DDDD. Once approved by the EPA, the
Oklahoma CISWI plan will become federally enforceable.
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
Information on Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) and how EPA defines
environmental justice can be found in the section titled ``Statutory
and Executive Order Reviews'' in this proposed rule. EPA is providing
additional analysis of environmental justice associated with this
action. The results of this analysis are being provided for
informational and transparency purposes, not as a basis of our proposed
action.
EPA conducted screening analyses using EJSCREEN, an environmental
justice mapping and screening tool that provides EPA with a nationally
consistent dataset and approach for combining various environmental and
demographic indicators.\9\ The EJSCREEN tool presents these indicators
at a Census block group (CBG) level or a larger user-specified
``buffer'' area that covers multiple CBGs.\10\ An individual CBG is a
cluster of contiguous blocks within the same census tract and generally
contains between 600 and 3,000 people. EJSCREEN is not a tool for
performing in-depth risk analysis, but is instead a screening tool that
provides an initial representation of indicators related to
environmental justice and is subject to uncertainty in some underlying
data (e.g., some environmental indicators are based on monitoring data
which are not uniformly available; others are based on self-reported
data).\11\ To help mitigate this uncertainty, we have summarized
EJSCREEN data within larger ``buffer'' areas covering multiple block
groups and representing the average resident within the buffer areas
surrounding the sources. We present EJSCREEN environmental indicators
to help screen for locations where residents may experience a higher
overall pollution burden than would be expected for a block group with
the same total population. These indicators of overall pollution burden
include estimates of ambient particulate matter (PM2.5) and
ozone concentration, a score for traffic proximity and volume,
percentage of pre-1960 housing units (lead paint indicator), and scores
for proximity to Superfund sites, risk management plan
[[Page 58688]]
(RMP) sites, and hazardous waste facilities.\12\ EJSCREEN also provides
information on demographic indicators, including percent low-income,
communities of color, linguistic isolation, and education.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The EJSCREEN tool is available at https://www.epa.gov/ejscreen.
\10\ See https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/about/glossary.html.
\11\ In addition, EJSCREEN relies on the five-year block group
estimates from the U.S. Census American Community Survey. The
advantage of using five-year over single-year estimates is increased
statistical reliability of the data (i.e., lower sampling error),
particularly for small geographic areas and population groups. For
more information, see https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/acs/acs_general_handbook_2020.pdf.
\12\ For additional information on environmental indicators and
proximity scores in EJSCREEN, see ``EJSCREEN Environmental Justice
Mapping and Screening Tool: EJSCREEN Technical Documentation,''
Chapter 3 (October 2022) at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-04/documents/ejscreen_technical_document.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA prepared EJSCREEN reports covering a buffer area of
approximately 3-mile radius around the incinerator identified by ODEQ
as subject to the CAA section 111(d)/129 CISWI plan. Table 1 presents a
summary of results from the EPA's screening-level analysis for the
areas surrounding the affected incinerator in Oklahoma compared to the
U.S. as a whole. The full, detailed EJSCREEN report is provided in the
docket for this rulemaking.
Table 1--EJSCREEN Analysis Summary for the Existing Incinerator in
Oklahoma Subject to the CISWI EG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Values for buffer areas (radius) for
each affected incinerator and the
U.S. (percentile within U.S. where
indicated)
Variables --------------------------------------
Henryetta Pallet
Company
(Henryetta, 3 U.S.
miles)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollution Burden Indicators
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter (PM2.5), 8.63 [micro]g/m\3\ 8.08 [micro]g/
annual average. (62nd %ile). m\3\ (--).
Ozone, summer seasonal average of 61.2 ppb (50th 61.6 ppb (--).
daily 8-hour max. %ile).
Traffic proximity and volume 43 (37th %ile).... 210 (--).
score *.
Lead paint (percentage pre-1960 0.42% (68th %ile). 0.3% (--).
housing).
Superfund proximity score *...... 0.81 (97th %ile).. 0.13 (--).
RMP proximity score *............ 0.051 (10th %ile). 0.43 (--).
Hazardous waste proximity score * 0.055 (10th %ile). 1.9 (--).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Demographic Indicators
------------------------------------------------------------------------
People of color population....... 34% (53rd %ile)... 39% (--).
Low-income population............ 48% (79th %ile)... 31% (--).
Linguistically isolated 0% (0h %ile)...... 5% (--).
population.
Population with less than high 18% (77th %ile)... 12% (--).
school education.
Population under 5 years of age.. 7% (66th %ile).... 6% (--).
Population over 64 years of age.. 22% (74th %ile)... 17% (--).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The traffic proximity and volume indicator is a score calculated by
daily traffic count divided by distance in meters to the road. The
Superfund proximity, RMP proximity, and hazardous waste proximity
indicators are all scores calculated by site or facility counts
divided by distance in kilometers.
A discussion on how Oklahoma's CISWI plan meets Federal
requirements, including CISWI EG requirements, is provided under the
section titled ``The EPA's Evaluation'' in this proposed rule. CISWI EG
requirements result in emission reductions for nine specified
pollutants: particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide (SO2),
hydrogen chloride (HCl), nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon
monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd), mercury (Hg), and dioxins/
furans, and they additionally provide for opacity limits. Information
on emissions controlled by the CISWI EG, its relationship to negative
health impacts, and the estimated benefits from the CISWI EG, can be
found at the Federal Register document titled ``Commercial and
Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units: Reconsideration and Final
Amendments; Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials That Are Solid Waste''
(78 FR 9112, February 7, 2013) and its associated Regulatory Impact
Analysis.\13\ We expect that this action will generally have positive
environmental and health impacts on all populations, including people
of color and low-income populations, in Oklahoma that are located near
an existing incinerator subject to the CISWI EG. At a minimum, this
action would not worsen any existing air quality and is expected to
ensure the area is meeting requirements to attain air quality
standards. Further, there is no information in the record indicating
that this action is expected to have disproportionately high or adverse
human health or environmental effects on a particular group of people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0119-2493. See also https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-management-process/managing-air-quality-human-health-environmental-and-economic#what.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this action, we are proposing to include in a final rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to incorporate by
reference revisions to the Oklahoma regulations as described in the
section titled ``Proposed Action'' in this proposed rule. The Oklahoma
regulations at OAC 252:100-17, Part 9, Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incinerators, contains Oklahoma's CAA section 111(d)/129 plan
provisions for sources subject to the Commercial and Industrial Solid
Waste Incineration Units Emission Guidelines at 40 CFR part 60, subpart
DDDD. We have made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble for more information).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a CAA
section 111(d)/129 submission that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7411(d); 42 U.S.C.
7429; 40 CFR part 60, subparts B and Cf; and 40 CFR part 62, subpart A.
Thus, in reviewing CAA section 111(d)/129 state plan submissions, EPA's
role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria
of the Act and implementing
[[Page 58689]]
regulations. Accordingly, this action merely proposes to approve state
law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason:
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), as amended by
Executive Order 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023), and was therefore
not subject to a requirement for Executive Order 12866 review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) because it does not contain any
information collection activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
This action is certified to not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.). This action will approve a state plan pursuant to CAA section
111(d)/129 and will therefore have no net regulatory burden for all
directly regulated small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any
State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This proposal to approve the Oklahoma CISWI plan will apply, if
finalized as proposed, to certain areas of Indian country throughout
Oklahoma as discussed in the preamble, and therefore has tribal
implications as specified in E.O. 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000). However, this action will neither impose substantial direct
compliance costs on federally recognized tribal governments, nor
preempt tribal law. This action will not impose substantial direct
compliance costs on federally recognized tribal governments because no
actions will be required of tribal governments. This action will also
not preempt tribal law as no Oklahoma tribe implements a regulatory
program under the CAA, and thus does not have applicable or related
tribal laws. Consistent with the EPA Policy on Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribes (May 4, 2011), the EPA has offered
consultation to tribal governments that may be affected by this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental
health or safety risks that EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per the definitions of ``covered
regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the Executive Order. Therefore,
this action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it approves
a state program.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution and Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. This action
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with
the Clean Air Act.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean that
``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
The air agency did not evaluate environmental justice
considerations as part of its submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. The EPA performed an environmental justice analysis, as
described in the section titled ``Environmental Justice
Considerations'' in this proposed rule. The analysis was done for the
purpose of providing additional context and information about this
rulemaking to the public, not as a basis of the action. Due to the
nature of the action being taken here, this action is expected to have
a neutral impact on the air quality of the affected area. In addition,
there is no information in the record upon which this action is based
inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for people of color, low-income populations, and
Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waste treatment
and disposal.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 9, 2024.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2024-15448 Filed 7-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
