OAR 2003 0119 Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Unit New Source Performance Standards and Emission Guidelines: Definitions Summary of Public Comments and Responses Contract No. 68 D 01 081 Work Assignment No. 3 16 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Emission Standards Division Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 September 14, 2005 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc i Disclaimer This report has been reviewed by the Emission Standards Division of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, and EPA, and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products is not intended to constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1 Summary ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Summary of Changes Since Proposal ....................................................... 1 2 Summary of Public Comments.......................................................................... 3 3 General Comments on Definitions .................................................................... 5 4 Definition of Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration ( CISWI) Unit .............................................................................. 17 5 Definition of Commercial or Industrial Waste ............................................... 19 6 Definition of Solid Waste ................................................................................. 23 7 Waste Heat Recovery Units ............................................................................. 27 8 Miscellaneous ................................................................................................... 30 8.1 Bagasse .................................................................................................. 30 8.2 Clarifications to the Applicability of the CISWI Rules That are Not Related to the Proposed Definition Changes..................................... 31 8.3 Rulemaking Process................................................................................ 33 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2 1. List of Commenters for the Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Unit NSPS and EG: Definitions ....................................................................................... 3 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 1 Chapter 1 Summary On December 1, 2000, EPA promulgated new source performance standards ( NSPS) and emission guidelines for commercial and industrial solid waste incineration ( CISWI) units ( hereafter referred to as the " CISWI Rules"). On August 17, 2001, EPA granted a petition for reconsideration regarding the definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" and " commercial and industrial solid waste incineration unit" in the final rules. On February 17, 2004, a Federal Register notice was published soliciting comments on the definitions of " solid waste,"

" commercial or industrial waste" and " commercial and industrial solid waste incineration unit" in the CISWI rules.

Twelve public comment letters were received from a wide variety of sources, consisting mainly of government agencies, environmental organizations, industry and utility associations, and owner/ operators of incinerators and other types of facilities.

All of the comments that were submitted and the responses to these comments are summarized in this document. This summary is the basis for the revisions made to the CISWI definitions between proposal and promulgation.

1.1 SUMMARY OF CHANGES SINCE PROPOSAL The major differences between the definitions we are promulgating for the CISWI rules and those proposed on February 17, 2004 ( 69 FR 7396), are that we have removed the language in the proposed definition of " commercial or industrial waste" that served to include units with only waste heat recovery in the CISWI source category, and we are not promulgating the definition of " waste heat recovery" at this time. These changes were made because we have not 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 2 assessed the impacts of including units with waste heat recovery in the CISWI rules. An impacts assessment is necessary, but is best done when we respond to the CISWI remand and can perform comprehensive analyses that address the addition of waste heat recovery units, other questions on the applicability of the CISWI rules and interface with the rules for the other solid waste incineration ( OSWI) source category, and remand issues regarding determination of the MACT floor and emission limits. Otherwise, editorial changes were made to the definition of " commercial or industrial waste" to reduce repetition among the definitions and better express our intent. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 3 Chapter 2 Summary of Public Comments The EPA received a total of 12 letters commenting on the proposed definitions for the CISWI rules, some of which contained attachments. A list of commenters, their affiliations, and the EPA docket item number assigned to their correspondence is provided in Table 2 1. To achieve an organized presentation, we have grouped the comments by topic in Chapters 3 through 8 of this document.

Table 2 1. List of Commenters for the Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Unit NSPS and EG: Definitions ( OAR 2003 0119)

Docket No. Commenter's Name and Addressa OAR 2003 0119 0002 John R. Evans, Lyondell Chemical Company, Houston, TX OAR 2003 0119 0003 Michael R. Benoit, Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition, Washington, DC OAR 2003 0119 0004 Michael R. Benoit, Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition, Washington, DC ( Comment Attachment) OAR 2003 0119 0005 Michael R. Benoit, Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition, Washington, DC ( Comment Attachment) OAR 2003 0119 0006 Michael R. Benoit, Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition, Washington, DC ( Comment Attachment) OAR 2003 0119 0007 Michael R. Benoit, Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition, Washington, DC ( Comment Attachment) OAR 2003 0119 0008 Derek Maat, Tyonek Native Corporation, Nikiski, AK ( on behalf of Envirotech LLC) OAR 2003 0119 0009 William F. Petersen, PPLC, Washington, DC ( on behalf of AF& PA, ACC, API, CIBO) OAR 2003 0119 0010 William F. Petersen, PPLC, Washington, DC ( on behalf of AF& PA, ACC, API, CIBO) [ Duplicate comment] OAR 2003 0119 0011 David Buff, Golder Associates, Inc., Gainesville, FL 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 4 Table 2 1. List of Commenters for the Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Unit NSPS and EG: Definitions ( OAR 2003 0119)

Docket No. Commenter's Name and Addressa OAR 2003 0119 0012 Earth Justice, Washington, DC OAR 2003 0119 0013 K. T. Murphy, Ashland, Inc. Columbus, OH OAR 2003 0119 0014 Barry Stephens, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Nashville, TN OAR 2003 0119 0015 Peter Briggs, United States Sugar Corporation, Clewiston, FL OAR 2003 0119 0016 C. David Cooper & David Buff, United States Sugar Corporation, Clewiston, FL ( Comment Attachment) OAR 2003 0119 0017 Earth Justice, Washington, DC ( duplicate comment to OAR 2003 0119 0012) OAR 2003 0119 0018 Earth Justice, Washington, DC ( duplicate comment to OAR 2003 0119 0012) OAR 2003 0119 0019 Earth Justice, Washington, DC ( duplicate comment to OAR 2003 0119 0012) OAR 2003 0119 0020 Earth Justice, Washington, DC ( duplicate comment to OAR 2003 0119 0012) OAR 2003 0119 0021 Earth Justice, Washington, DC ( duplicate comment to OAR 2003 0119 0012) OAR 2003 0119 0022 Earth Justice, Washington, DC ( duplicate comment to OAR 2003 0119 0012) OAR 2003 0119 0023 Earth Justice, Washington, DC ( duplicate comment to OAR 2003 0119 0012) OAR 2003 0119 0024 Earth Justice, Washington, DC ( duplicate comment to OAR 2003 0119 0012) OAR 2003 0119 0025 Barry Stephens, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Nashville, TN ( duplicate comment to OAR 2003 0119 0014) OAR 2003 0119 0026 Utility Solid Waste Activities Group, Washington, DC OAR 2003 0119 0027 Ron Mathier, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Atlanta, GA OAR 2003 0119 0028 Margaret Hoffman, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Austin, TX a Commenters listed multiple times due to duplicate comments and attachments are referred to in Chapters 3 through 8 of this document by the first number that was assigned to that commenter in the docket. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 5 Chapter 3 General Comments on Definitions Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0012) stated that EPA's attempts to fabricate ambiguity in section 129 are without merit. The commenter stated that, regardless of whether EPA has discretion to draw the line between different types of solid waste combustion units, the agency does not have the discretion to exempt any such units from regulation under section 129 ( except for those expressly enumerated in section 129( g)( 1)). The commenter added that, contrary to EPA's claim, the critical question is not whether a unit " is designed and operated to recover heat for a useful purpose," but, rather, is " does the unit combust solid waste?" Finally,

the commenter added that, read as a whole, section 129 requires that the CISWI standards must apply to all combustion units that burn waste from commercial and industrial facilities. The commenter contended that EPA's narrow definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" and " commercial and industrial solid waste incineration unit" unlawfully exempt the majority of CISWI units from regulation under section 129. The commenter also pointed out that most CISWI units fall below the major source threshold established in CAA section 112( a). The commenter viewed EPA's definitions in the CISWI rule as an attempt to regulate many sources under section 112, instead of regulating all sources under section 129. Section 112 requires emissions standards based on generally available control technology ( GACT) for non major sources.

Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter. Contrary to the commenters' assertion,

section 129 is ambiguous because it does not contain definitions of certain terms. EPA has reasonably interpreted section 129 in establishing the regulatory definitions described in the notice. The statutory provisions of sections 129( a), ( g), and ( h) of the CAA collectively call for 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 6 EPA to determine, as part of the regulatory process, which combustion units should be subject to regulation under section 129. Section 129 of the CAA directs EPA to promulgate standards under section 111 applicable to " solid waste incineration units combusting commercial or industrial waste." 42 U. S. C. § 7429( a)( 1)( D). However, section 129 does not define commercial or industrial waste. Inherent in EPA's implementation of this statutory provision is the discretion to reasonably define what constitutes this undefined type of solid waste. Furthermore, the language of CAA section 129( h) makes clear the Congressional intent that nonhazardous combustion sources not be regulated under both section 129 and section 112. Thus, for the CISWI rules, EPA must determine which types of sources are included in the CISWI source category.

The distinction between CISWI units and non CISWI combustion units is not readily apparent. For example, there is general agreement that burning coal in a coal fired boiler is not commercial or industrial waste, because coal is commonly thought of as a fuel. However, there are many other materials that are burned in commercial and industrial boilers for energy recovery.

Such materials include wood, other biomass, bagasse burned in boilers at sugar plants to produce the heat needed to refine sugar from sugar cane, and many other materials generated as part of commercial or manufacturing activities. When these materials are burned in a boiler to recover heat for a useful purpose, it is reasonable to consider these materials, like coal, to be a fuel and distinct from commercial and industrial solid waste. Combustion of such materials, when burned in a boiler that recovers energy for a useful purpose, is not considered waste combustion and is appropriately addressed under CAA section 112 regulations for boilers ( e. g., the boilers NESHAP and area source boilers standards). On the other hand, if materials were burned in a combustion unit without heat recovery, the combustion would serve no useful purpose other than destruction or disposal of an unwanted material, and EPA would then consider it appropriate to identify the material as a commercial or industrial waste and regulate the combustion unit under section 129 as a CISWI unit.

In addition, many units that are designed and operated for energy recovery and predominantly burn materials that are widely considered fuels will occasionally fire small amounts of other materials in these units that could be considered waste in some circumstances. However,

these units continue to recover energy from the combustion of these additional materials. Thus, it 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 7 is not immediately clear how EPA should classify such units that are designed and operated for energy recovery but occasionally combust waste like materials.

The EPA has determined that for purposes of the CISWI rules, the critical consideration in determining whether the unit is burning commercial or industrial waste is the primary function of the combustion unit; and the primary indicator of function is whether or not a unit is designed and operated to recover energy for a useful purpose. Accordingly, we are promulgating definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" and " CISWI unit" to include in the CISWI rules units whose design does not provide for energy recovery or that are operated without energy recovery. We continue to define energy recovery as the recovery of heat ( thermal energy) for a useful purpose.

The revised definition of " commercial or industrial waste" does not change the existing scope of the CISWI category, but contains editorial revisions to more clearly express our intent, as described in later responses.

The determination that units ( such as boilers) that recover energy for a useful purpose are not subject to the CISWI rules does not exclude them from regulation. As noted earlier, EPA has already regulated commercial and industrial boilers and process heaters located at major sources under 40 CFR 63, subpart DDDDD ( the boilers NESHAP). The EPA is addressing commercial and institutional boilers and process heaters located at area sources under the section 112 area source boilers standards, currently under development. Additionally, other categories of specialty combustion units, such as hazardous waste combustors and cement kilns are regulated under separate section 112 NESHAP. Section 112 addresses hazardous air pollutants such as hazardous metals, organic compounds, and hydrogen chloride ( HCl).

The major differences between the definitions we are promulgating for the CISWI rules and those proposed on February 17, 2004 ( 69 FR 7396), are that we have removed the language in the proposed definition of " commercial or industrial waste" that served to include units with only waste heat recovery in the CISWI source category, and we are not promulgating the definition of " waste heat recovery" at this time. We are not taking final action on these changes because we have not yet had an opportunity to assess the impacts of including units with waste heat recovery in the CISWI rules. An impacts assessment is necessary, but is best done when we respond to the CISWI remand and can perform comprehensive analyses that address the addition of waste heat recovery units, any questions on the applicability of the CISWI rules raised by promulgation of the section 129 rules for the other solid waste incineration ( OSWI) source 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 8 category, and remand issues regarding determination of the MACT floor and emission limits.

When we respond to the remand of the CISWI rules, we currently plan to propose additional regulatory language to address units with only waste heat recovery and to provide opportunity for additional comment on the inclusion of these units in the CISWI source category.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0012) pointed out that despite EPA's claim that it has " considerable discretion to regulate a variety of sources as solid waste incinerators,"

section 129( a)( 1) requires EPA to " establish performance standards and other requirements pursuant to section 7411 of this title and this section for each category of solid waste incineration units." 42 U. S. C. § 7429( a)( 1)( A) ( emphasis added). The commenter believes these categories are very broad, based on language in section 129( g)( 1), which defines " solid waste incineration unit"

to mean " a distinct operating unit of any facility which combusts any solid waste material from commercial or industrial establishments." 42 U. S. C. § 7429( g)( 1). The commenter also argued that the text of section 129 shows that Congress expressly considered the issue of whether to regulate heat recovery units under section 129 by providing only limited, specific exemptions.

Thus, according to the commenter's interpretation of the statute, EPA must set section 129 standards for any unit that combusts any solid waste, with the narrow exception of the categories of energy recovery units specifically enumerated in section 129( g)( 1). The commenter also asserts that EPA acknowledged this position in the hospital, medical, and infectious waste incinerator ( HMIWI) rules by stating the following:

The EPA disagrees with commenters that contend EPA has no authority to regulate cement kilns under section 129. Section 129( a)( 1)( A) requires the Administrator to establish performance standards and other requirements for each category of solid waste incineration units. Congress specifically listed in section 129 various categories of solid waste incineration units that EPA must regulate. Section 129( g)( 1) broadly defines solid waste incineration unit as " a distinct operating units of any facility which combusts any solid waste material..." This definition clearly indicates Congress' intent to regulate more than just incinerators because the definition sweeps within its scope any facility that is combusting any solid waste.

Response: Inherent in EPA's implementation of CAA section 129 is the discretion to identify the types of sources covered by the statutorily undefined category of commercial or industrial solid waste incineration units. Considered as a whole, the statutory provisions of section 129( a), ( g), and ( h) require that EPA determine, as part of the regulatory process, which 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 9 units should be subject to regulation under section 129. For example, as explained in the previous response, EPA has determined that boilers combusting materials for energy recovery are subject to section 112 and hence, are not subject to section 129.

The commenter relies on the statutory definition of solid waste incineration unit to argue that any unit combusting any solid waste at any time should be covered under CISWI. However,

we do not agree with this broad interpretation of the definition of " solid waste incineration unit"

based on the use of the modifier " any." We believe the word " any" should be interpreted within the broader frame of reference of its statutory context, consistent with observations of the Supreme Court in Nixon v. Missouri Municipal League, 541 U. S. 125, 124 S. Ct. 1555 ( 2004).

In this recent opinion, the Court observed that Congress's understanding of " any" can differ depending on the statutory setting. 124 S. Ct. at 1561. Nixon and a related line of cases support looking for indications in the statute that suggest a more limited meaning of the modified term is possible or intended. See 70 Fed. Reg. 33838, 33842 ( June. 10, 2005). Indications of a more limited meaning can be found within the definition of solid waste incineration unit in section 129( g)( 1) and section 129( h).

The commenter argues that EPA should stop reading the definition of " solid waste incineration unit" in section 129( g)( 1) after the phrase " any solid waste material." Thus,

according to the commenter, a CISWI unit must include " any facility which combusts any solid waste material." However, the commenter fails to give meaning to the remainder of the sentence in section 129( g)( 1), which provides that a solid waste incineration unit under section 129 includes a facility that combusts " any solid waste material from commercial and industrial establishments." There is a distinction between " any solid waste material" and " any solid waste material from commercial and industrial establishments." In order to identify solid waste material from commercial or industrial establishments, we have promulgated a definition of " commercial or industrial waste" which incorporates the broader definition of " solid waste." As discussed in the earlier response, because it is sometimes not obvious whether a commercial and industrial establishment treats material as a waste or as a fuel, we have developed the definition of commercial or industrial waste to identify solid waste from commercial and industrial establishments based on whether the waste is burned without energy recovery.

We recognize that Congress specifically defined municipal waste to include " refuse ( and refuse derived fuel) collected from the general public and from residential, commercial, 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 10 institutional, and industrial sources  ." 42 U. S. C. § 7429( g)( 5). However, we read this definition to provide more specific meaning to the phrase " solid waste  from the general public"

set forth in section 129( g)( 1) of the Act. Although Congress listed waste from " commercial" and " industrial" sources in the definition of municipal waste in section 129( g)( 5), reading section 129 as a whole, it does not appear that Congress intended all such waste to be municipal waste because it required separate regulations for units combusting " commercial or industrial waste."

This view is also supported by the exclusion of " industrial process wastes" from the definition of municipal waste in section 129( g)( 5). Thus, we have defined " commercial or industrial waste" as combustion of solid waste " at any commercial or industrial facility" in part to help distinguish CISWI units from municipal waste combustors and to distinguish the " commercial or industrial waste" burned by CISWI units from municipal waste that may contain some refuse from commercial or industrial facilities.

Moreover, we do not agree that the " small power production facilities" or " qualifying cogeneration facilities" described in section 129( g)( 1) are the only types of energy recovery facilities that are properly excluded from the CISWI category. To the extent that another type of energy recovery facility is not considered to be combusting solid waste from a commercial and industrial establishment, that facility should also be excluded from the CISWI category. We do not read section 129( g)( 1) to establish an exclusive list of excluded sources. See National Wildlife Federation v. Gorsuch, 693 F. 2d 156, 172 ( D. C. Cir. 1982) ( use of the term " includes"

allows for additional, unstated meanings); Chemehuevi Indian Tribe v. California St. Bd. of Equalization, 757 F. 2d 1047, 1054 ( 9th Cir. 1985), rev'd on different grounds, 106 S. Ct. 289 ( 1985) (" includes" is a term of enlargement, not of limitation); United States v. Huber, 603 F. 2d 387, 394 ( 2d Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 100 S. Ct. 1312 ( 1980) ( use of the word " includes," rather than a more restrictive term such as " means," indicates that the list is not exhaustive but merely illustrative).

Furthermore, the definition of " solid waste incineration unit" applies to all categories of units subject to section 129. The enumerated exclusions in section 129( g)( 1) ensure that specific types of facility are not included in any category under section 129. Thus, we do not read these exclusions to be an exclusive list of energy recovery facilities that are not included in the CISWI source category. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 11 Furthermore, section 129( h)( 2) states that any unit subject to a section 129 standard cannot also be subject to a 112( d) standard. The rules of logic support the position that the contra positive of that statement is equally true   any unit subject to a section 112( d) standard cannot also be subject to a section 129 standard. This indicates a Congressional intent not to give the word " any" the broad meaning suggested by the commenter because it would require that EPA periodically address units regulated by section 112 under section 129 at times when such units combust solid waste material, even if such units are designed and operated for energy recovery.

The quote cited by the commenter regarding cement kilns expressed EPA's position that we have the authority to regulate units under section 129 based on their primary function. Thus,

we indicated that if we determined that a unit, that might be called a cement kiln was actually functioning more like incinerator, we would have the authority to regulate that unit under section 129 even though it was not identified as an incinerator. However, we did not make a finding at that time that we were required to regulate cement kilns under section 129 because they functioned as incinerators. In addition, it appears from the quote that we focused at that time only on the phrase " any solid waste material" without considering the additional language " from commercial or industrial establishments" that is relevant to the CISWI category.

Ultimately, we determined that cement kilns should not be regulated in the final HMIWI rules, but instead should be regulated under section 112. Cement kilns, including those burning nonhazardous solid waste for purposes of energy recovery, have been regulated since 1999 under the portland cement manufacturing industry NESHAP, which is based on maximum achievable control technology ( MACT). The NESHAP regulates both major and area sources, and its requirements reduce emission of PM, multiple metals, dioxins/ furans, and total hydrocarbons ( which are a surrogate for other organic HAP including polycyclic organic matter ( POM),

benzene, toluene, and formaldehyde). The rule has already been implemented and sources are complying with it. As discussed above, section 129( h)( 2) of the CAA is clear that regulations under sections 129 and 112 are mutually exclusive. Accordingly, sources such as cement kilns,

boilers and process heaters that are subject to section 112 standards are not CISWI units.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0026) believes that electric steam generating units that are already subject to NSPS controls under 40 CFR 60 subparts Da or Db should not be subject to regulation under section 129. The commenter stated that EPA did not 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 12 consider electric utilities that co combust solid waste with fuel in its rulemaking activities, and therefore, EPA's regulatory impact analysis did not account for such units. The commenter urged EPA to clarify that the definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" and " commercial and industrial solid waste incineration ( CISWI) unit" do not inadvertently result in the CAA section 129 program regulating electric utility boilers, including circumstances where such boilers cocombust very small amounts of non hazardous solid waste with fuel during the production of power. An example is periodic boiler cleaning, when deposits that accumulate on the interior of boiler tube walls are removed with a cleaning agent. The resulting material is combusted in the boiler with fuel while the boiler is being operated to recovery energy and produce power.

Combustion is a highly effective method of destroying such materials. The commenter pointed out that EPA agreed with their comment on the November 1999 CISWI proposal that the regulatory text swept too broadly by potentially capturing the episodic circumstances in which electric utilities combust small amounts of such non hazardous solid waste with fuel. The commenter also stated that the legislative history makes clear that Congress intended section 129 to apply only to units dedicated to solid waste combustion and cited specific legislative history supporting this point. The commenter further stated that application of section 129 to electric utility boilers would be at odds with CAA section 112, and the language of the CAA makes clear Congress' intent for EPA to regulate nonhazardous waste combustion sources under either CAA section 129 or CAA section 112, but not both.

Response: We agree that electric utility boilers should not be covered by the CISWI rules because they are designed and operated for purposes of energy recovery and do not function as incinerators. We addressed this issue in the November 2000 CISWI comment response document ( EPA 453/ R 00 008). Electric utility boilers are regulated under authorities other than section 129.

Furthermore, the wording of CAA section 129( h) makes clear the Congressional intent for CAA regulations under section 112 or section 129 to be mutually exclusive. In section 112( n)( 1)( A), Congress set forth limited circumstances under which EPA could regulate electric utility boilers under section 112. First, Congress instructed EPA to complete a study of the hazards to public health reasonably expected to occur as a result of emissions by electric utility steam generating units of pollutants listed in section 112 after imposition of the requirements of the CAA. Then, it required EPA to regulate electric utility steam generating units under section 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 13 112 if the Administrator finds such regulation is appropriate and necessary considering the results of the study required by section 112( n). The EPA recently determined that is was neither appropriate nor necessary to regulate electric utility boilers under Section 112. 70 FR 15994 ( Mar. 29, 2005). The fact that the CAA specifically addressed electric utilities under section 112 indicates that Congress did not intend them to be regulated under section 129.

Similarly, since promulgation of the CISWI rules, EPA promulgated section 112 regulations for industrial, commercial and institutional boilers ( 40 CFR 63, subpart DDDDD).

That rule applies to some electric steam generating units ( e. g., independent power producers).

The language of CAA section 112( h) makes clear the Congressional intent for CAA regulation under section 129 or section 112 to be mutually exclusive. Accordingly, sources subject to section 112 standards are not CISWI units.

We are making minor adjustments to the definition of " commercial or industrial waste" to clarify our intent that boilers operated for energy recovery are not subject to CISWI, even if such units combust a small amount of material that might, under some circumstances, be considered waste along with other fuels. The revised definition clarifies that ( as described in the proposal preamble and the previous response), the critical consideration in determining whether a unit is burning commercial or industrial waste is the function of the combustion unit, and the primary indicator of function is whether or not the unit is designed and operated to recover energy for a useful purpose. The revised definition is:

Commercial or industrial waste means solid waste ( as defined in this subpart) that is combusted at any commercial or industrial facility using controlled flame combustion in an enclosed, distinct operating unit: ( 1) whose design does not provide for energy recovery ( as defined in this subpart); or ( 2) operated without energy recovery ( as defined in this subpart). Commercial or industrial waste also means solid waste ( as defined in this subpart) combusted in an air curtain incinerator that is a distinct operating unit of any commercial or industrial facility.

The referenced definition of energy recovery, which has not been changed, incorporates the concept of recovering thermal energy for " useful purposes." This revised definition of " commercial or industrial waste" excludes from CISWI units ( such as boilers) whose design provides for energy recovery and that are operated for energy recovery. However, units designed and operated without energy recovery remain subject to the CISWI rule as discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule. We believe the revised definition is sufficiently clear to exclude 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 14 utility steam generating units from the CISWI rules, but if any ambiguities remain, they can be addressed when EPA proposes and promulgates our response to the remand of the CISWI rules.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0008) strongly believes that a unit that incinerates solid waste at a rate of less than 1,000 lb/ hr and recovers heat from the outside of the burn chamber of the unit for useful purposes should be exempt from the CISWI rules. The commenter believes that such units are necessary in remote locations in northern climates for disposal of small volumes of solid waste and to generate heat as a useful resource.

Response: The commenter has not provided any specific data to support the technical or legal basis for a size cutoff. However, at this time, waste heat recovery units are not covered under CISWI because we have not assessed the impacts of including such units in the CISWI rules. An impacts assessment is necessary, but is best done when we respond to the CISWI remand and can perform comprehensive analyses that address the addition of waste heat recovery units, any questions on the applicability of the CISWI rules that may be raised by promulgation of rules for the other solid waste incineration ( OSWI) source category, and remand issues regarding determination of the MACT floor and emission limits. In subsequent rulemaking action in response to the CISWI remand, we currently intend to propose additional regulatory language to address units with only waste heat recovery and assess the impacts of the inclusion of these units in the CISWI category.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0011) supports the approach taken by EPA in distinguishing between incinerators that burn nonhazardous solid waste for purposes of disposal and combustion units that burn fuel for purposes of useful energy recovery. Another commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0015) also supports EPA's proposed definitions.

Response: The EPA acknowledges the commenters' support for the proposed approach.

We are finalizing the definitions as proposed, with minor clarifications, and as described in other responses, we are not including units with waste heat recovery in the CISWI rules at this time.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0009) stated that if EPA were to broaden the definitions beyond what was proposed in the February 17, 2004 notice ( as suggested by some commenters), the rulemaking would require a new database that considers all of the potentially impacted sources. Furthermore, such a change would not make sense because the types of units covered would have no technical similarity or common control approach, but would be grouped 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 15 together because of legalistic and environmentally meaningless distinctions in the types of fuel they burned.

Response: The EPA is promulgating the definitions as proposed with some modifications that are not intended to broaden the scope of the category beyond what we proposed. However,

at a later date, we will propose to include units with only waste heat recovery in the CISWI category. We will add these waste heat recovery units to our database and evaluate them in conjunction with additional action we will propose on the voluntary remand of the CISWI standards.

As explained in the February 17, 2004 notice of proposed rule, the revised CISWI definitions must also address an unintended regulatory gap. The boilers NESHAP covers combustion units at industrial and commercial facilities that burn solid materials for energy recovery, but excludes waste heat recovery units ( also known as " waste heat boilers"). For example, the boilers NESHAP would exclude a combustion unit that does not have heat recovery in the firebox and recovers heat only with a waste heat boiler. The CISWI rule, as promulgated in December 2000, covers units at commercial and industrial sites that burn solid materials with no energy recovery. Therefore, neither rule covered combustion units at commercial and industrial sites that recover heat with a waste heat recovery unit ( which recovers heat from the hot combustion gases following the combustion firebox).

Although EPA is not taking final action on waste heat recovery units at this time, the Agency is still inclined to cover waste heat recovery units in the CISWI rules because of the similarities of such units and units currently covered by CISWI. Incineration units are designed to discard materials by burning them at high temperatures and leaving as little residue as possible.

Incineration units do not have heat recovery in the combustion firebox, but they may be followed by waste heat recovery units. Unlike a boiler ( which is specifically designed to recover the maximum amount of heat from a material's combustion), waste heat recovery units are designed to cool the exhaust gas stream from an incineration unit, and/ or recover, indirectly, the useful heat remaining in the exhaust gas. The presence of a waste heat recovery unit on the exhaust gas does not change the fact that the unit combusting the material is primarily an incineration unit. Such units are designed and operated similar to units without heat recovery; but an external device ( the waste heat recovery unit) has been added to recover some of the heat from the incineration unit's exhaust gas. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 16 Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0003) strongly supports EPA's approach of not specifying a particular level of British thermal units per pound ( Btu/ lb) as a regulatory threshold. The commenter also included a discussion of the 5,000 Btu/ lb threshold that EPA had previously proposed in the CISWI rule, and pointed out that valid energy recovery could be obtained from materials with lower Btu values. The commenter indicated ( in attached comments submitted in response to previous rulemakings) that valid energy recovery from the cement kiln process has been obtained with materials with heating values between 996 and 1,948 Btu/ lb, but recommended that, if EPA does adopt a Btu threshold, a threshold of 3,000 Btu/ lb is appropriate and conservatively high.

Response: The EPA agrees that a Btu threshold is not needed for reasons described in the February 2004 notice and the 2000 CISWI promulgation preamble. In the preamble to the December 1, 2000, final CISWI rule ( 65 FR 75342), EPA summarized commenters' statements that "... the universe of materials burned for energy recovery is much broader than those defined as " fuels." For example, several of today's combustion technologies and some new emerging technologies can burn materials for energy recovery having heat values less than the proposed 5,000 Btu/ lb threshold for considering a material a fuel." The EPA responded that "... we agree that several of today's combustion technologies, including some emerging technologies, may be capable of burning materials with a heat value of less than 5,000 Btu/ lb to recover energy.

Therefore, we have deleted the requirement from the definition of solid waste in the final NSPS and EG." We still maintain this position. In addition to the information submitted by the commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0003) stating that cement kilns can recover heat from materials in the 1,000 to 2,000 Btu/ lb range, EPA has found examples of fluidized bed combustion units and other technologies, used at pulp and paper mills and for other utility, industrial, or commercial uses, that recover useful energy from sludges and other materials with low Btu contents ( e. g., in the range of 1,000 to 3,800 Btu/ lb). There is no bright line Btu value that can be used to distinguish if a material is a fuel burned for energy recovery or a waste disposed of for purposes other than energy recovery. The approach taken in the February 2004 proposed definition is more workable than a Btu/ lb cutoff.

We also reiterate that, by excluding combustion units such as boilers and cement kilns from the CISWI rules, we are not excluding them from regulation. We are simply determining which authority ( section 129 or 112) applies to various types of combustion units. Boilers at 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 17 major sources and cement kilns at major and area sources are regulated by section 112 standards for hazardous air pollutants, and EPA is currently developing section 112 standards for boilers located at area sources. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 18 Chapter 4 Definition of Commercial And Industrial Solid Waste Incineration ( CISWI) Unit Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0011) agrees with the proposed definition of " commercial and industrial solid waste incineration ( CISWI) unit," but suggested adding a phrase as shown ( in italics): " Commercial and industrial solid waste incineration ( CISWI) unit means any combustion unit that combusts commercial or industrial waste ( as defined in this subpart) in an enclosed unit using controlled flame combustion, that is a distinct operating unit of any..."

Response: We have determined that this wording change is not necessary. The definition of " commercial or industrial waste" already specifies that to be considered commercial or industrial waste, the waste must be combusted in an enclosed unit using controlled flame combustion. The definition of " CISWI unit" includes only units burning commercial or industrial waste ( as defined in the subpart). These definitions, read together, clearly limit CISWI units to enclosed units using controlled flame combustion, so the suggested revision to the CISWI unit definition is not necessary. Because these definitions are intended to be read together, we believe it would be redundant to repeat language in both definitions.

However, we note that our proposed definitions do contain some redundant language that should be removed. For example, we are removing the following phrase from the definition of " commercial or industrial waste:" "( including field erected, modular, and custom built incineration units operating with starved or excess air)." This language is already contained within the definition of " CISWI unit" and need not be included in the definition of the waste. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 19 Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0003) supports EPA's continued exemption of cement kilns from the definition of " CISWI unit," regardless of what type of fuel the cement kilns are burning.

Response: As pointed out by the commenter, we regulate cement kilns ( including those burning nonhazardous solid waste) under the section 112 portland cement manufacturing industry NESHAP ( 40 CFR 63 subpart LLL). The wording of section 129 makes it clear that the same source cannot be regulated under both sections 112 and 129. The commenter also describes several technical differences between cement kilns that are designed and operated to recover energy as an integral part of a manufacturing process and incinerators without energy recovery that fall under the CISWI definitions. These include differences in raw material chemistry,

combustion unit design, temperature, turbulence, and residence time. We agree that cement kilns that burn some nonhazardous solid waste are the same as the other cement kilns regulated by the portland cement manufacturing industry NESHAP in terms of combustion technology, emission characteristics, and control techniques, and thus should be regulated as cement kilns under that NESHAP rather than incinerators under the CISWI rules. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 20 Chapter 5 Definition of Commercial or Industrial Waste Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0002) supports EPA's definition of " commercial or industrial waste." The commenter agrees that, considering high energy costs,

materials burned for heat recovery should not be considered solid waste. The commenter also agrees that materials burned without heat recovery for a useful purpose should be regulated as commercial and industrial solid waste.

Response: The EPA acknowledges the commenter's support for the proposed definition of " commercial or industrial waste." We are promulgating the definition proposed in the February 17, 2004 Federal Register notice, with minor clarifications, and, as described elsewhere in this document, we are not including units with waste heat recovery in the CISWI rules at this time.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0011) agrees with the proposed definition of " commercial or industrial waste," but suggested some rewording ( shown in italics) for clarity as follows: " Commercial or industrial waste means: ( 1) Solid waste ( as defined in this subpart)

combusted in an enclosed unit using controlled flame combustion that is a distinct operating unit of any commercial or industrial facility ( including field erected, modular, and custom built incineration units operating with starved or excess air), where the solid waste is combusted: ( a)

Without heat recovery; ( b) For reasons that do not include heat recovery for a useful purpose;

or ( c) With only waste heat recovery ( i. e., no heat recovery in the combustion firebox). ( 2) Solid waste ( as defined in this subpart), combusted in an air curtain incinerator that is a distinct operating unit of any commercial or industrial facility." 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 21 Response: We agree with the commenter that there is room to improve the clarity of the proposed definition and have made some modifications to the definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" with this in mind. However, we have reorganized the proposed definition in a different manner than suggested by the commenter. The full revised definition is presented in a previous comment response. We believe our modified definitions are clearer than the reworded definition of commercial or industrial waste provided by the commenter, which retains some parenthetical language that is repetitive with other definitions. In addition, the commenter's definition does not reflect our decision to omit the phrase " combusted for reasons that do not include the recovery of heat for a useful purpose" and insert the phrase " whose design does not provide for energy recovery ( as defined in this subpart)" to better reflect the key principal that we discussed in the preamble of the proposed rule. Furthermore, EPA's revised definition better reflects our decision not to regulate units with only waste heat recovery at this time, but to propose to regulate such units when we respond to the remand of the CISWI rules.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0026) believes that there is no reason to deviate from the definitions in the Dec. 1, 2000 CISWI rule, but if the definitions are amended,

the term " commercial or industrial waste" should include only wastes combusted in units without any heat recovery. The commenter suggested the following definition: " Commercial or industrial waste means solid waste ( as defined in this subpart) combusted in a unit that does not recover heat for a useful purpose ( e. g., no heat recovery in the combustion firebox) and such combustion occurs in an enclosed unit using controlled flame combustion..."

Response: The commenter represents electric utilities. As described in a previous response in Chapter 3, we have made additional changes to the definition to better reflect EPA's intent, and we do not believe that electric utility steam generating units are covered under the revised definition of " commercial or industrial waste."

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0027) stated that the definition of " commercial or industrial waste" ( both the promulgated and newly proposed definitions) appears to define when combustion of commercial or industrial waste is subject to the CISWI rule rather than defining the term. The commenter added that EPA states in its discussion on 69 FR 7396 ( February 14, 2004), that " it is reasonable to define commercial or industrial waste, for purposes of identifying commercial and industrial solid waste incineration units subject to regulation under section 129 of the CAA, as follows: solid materials burned at commercial or industrial facilities 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 22 are commercial or industrial waste unless they are ( 1) hazardous solid wastes, ( 2) subject to one of the exemptions included in section 129 of the CAA ( e. g., material recovery facility, qualifying small power production facility), or ( 3) burned with heat recovery for a useful purpose... ." The commenter agrees that this definition is effective and straightforward and would like for EPA to explain why this language was not included in the proposed commercial or industrial waste definition.

Response: The statement from the preamble cited by the commenter summarizes general concepts that are reflected in the definitions proposed in February 2004 and other portions of our CISWI regulations that we did not address in the February 2004 notice. For example, hazardous solid wastes and wastes subject to the exemptions in section 129 of the CAA are excluded in the applicability sections of the CISWI rules ( § 60.2020 of subpart CCCC and § 60.2555 of subpart DDDD). These sections of our rules also address materials recovery units and small power production facilities. Thus, we do not believe these exemptions needed to be reiterated in the definitions of commercial or industrial waste and CISWI unit that are at issue in this action.

The definitions on which we sought comment in this action primarily address the third concept of whether energy is recovered for a useful purpose and whether waste heat recovery units should be included in the CISWI category. As explained in the February 2004 proposal, the definitions in the final ( December 1, 2000) CISWI rules leave an unintended regulatory gap, where incineration units with only waste heat recovery used at commercial and industrial sites would not be covered by the boilers NESHAP or the CISWI rules. Such units are similar to incinerators already covered by the CISWI rules, yet are unregulated. To address this regulatory gap, EPA proposed that these units should be subject to the CISWI rules rather than the boilers NESHAP for reasons described in the February 17, 2004 proposal ( 69 FR 7396). Because of the need to address waste heat recovery units, we did not believe our proposed definitions could be limited solely to addressing the third concept of energy recovery for a useful purpose. As explained in other responses, we have determined that CISWI units include those units that combust materials combusted in a unit that is designed or operated without energy recovery. However, at this time,

waste heat recovery units are not covered under CISWI because we have not assessed the impacts of including such units in the CISWI rules. An impacts assessment is necessary, but is best done when we respond to the CISWI remand and can perform comprehensive analyses that address the addition of waste heat recovery units, other questions on the applicability of the CISWI rules and 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 23 interface with the rules for the other solid waste incineration ( OSWI) source category, and remand issues regarding determination of the MACT floor and emission limits. In subsequent rulemaking action, we will propose additional regulatory language to address units with only waste heat recovery and assess the impacts of the inclusion of these units in the CISWI category.

We are, therefore, promulgating the definitions as proposed in February 2004, with minor clarifications. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 24 Chapter 6 Definition of Solid Waste Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0012) stated that EPA's arguments about the definition of solid waste are irrelevant and without merit. Pointing to section 129( g)( 6),

which provides that solid waste shall have the meanings established by EPA pursuant to the Solid Waste Disposal Act ( SWDA), the commenter argues that EPA has established only one " comprehensive definition" of solid waste under the SWDA: the definition in 40 CFR 261.2. 69 FR at 7395/ 2. Furthermore, the commenter asserts that this definition was the only comprehensive definition that existed when Congress enacted section 129, which, in the commenter's view indicates that Congress intended EPA to use that definition. The commenter made this point in an attempt to refute EPA's argument that because section 261.2 " defines solid waste specifically for purposes of identifying hazardous solid waste [ it] could not serve as a regulatory definition for purposes of identifying nonhazardous solid waste under CAA section 129." The commenter pointed out that EPA has not provided a reason that this definition is unusable for identifying nonhazardous solid waste, and the refusal to use the definition is arbitrary, capricious, and unlawful. Finally, the commenter added that even if EPA were not compelled to use the definition provided in 40 CFR 261.2, EPA's attempt to provide a new definition solely for the purpose of the CISWI regulation is unlawful because the CAA provides that " solid waste" shall have the meaning established by EPA " pursuant to the Solid Waste Disposal Act."

Response: We disagree with the commenter. Section 129( g) states that " solid waste ...

shall have the meanings established by the Administrator pursuant to the Solid Waste Disposal Act." Section 129( g) also states that the term " solid waste incineration unit" does not include 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 25 units required to have a permit under section 3005 of the SWDA. This reference to section 3005 of the SWDA refers to the hazardous waste regulatory program authorized under the SWDA.

This language effectively limits the scope of EPA's authority under section 129 to units that burn nonhazardous solid waste.

However, the definition of " solid waste" in section 261.2 cited by the commenter applies only to hazardous wastes, whereas the CISWI rules apply to only nonhazardous solid wastes. To develop and implement the hazardous waste regulatory program authorized by the SWDA, EPA adopted a definition of hazardous waste pursuant to the SWDA. This definition is found in part 261 of title 40 of the CFR. In defining hazardous waste, part 261 also defines solid waste.

However, in doing so 40 CFR 261.1( b)( 1) states that this definition of solid waste applies only to wastes that are hazardous for purposes of implementing subtitle C of RCRA. Section 261.1( b)( 2)

indicates that the Part 261 definition identifies only some of the wastes that are considered solid wastes under other sections of RCRA.

Much of the complexity and specificity of the part 261 definition was unique to hazardous waste and was needed to assure that hazardous waste is properly identified, tracked, transported,

and disposed of, and is not inappropriately discarded or abandoned. One United States Appeals Court has recognized that the words of the RCRA statute contemplate that EPA refine and narrow the definition of solid waste for the sole purpose of Subchapter C of RCRA. Connecticut Coastal Fisherman's Ass'n v. Remington Arms Co., Inc., 989 F. 2d 1305, 1315 ( 2d Cir. 1993).

This court recognized that the RCRA statute contemplate more than one definition for the term " solid waste." Id.

Consequently, we looked to the definition of solid waste in the SWDA and to other regulatory definitions of solid waste adopted by EPA under the authority of that statute that also apply to various types of nonhazardous solid wastes ( i. e., definitions found in 40 CFR parts 240 through 259). These definitions reflect the general definition of solid waste found in the SWDA ( 42 U. S. C. 6903), but they each vary slightly depending on the particular regulatory circumstances. Furthermore, these solid waste definitions found in the rules for nonhazardous solid wastes do not contain the extensive detail found in the definition of solid waste in the part 261 hazardous waste rules.

The fact that the language of the individual regulatory definitions of solid waste vary from definition to definition indicates that the Administrator has not adopted a single authoritative 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 26 definition to identify nonhazardous solid waste under the SWDA. Because the Administrator has not adopted a single authoritative definition of nonhazardous solid waste, it is reasonable for EPA to adopt an appropriate definition for purposes of the final CISWI rule so long as it is not inconsistent with the SWDA. As described in previous Federal Register notices pertaining to the CISWI rules ( 64 FR 67104, November 30, 1999 and 65 FR 75342, December 1, 2000) EPA has adopted, under the joint authority of the CAA and RCRA, a definition of solid waste that is used solely to identify nonhazardous solid waste for the regulatory programs authorized by CAA section 129, such as the CISWI rules. The definition proposed in the February 2004 CISWI notice is the same as the definition previously adopted for the CISWI rules, and we consider the definition of solid waste in the rules to be consistent with the SWDA.

Comment: Several commenters ( OAR 2003 0119 0009, OAR 2003 0119 0011, 0013)

support the proposed definition of " solid waste," which is the same as that already contained in 40 CFR § 60.2265. One of these commenters ( OAR 2003 0119 0009) stated that, to implement this [ CISWI] rule, EPA should continue to use definitions designed to address the particular regulatory problems that it poses in the context of the CAA as a whole, rather than being bound by definitions under RCRA that were designed to serve completely different purposes. The commenters stated that, since EPA has never established a single, all purpose definition of solid waste under RCRA, EPA was authorized to establish a definition of " solid waste" to implement CISWI, as long as that definition was consistent with RCRA. The commenter added that EPA's definition of " commercial or industrial waste" under CISWI is fully consistent with RCRA. The statute, § 1004( 27), defines solid waste as discarded material. Since materials from which useful energy or raw materials are recovered are not discarded, the CISWI rule definition fully implements the statute. The commenter added that units excluded from CISWI were not excluded from regulation under the CAA, but would instead be subject to similar standards under section 112. The fact that units will be regulated should broaden EPA's discretion. The commenter supports the major aspects of the proposal.

Response: We agree that the proposed definition of solid waste is appropriate for the reasons set forth in our prior response. We agree that EPA has never established a single,

allpurpose definition of solid waste under RCRA and that we have the authority to establish a definition of solid waste for purposes of the CISWI rules. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 27 Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0027) requested that EPA answer the following question: does wood waste, clean lumber, and yard waste meet the definition of solid waste in the CISWI NSPS and EG?

Response: Yes, these materials meet the definition of solid waste in the CISWI rule.

However, these materials are not necessarily commercial or industrial wastes and units combusting such materials are not necessarily CISWI units. An owner/ operator of a specific combustion unit burning these material must also review the applicability section of the CISWI rules and other definitions in the rules to determine if their unit is subject to the CISWI rules. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 28 Chapter 7 Waste Heat Recovery Units Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0013) does not support the inclusion of waste heat recovery units in CISWI as proposed in the Feb. 17, 2004 notice. The commenter added that they operate one unit that recovers considerable amounts of energy outside of the firebox. The commenter supports the current definition of solid waste, which defines waste as " discarded" materials, and points out that the waste stream combusted in their unit with external heat recovery involved is not discarded but is used beneficially. Finally, the commenter points out that broadening the definitions in the final rule will broaden the rule beyond the units represented by EPA's CISWI database and would require a whole new rulemaking.

Response: We recognize that including units with waste heat recovery would broaden the scope and coverage of the CISWI rules. Because we have not assessed the impacts of requiring such units to comply with the CISWI rules, we have decided not to include units with waste heat recovery in the CISWI rules at this time. We plan to perform the necessary analyses and we will propose to regulate waste heat recovery units when we respond to the CISWI remand that we requested on other grounds because of the court's opinion in Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition v.

EPA, 255 F. 2d 885 ( D. C. Cir. 2001).

In addition to the decisions on coverage of units with only waste heat recovery, the remand will address such issues as the MACT floor determination, emission limits, and other questions on the applicability of the December 2000 CISWI rules and the interface with the final rules for other solid waste incineration ( OSWI) units. To properly address these issues, we will need to perform additional analyses to determine the changes that will occur to the CISWI regulations and the associated environmental, economic, and other impacts of these changes. To 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 29 completely assess the impacts, these analyses are best performed when we are addressing all of the issues involved with the CISWI remand including, among other things, potential changes to the number of regulated units ( e. g., by the addition of units with only waste heat recovery) and the control techniques used in the newly expanded CISWI source category. Therefore, at the time of the remand, we will take public comments on any proposed changes and their associated impacts, and then promulgate final rules.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0009) believes that including waste heat recovery units makes sense in general terms, but that the approach requires adjustment to the definition of waste heat recovery ( and/ or waste heat boiler) to avoid unintended consequences.

The commenter provided several examples of sources that may be covered that EPA did not intend to cover, including: ( 1) gasification units used in the forest products industry, in which the gasification, which is clearly energy recovery, takes place outside the firebox; ( 2) boilers designed to burn wet fuels, in which the combustion takes place in small cells, and the exhaust from multiple cells combines in a separate chamber where heat recovery takes place; ( 3) thermal oil heaters, which generally place heat recovery sections outside of the combustion chamber for safety reasons; and ( 4) process heaters where combustion gases are too hot for the process to safely use cool the gases with dilution air and heat recovery takes place from the diluted gases; ( 5)

direct fired lumber kilns that burn biomass these may be claimed to be subject to CISWI standards, particularly when the combustion unit must be vented to the atmosphere during process upsets ( emissions from these units are fully addressed in the plywood and composite wood products ( PCWP) NESHAP) ; and ( 6) wood products hybrid systems ( burning residuals) that have multiple heat recovery units. All or portions of the heat recovery may not be in the firebox,

and these units may be temporarily vented to the atmosphere during certain conditions.

Depending on the conditions, these units are subject to either the PCWP or boilers NESHAP.

To resolve these unintended consequences ( to avoid covering the types of sources described above), the commenter believes that EPA should make the definition of a waste heat recovery unit identical with the definition for waste heat boiler in the boilers NESHAP.

Response: As discussed earlier, we have decided not to include units with only waste heat recovery in the CISWI rules at this time. We will address the comment when we respond to the CISWI remand. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 30 Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0027) stated that by covering units that recover heat outside of the firebox, the CISWI rule will probably force at least one combustion unit in their State, which recovers waste heat for a legitimate useful purpose, to shut down due to the high cost of pollution controls and testing. Facilities in this position will likely require some time to find alternative sources of heat for their operations. One facility in the commenter's State has indicated that it will consider replacing their waste heat unit ( which combusts clean wood scraps) with an air curtain incinerator ( which will have to meet opacity limits only).

Response: As discussed earlier, we have decided not to include units with only waste heat recovery in the CISWI rules at this time. We will address the comment when we respond to the CISWI remand.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0013) supports the continued use of the current definition of heat recovery. The commenter stated that their CISWI unit can meet the limits without air pollution controls, but that the existing regulation presents a paperwork and training burden with little commensurate environmental benefit. If the exemption for units with downstream heat recovery is removed, another one of the company's units at a different facility will be subject to the regulation, and will have to obtain a title V permit and incur other costs associated with the rule, again with little environmental benefit ( since they anticipate that the unit can meet the emission limits without add on controls). A potential remedy to this situation would be for EPA to exempt units which do not require add on control devices in future CISWI rulemaking.

Response: As discussed earlier, we have decided not to include units with only waste heat recovery in the CISWI rules at this time. We will address the comment when we respond to the CISWI remand. 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 31 Chapter 8 Miscellaneous 8.1 BAGASSE Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0011) suggested wording changes to specific passages in the February 2004 notice to reflect that bagasse, when burned in a boiler to produce heat needed to produce sugar from sugar cane, is clearly a fuel and is more properly regulated under CAA section 112 than section 129.

Response: The EPA agrees that boilers combusting bagasse and other materials for energy recovery are properly regulated under section 112. The applicability and definitions in the boilers NESHAP were written to cover such units. The CISWI rules will apply only to waste that is combusted in a unit: ( 1) whose design does not provide for energy recovery; or ( 2) operated without energy recovery. The language revisions suggested by the commenter were not changes to the proposed definitions themselves, but changes to the discussion in the February 17, 2004 Federal Register notice that solicited comment on the definitions. The EPA is not republishing the language from the February 2004 notice that these commenters found objectionable in the preamble to the final action on these definitions.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0011) stated that there is no doubt that certain biomass materials are fuels. The commenter pointed out that for the past 200 years the main fuel of the U. S. sugar industry has been bagasse, which has a heat content of about 4,000 Btu/ lb as produced in the mill. The commenter also pointed out that bagasse has been consistently characterized by both the sugar industry and government regulators as a product of sugar production, and that EPA ( and the rest of the world) has recognized that bagasse is a renewable resource. In addition, the use of bagasse as fuel reduces net CO2 emissions, thus helping in the fight against global climate change, and reduces our dependence on fossil fuel 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 32 combustion. One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0011) also stated that bagasse should be removed from the definition of agricultural waste because bagasse has never been considered as a waste material, nor has bagasse been routinely discarded. It is either used as a fuel or sold as a source of lignin for paper production, as a raw material for furfural, and for many other uses.

Response: The EPA agrees that bagasse, when burned in a boiler for energy recovery, is a fuel rather than a commercial or industrial waste. Boilers combusting bagasse are covered under section 112 rules, such as the boilers NESHAP and the upcoming area source boilers standards.

The definitions in the CISWI rules are clear, and will not cause bagasse that is burned in a boiler to be covered by the CISWI rules. However, EPA is not removing bagasse from the definition of " agricultural waste" in the CISWI rules. If bagasse or other agricultural materials are combusted for disposal in a unit without energy recovery rather than combusted for energy recovery, they would be considered a commercial or industrial waste. We note, however, that the CISWI rules exempt incineration units burning 90 percent or more agricultural wastes, as long as they follow the notification and recordkeeping requirements in § 60.2020( b) of subpart CCCC or § 60.2555( b)

of subpart DDDD.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0015) supports the comments submitted on behalf of the Florida Sugar Industry by another commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0011).

Response: The EPA understands that this commenter agrees with the comments submitted on behalf of the Florida Sugar Industry and has addressed the comments throughout this document.

8.2 CLARIFICATIONS TO THE APPLICABILITY OF THE CISWI RULES THAT ARE NOT RELATED TO THE PROPOSED DEFINITION CHANGES Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0027) requested that the definition of commercial and industrial solid waste incineration unit be amended to clarify that air curtain incinerators burning wood waste, clean lumber, and yard waste are not solid waste incineration units and are therefore not subject to title V permitting requirements. The commenter believes that these area sources, typically small wood pallet recyclers, are more effectively regulated with SIP permits.

Response: This comment is not related to the changes in the definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" and " CISWI unit" discussed in the February 2004 proposal and, therefore, so is 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 33 outside the scope of the current regulatory action. However, EPA will consider this comment in conjunction with additional actions to amend the CISWI rule that we will be taking in response to the court remand that we requested voluntarily.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0027) requested that EPA address whether pyrolysis and gasification units meet the definition of CISWI unit.

Response: This comment is not related to the changes in the definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" and " CISWI unit" discussed in the February 2004 proposal and, therefore, is outside the scope of the current regulatory action. However, EPA will consider this comment in conjunction with additional action to amend the CISWI rule that we will be taking in response to the court remand that we requested voluntarily.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0014) asked EPA to clarify whether the exemption in § 60.2555( n)( 7) for " units burning only photographic film to recover silver" or the exemption in § 60.2555( h) for " materials recovery units that combust waste for the primary purpose of recovering metals" would apply to silver recovery operations that combust materials other than photographic film ( e. g., x ray film, silver rich sludges from photographic paper coating). The commenter also asked whether such units could combust some non silver bearing waste such as plastic and cardboard film packaging, and still be eligible for these exemptions.

Response: This comment is not related to the changes in the definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" and " CISWI unit" discussed in the February 2004 proposal and, therefore, is outside the scope of the current regulatory action. However, EPA will consider this comment in conjunction with additional action to amend the CISWI rule that we will be taking in response the court remand that we requested voluntarily.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0009) requested clarification of the provisions of § § 60.2025 and 60.2558 to indicate that the recovered chemical constituents can be used in a manner other than the original use in the process upstream of the stream being burned.

The quality of recovered constituents may make them more suited to a different application, and providing this clarification will enhance the ability to reuse recovered materials.

Response: This comment is not related to the changes in the definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" and " CISWI unit" discussed in the February 2004 proposal and, therefore, is outside the scope of the current regulatory action. However, EPA will consider this comment in 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 34 conjunction with additional action to amend the CISWI rule that we will be taking in response the court remand that we requested voluntarily.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0009) urged EPA to retain the 15 specific exemptions set out in 40 CFR 60.2020. The commenter noted that it does not appear that EPA is taking comment on the exemptions, but commented anyway.

Response: The EPA did not seek comment on the 15 exemptions already contained in the CISWI rules, and they are outside the scope of the current regulatory action. The exemptions are not affected by the changes in the definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" and " CISWI unit" discussed in the February 2004 proposal, and we intend to retain them.

Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0014) stated that section 129 exempts precious metal recovery operations from regulation as incinerators, and that these facilities could be considered for regulation under section 112, particularly since HAP emissions could be significant.

Response: This comment is not related to the changes in the definitions of " commercial or industrial waste" and " CISWI unit" discussed in the February 2004 proposal and, therefore, is outside the scope of the current regulatory action.

8.3 RULEMAKING PROCESS Comment: One commenter ( OAR 2003 0119 0012) challenged the rulemaking process,

arguing that EPA committed to convene further proceedings to allow for additional public comment on the CISWI definitions, but then finalized the boiler rule under section 112. In the commenter's view, this series of events rendered the reconsideration proceeding on the CISWI definitions meaningless since EPA has already decided which units would be covered under the boiler rule.

Response: In order to comply with a deadline established in a Consent Decree ( which was negotiated and signed by counsel for the commenter), EPA was required to finalize the boilers rule under section 112 by February 27, 2004. As a result of this deadline, EPA did not have the ability to wait to finalize the boiler rule until the conclusion of EPA's reconsideration of the CISWI definitions. The notice of proposed rulemaking on the CISWI definitions was signed by the Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation on February 10, 2004 and published on Federal Register on February 17, 2004. The Administrator signed the boiler rule on February 26, 2004 0154 03 008\ CISWI comment response. doc 35 and EPA published the rule in the Federal Register on September 14, 2004 after an unforeseen delay.

Because these actions occurred contemporaneously, we acknowledged in the Response to Comments document for the boiler rule that we were soliciting further comment on the CISWI definitions. See " Response to Public Comments on Proposed Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters NESHAP" ( Boilers RTC). In that document, we stated that "[ c] hanges made to the CISWI rule in the promulgated rule that affect boilers and process heaters will be dealt with after the promulgation of the boiler MACT standards." Boilers RTC at 167. Thus, we informed the public that we would take further action to address the scope of the boilers rule if it was necessary after our reconsideration of the CISWI definitions.

Our final action in the boilers rule on February 26, 2004 was informed by the definitions that we had proposed on February 17, 2004 in the CISWI reconsideration action. Thus, at that time, we had intended for the scope of the boilers rule to be consistent with the proposed scope of the CISWI rule. Our rationale for the action in the boilers rule was based on what EPA proposed in the reconsideration action on the CISWI definitions. However, as shown by the statements described above, we continued to recognize that it might be necessary to make changes to the CISWI definitions and boiler rule based on public comments received on this reconsideration. We made clear that our final action in the boilers rule did not preclude the possibility of further action to amend the scope of the boilers rule after receiving public comments on the scope of the CISWI definitions.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 208 (Monday, October 28, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 64178]
[FR Doc No: 2013-25289]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0852]

Drawbridge Operation Regulation; Back Bay of Biloxi, Between
Biloxi and D'Iberville, MS

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
operating schedule that governs the I-110 Bridge across the Back Bay of
Biloxi, mile 3.0, between Biloxi and D'Iberville, Harrison County,
Mississippi. The deviation is necessary to continue the rehabilitation
and maintenance of the bascule span of the bridge. This deviation
allows the bridge to remain closed to vessel traffic unless 24 hours
notice is given.

DATES: This deviation is effective from November 1, 2013 through April
29, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2013-0852] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Mr. Jim Wetherington, Coast Guard;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you
have questions on viewing the docket, call Barbara Hairston, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Mississippi Department of Transportation
(MDOT), the bridge owner, requested a 24 hour notice be given to open
the I-110 Bridge over the Back Bay of Biloxi, Mile 3.0, between Biloxi
and D'Iberville, Harrison County, MS. The bridge has a horizontal
clearance of 132 feet and a vertical clearance of 60 feet, above Mean
Sea Level, in the closed-to-navigation position and an unlimited
vertical clearance in the open-to-navigation position.
    The bridge opens per 33 CFR 117.675(a). This regulation states that
the I-110 Bridge opens on signal if at least 6-hours notice is given.
The deviation will require a 24 hour notice to operate the bridge from
November 1, 2013 through April 29, 2014. This schedule will allow the
safe and continued rehabilitation and maintenance of the bridge.
    This waterway is used by both commercial and recreational vessel
traffic. No previous coordination was made with the waterway users
though the closure dates were chosen to minimize the impact to these
users.
    Vessels able to pass through the bridge in the closed positions may
do so at anytime. The bridge will not be able to open for emergencies
and there is no immediate alternate route for vessels to pass. The
Coast Guard will also inform the users of the waterways through our
Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners of the change in operating
schedule for the bridge so that vessels can arrange their transits to
minimize any impact caused by the temporary deviation.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e), the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This deviation from the operating
regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: September 30, 2013.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-25289 Filed 10-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 148 (Monday, August 3, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 45969]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18966]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EF15-7-000]

Western Area Power Administration; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on July 22, 2015, the Western Area Power
Administration submitted tariff filing per 300.10: DSW_BCP_WAPA 171-
20150721 to be effective 10/1/2015.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 21, 2015.

    Dated: July 28, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-18966 Filed 7-31-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 42 (Monday, March 6, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 12614]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04228]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2017-N-0809]

Issuance of Priority Review Voucher; Rare Pediatric Disease
Product

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
issuance of a priority review voucher to the sponsor of a rare
pediatric disease product application. The Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), as amended by the Food and Drug Administration
Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA), authorizes FDA to award priority
review vouchers to sponsors of rare pediatric disease product
applications that meet certain criteria. FDA has determined that
SPINRAZA (nusinersen), manufactured by Biogen Inc., meets the criteria
for a priority review voucher.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Bauer, Rare Diseases Program,
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration,
10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is announcing the issuance of a priority
review voucher to the sponsor of a rare pediatric disease product
application. Under section 529 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360ff), which
was added by FDASIA, FDA will award priority review vouchers to
sponsors of rare pediatric disease product applications that meet
certain criteria. FDA has determined that SPINRAZA (nusinersen),
manufactured by Biogen Inc., meets the criteria for a priority review
voucher. SPINRAZA (nusinersen) is indicated for the treatment of spinal
muscular atrophy in pediatric and adult patients.
    For further information about the Rare Pediatric Disease Priority
Review Voucher Program and for a link to the full text of section 529
of the FD&C Act, go to http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/DevelopingProductsforRareDiseasesConditions/RarePediatricDiseasePriorityVoucherProgram/default.htm. For further
information about SPINRAZA (nusinersen), go to the ``Drugs@FDA'' Web
site at http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/.

    Dated: February 28, 2017.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2017-04228 Filed 3-3-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 31, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16720-16721]
[FR Doc No: 2021-06589]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0692; FRL-10019-41]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Renewal of an
Existing Collection and Comment Request; Pesticide Environmental
Stewardship Program Annual Measures Reporting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), this
document announces that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
planning to submit an information collection request (ICR) to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The ICR, entitled: ``Pesticide
Environmental Stewardship Program Annual Measures Reporting'' and
identified by EPA ICR No. 2415.04 and OMB Control No. 2070-0188,
represents the renewal of an existing ICR that is scheduled to expire
on October 31, 2021. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and
approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the
proposed information collection that is summarized in this document.
The ICR and accompanying material are available in the docket for
public review and comment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 1, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
(ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0692, by using the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Do not submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
    Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with
limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer
service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status
information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carolyn Siu, Mission Support Division,
Office of Program Support, (7101M), Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:
(703) 347-1249; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What information is EPA particularly interested in?

    Pursuant to PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)),
EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:
    1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility.
    2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of
the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used.
    3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected.
    4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from
very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of
specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork
burden for very small businesses affected by this collection.

II. What information collection activity or ICR does this action apply
to?

    Title: Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program Annual Measures
Reporting.
    ICR number: EPA ICR No. 2415.04.
    OMB control number: OMB Control No. 2070-0188.
    ICR status: The existing ICR is currently scheduled to expire on
October 31, 2021. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers
for EPA's

regulations in title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), after
appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR
part 9, are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or
by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers
for certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
    Abstract: This ICR covers the information collection activities
associated with voluntary participation in the Pesticide Environmental
Stewardship Program (PESP). The program uses the information collected
to establish partner membership, develop stewardship strategies,
measure progress towards stewardship goals, and award incentives. PESP
is an EPA partnership program that encourages the use of integrated
pest management (IPM) strategies to reduce pests and pesticide risks.
IPM is an approach that involves making the best choices from among a
series of Pest management practices that are both economical and pose
the least possible hazard to people, property, and the environment.
    PESP member includes pesticide end-users and organizations which
focus on training, educating, and/or influencing pesticide users. To
become a PESP member, an organization submits an application and a
five-year strategy outlining how environmental and human health risk
reduction goals will be achieved through IPM implementation and/or
education. The program encourages PESP members to track progress
towards IPM goals such as: reductions in unnecessary use of pesticides,
cost reductions, and knowledge shared about IPM methodologies. Entities
participating in PESP also benefit from technical assistance, and
through incentives for achievements at different levels.
    Form Numbers: EPA Form No. 9600-01, 9600-02, and 9600-03.
    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by
this ICR are pesticide user companies and organizations, or entities
that practice IPM or promote the use of IPM through education and
training.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Voluntary.
    Estimated number of respondents: 419 (total).
    Frequency of response: Annual and on occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 50,093 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.03(b)
    Total estimated cost: $3,501,544 (per year). This is the estimated
burden cost; there are no capital investment or maintenance and
operational costs for this information collection.

III. Are there changes in the estimates from the last approval?

    There is an increase of 2,428 hours in the total estimated
respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This
increase reflects EPA's updating of burden estimates for this
collection based upon historical information on the number of PESP
members. Based on revised estimates, the number of IPM Promoters has
decreased, while the number of IPM users has increased, and the number
of National IPM users has decreased since the last ICR renewal.
Although the estimated burden per response has not changed for any
category, the shift in membership types has resulted in a net increase
in the overall burden.
    In addition, OMB has requested that EPA move towards using the 18-
question format for ICR Supporting Statements used by other federal
agencies and departments and is based on the submission instructions
established by OMB in 1995, replacing the alternate format developed by
EPA and OMB prior to 1995. EPA intends to update this Supporting
Statement during the comment period to reflect the 18-question format,
and has included the questions in an attachment to this Supporting
Statement. In doing so, the Agency does not expect the change in format
to result in substantive changes to the information collection
activities or related estimated burden and costs.

IV. What is the next step in the process for this ICR?

    EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as
appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for
review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another
Federal Register document pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to
announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit
additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or
the approval process, please contact the technical person listed under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

    Dated: March 25, 2021.
Michal Freedhoff,
Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution
Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2021-06589 Filed 3-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P