[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 78 (Monday, April 23, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24272-24299]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9093]

Vol. 77

Monday,

No. 78

April 23, 2012

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

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

40 CFR Parts 60 and 62

Federal Plan Requirements for Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste
Incinerators Constructed on or Before December 1, 2008 and Standards of
Performance for New Stationary Sources; Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 77 , No. 78 / Monday, April 23, 2012 /
Proposed Rules

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 60 and 62

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0534; FRL-9660-1]
RIN 2060-AR11

Federal Plan Requirements for Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste
Incinerators Constructed on or Before December 1, 2008 and Standards of
Performance for New Stationary Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On October 6, 2009, the EPA adopted amendments to the
September 15, 1997, new source performance standards and emissions
guidelines for hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators. The
amendments were developed in response to the March 2, 1999, remand of
the 1997 hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators regulations by
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the
Court), which requested further explanation of the EPA's reasoning in
determining the minimum regulatory emission standards for new and
existing hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators. Today's action
proposes amendments to the hospital/medical/infectious waste
incinerators federal plan to implement the amended emission guidelines
adopted on October 6, 2009, for those states that do not have an
approved revised/new state plan implementing the emission guidelines,
as amended, in place by October 6, 2011. Today's action also proposes
to amend the new source performance standards to better reflect our
original intent in the October 6, 2009, final rule in eliminating an
exemption during startup, shutdown and malfunction periods from the
requirement to comply with standards at all times.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before June 7, 2012.
Because of the need to revise the hospital/medical/infectious waste
incinerators (HMIWI) federal plan in a timely manner, the EPA does not
expect to grant requests for extensions beyond this date.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA by May 3, 2012
requesting to speak at a public hearing, the EPA will hold a public
hearing on May 8, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments on the federal plan requirements
proposed rule, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405, by one
of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email: Send your comments via electronic mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405.
     Facsimile: Fax your comments to<PHONE_NUMBER>, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405.
     Mail: Send your comments to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2011-0405. Please include a total of two copies. We request that a
separate copy also be sent to the contact person identified below (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
     Hand Delivery: Deliver your comments to: EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405.
Such deliveries are accepted only during the normal hours of operation
(8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays) and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Submit your comments on the new source performance standards (NSPS)
final rule amendments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-
0534, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
     Email: Send your comments via electronic mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0534.
     Facsimile: Fax your comments to<PHONE_NUMBER>, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0534.
     Mail: Send your comments to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0534. Please include a total of two copies. We request that a
separate copy also be sent to the contact person identified below (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
     Hand Delivery: Deliver your comments to: EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0534.
Such deliveries are accepted only during the normal hours of operation
(8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays) and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments on the federal plan requirements
proposed rule to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405. Direct your
comments on the NSPS final rule amendments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0534. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be confidential
business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to the EPA without going through www.regulations.gov,
your email address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA
recommends that you include your name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Public Hearing: If a public hearing is held, it will be held at the
EPA's Campus located at 109 T.W. Alexander Drive in Research Triangle
Park, NC, or an alternate site nearby. Contact Ms. Joan Rogers at (919)
541-4487, to request a hearing, to request to speak at a public
hearing, to determine if a hearing will be held or to determine the
hearing location. If no one contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a
public hearing concerning this proposed rule by May 3, 2012, the
hearing will be cancelled without further notice.
    Docket: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405 and Legacy Docket ID No. A-98-24.
The EPA has established a docket for the HMIWI rules under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0534 and Legacy

Docket ID No. A-91-61. All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically at www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket
Center EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone
number for the EPA Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Amy Hambrick, Fuels and
Incineration Group, Sector Policies and Programs Division (E143-05),
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Organization of This Document

    The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in
this preamble.

I. General Information
    A. Does the proposed action apply to me?
    B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments?
II. Background Information
    A. What is the regulatory development background for this
proposed rule?
    B. What is the purpose of this proposed rule?
    C. What is the status of state plan submittals?
III. Affected Facilities
    A. What is a HMIWI?
    B. Does the federal plan apply to me?
    C. How do I determine if my HMIWI is covered by an approved and
effective state plan?
IV. Elements of the HMIWI Federal Plan
    A. Legal Authority and Enforcement Mechanism
    B. Inventory of Affected HMIWI
    C. Inventory of Emissions
    D. Emissions Limits
    E. Compliance Schedules
    F. Waste Management Plan Requirements
    G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
    H. Operator Training and Qualification Requirements
    I. Record of Public Hearings
    J. Progress Reports
V. Summary of Proposed Amendments to HMIWI Federal Plan
    A. What are the proposed amendments to applicability?
    B. What are the proposed amendments to the emissions limits?
    C. What are the proposed amendments to the waste management plan
requirements?
    D. What are the proposed amendments to the inspection
requirements?
    E. What are the proposed amendments to the performance testing
and monitoring requirements?
    F. What are the proposed amendments to the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements?
    G. What are the proposed amendments to the compliance schedule?
    H. What are the other proposed amendments?
VI. Summary of Proposed Amendments to HMIWI New Source Performance
Standards
    A. What are the proposed amendments to the emissions limits?
VII. HMIWI That Have or Will Shutdown
    A. Units That Plan To Close Rather Than Comply
    B. Inoperable Units
    C. HMIWI That Have Shutdown
VIII. Implementation of the Federal Plan and Delegation
    A. Background of Authority
    B. Delegation of the Federal Plan and Retained Authorities
    C. Mechanisms for Transferring Authority
    D. Implementing Authority
IX. Title V Operating Permits
    A. Title V and Delegation of a Federal Plan
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Planning and
Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice (EJ) in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations

    A redline version of the federal plan regulatory language that
incorporates the changes in this action is available in the docket.

I. General Information

A. Does the proposed action apply to me?

    Regulated Entities. If you own or operate an existing HMIWI and are
not already subject to an EPA-approved and effective state plan
implementing the October 6, 2009, revised emission guidelines (EG), you
may be covered by this proposed action. Existing HMIWI are those that
commenced construction on or before December 1, 2008, or commenced
modification on or before April 6, 2010. Regulated categories and
entities include those listed in the following table.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Examples of regulated
           Category                NAICS * code           entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry......................  622110, 622310,    Private hospitals,
                                 325411, 325412,    other health care
                                 562213, 611310.    facilities,
                                                    commercial research
                                                    laboratories,
                                                    commercial waste
                                                    disposal companies,
                                                    private
                                                    universities.
Federal Government............  622110, 541710,    Federal hospitals,
                                 928110.            other health care
                                                    facilities, public
                                                    health service,
                                                    armed services.
State/local/tribal Government.  622110, 562213,    State/local
                                 611310.            hospitals, other
                                                    health care
                                                    facilities, state/
                                                    local waste disposal
                                                    services, state
                                                    universities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* North American Industry Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by the
proposed action. To determine whether your facility would be affected
by the proposed action, you should examine the applicability criteria
in Sec.  62.14400 of subpart HHH. If you have any questions regarding
the applicability of the proposed action to a particular entity,
contact the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments?

1. Submitting CBI
    Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI
electronically through www.regulations.gov or email. Send or deliver
information identified

as CBI to only the following address: Ms. Amy Hambrick, c/o OAQPS
Document Control Officer (Room C404-02), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For
CBI on a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of
the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the
disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain
the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except
in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming
CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments
    When submitting comments, remember to:
    a. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    b. Follow directions. The EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    c. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
    d. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
    e. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
    f. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and
suggest alternatives.
    g. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
    h. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified in the preceding section titled DATES.
3. Docket
    The docket number for the proposed action regarding the HMIWI
federal plan (40 CFR part 62, subpart HHH) is Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2011-0405.
    The docket number for the proposed action regarding the NSPS (40
CFR part 60, subpart Ec) is Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-2006-0534.
4. Worldwide Web (WWW)
    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
the proposed action and final rule amendments is available on the WWW
through the Technology Transfer Network Web site (TTN Web). Following
signature, the EPA posted a copy of the proposed action and final rule
amendments on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated rules at www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides
information and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution
control.

II. Background Information

A. What is the regulatory development background for this proposed
rule?

    Section 129 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the EPA to develop
NSPS and EG for ``units combusting hospital waste, medical waste and
infectious waste.'' On September 15, 1997, the EPA promulgated NSPS for
new HMIWI, codified at 40 CFR part 60 subpart Ec, and EG for existing
HMIWI, codified at 40 CFR part 60 subpart Ce. (See 62 FR 48348.) The
NSPS and EG were designed to reduce air pollution emitted from these
HMIWI, including cadmium (Cd), carbon monoxide (CO), dioxins/furans
(total, or 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin toxic equivalent (TEQ)),
hydrogen chloride (HCl), lead (Pb), mercury (Hg), nitrogen oxides
(NOX), opacity, particulate matter (PM) and sulfur dioxide
(SO2). The 1997 NSPS applied to HMIWI for which construction
began after June 20, 1996, and required compliance within 6 months
after startup or by March 16, 1998, whichever date was later. The 1997
EG applied to HMIWI for which construction began on or before June 20,
1996, and required compliance no later than September 15, 2002.
    On March 2, 1999, in Sierra Club v. EPA, 167 F.3d 658 (DC Cir.
1999), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit remanded the rule
to the EPA for further explanation regarding how the EPA derived the
maximum achievable control technology (MACT) emissions standards for
HMIWI. The Court did not vacate the regulations and the regulations
remained in effect during the remand.
    On July 6, 1999, the EPA proposed the federal plan requirements for
HMIWI units constructed on or before June 20, 1996 (64 FR 36426). The
federal plan covered existing HMIWI located in states that did not have
an approved state plan. Furthermore, the federal plan would implement
and enforce the EG in Indian country until tribes receive approval to
administer their own programs. On August 15, 2000, the EPA promulgated
the federal plan requirements for HMIWI units constructed on or before
June 20, 1996 (65 FR 49868). The 1997 HMIWI rules were fully
implemented by September 2002.
    On February 6, 2007, the EPA proposed a response to the HMIWI
remand. (See 72 FR 5510.) The proposed response would have revised some
of the emissions limits in the NSPS and EG. In addition to responding
to the Court's remand, the EPA also proposed its first 5-year review of
the HMIWI standards. Every 5 years after adopting a MACT standard under
section 129, CAA section 129(a)(5) requires the EPA to review and, if
appropriate, revise the incinerator standards.
    On December 1, 2008, the EPA reproposed its response to the Court's
remand and 5-year review (73 FR 72962). The EPA's decision to repropose
its response to the remand was based on a number of factors, including
further rulings by the Court that were issued after the 2007 proposal
was published. In addition, public comments regarding the 2007 proposal
raised issues that, upon further consideration, the EPA believed would
best be addressed through a reproposal. In response to public comments
on the 2008 reproposal, the EPA further revised the standards and, on
October 6, 2009, published final revisions to the September 1997 NSPS
and EG to respond to the remand and satisfy the 5-year review
requirement under CAA section 129(a)(5) (74 FR 51367). On April 4,
2011, the EPA promulgated amendments to the NSPS and EG, correcting
inadvertent drafting errors in the NOX and SO2
emissions limits for large HMIWI in the NSPS, which did not correspond
to our description of our standard-setting process, correcting
erroneous cross-references in the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements in the NSPS, clarifying that compliance with the EG must
be expeditious if a compliance extension is granted, correcting the
inadvertent omission of delegation of authority provisions in the EG,
correcting errors in the units' description for several emissions
limits in the EG and NSPS and removing extraneous text from the HCl
emissions limit for large HMIWI in the EG (76 FR 18407).

B. What is the purpose of this proposed rule?

    Section 129 of the CAA relies upon states as the preferred
implementers of

EG for existing HMIWI. To make the HMIWI EG enforceable, states with
existing HMIWI are to submit to the EPA within 1 year following
promulgation of the EG state plans that implement and enforce the
amended EG. For states that do not have an EPA-approved and effective
plan, the EPA must develop and implement a federal plan within 2 years
following promulgation of the EG. The federal plan is an interim
measure to ensure that emissions standards are implemented until states
assume their role as the preferred implementers of the EG. States
without any existing HMIWI are directed to submit to the Administrator
a letter of negative declaration certifying that there are no HMIWI in
the state. No plan is required for states that do not have any HMIWI.
Hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators located in states that
mistakenly submit a letter of negative declaration would be subject to
the federal plan until a state plan becomes approved and effective
covering those HMIWI.
    State plans to implement the EG adopted on September 15, 1997, are
already in place and the EPA adopted a HMIWI federal plan on August 15,
2000, (65 FR 49868) to implement the September 15, 1997, EG for those
HMIWI not covered by an approved state plan. Revised or new state plans
to implement the amended EG adopted on October 6, 2009, are currently
undergoing EPA review. The deadline for submitting revised/new state
plans for EPA review was October 6, 2010.
    Today's action proposes amendments to the HMIWI federal plan to
implement the amended EG adopted on October 6, 2009, for those states
that did not have an approved revised/new state plan in place by
October 6, 2011. Sections 111 and 129 of the CAA and 40 CFR 60.27(c)
and (d) require the EPA to develop, implement and enforce a federal
plan to cover existing HMIWI located in states that do not have an
approved plan within 2 years after promulgation of the EG (by October
6, 2011). The EPA is proposing amendments to the HMIWI federal plan now
so that a promulgated federal plan will go into place for any such
states, thus ensuring implementation and enforcement of the amended
HMIWI EG.
    The amended EG adopted on October 6, 2009, required improvements in
performance for 50 of the then operating 57 units.\1\ Incineration of
hospital/medical/infectious waste causes the release of a wide array of
air pollutants, some of which exist in the waste feed material and are
released unchanged during combustion, and some of which are generated
as a result of the combustion process itself. EPA estimated that a
total emissions reduction of 393,000 pounds per year of the regulated
pollutants, of which acid gases (i.e., hydrogen chloride and sulfur
dioxide) comprise about 62 percent, particulate matter about 0.8
percent, carbon monoxide about 0.3 percent, nitrogen oxides about 37
percent, and metals (i.e., lead, cadmium, and mercury) and dioxins/
furans about 0.2 percent. EPA also estimated that air pollution control
devices that would be installed to comply with the 2009 rule would also
effectively reduce emissions of pollutants such as polycyclic organic
matter (POM) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). The 2009 final
rule's revised waste management plan provisions encourage segregation
of types of waste that lead to such emissions, such as chlorinated
plastics and PCB-containing wastes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 74 FR 51371-51375, 51396-51399, and 51399-51400 to
reference the regulatory background, summary of final rule changes,
and impacts of the amended EG adopted on October 6, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What is the status of state plan submittals?

    Sections 111(d) and 129(b)(3) of the CAA, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
7411(d) and 7429(b)(3), authorize the EPA to develop and implement a
federal plan for HMIWI located in states with no approved and effective
state plan. The status of the state plans are outlined in the below
table.

                          Status of State Plans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Status                               States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. States with EPA-Approved State Plans  Florida.
II. Anticipated States to Submit         New York; Puerto Rico;
 Negative Declarations to the EPA.        Pennsylvania; Mississippi; New
                                          Mexico-City of Albuquerque;
                                          Oklahoma; South Dakota;
                                          District of Columbia.
III. Negative Declaration Submitted/EPA  Maine; Massachusetts; Vermont;
 Approved.                                Delaware; Virginia; Jefferson
                                          County (Birmingham), Alabama;
                                          Kentucky; Jefferson County
                                          (Louisville), Kentucky;
                                          Forsyth County (Winston-
                                          Salem), North Carolina;
                                          Buncombe County (Asheville),
                                          North Carolina; South
                                          Carolina; Philadelphia County;
                                          New Hampshire; Rhode Island.
IV. Final State Plans Submitted to the   North Dakota.
 EPA.
V. Draft States Plans Submitted to the   Maryland; West Virginia.
 EPA.
VI. States for which the EPA has not     Pennsylvania; Alabama;
 received a draft or final plan or        Huntsville, Alabama; North
 negative declaration.                    Carolina; Mecklenburg County
                                          (Charlotte), North Carolina;
                                          Georgia; Tennessee; Illinois;
                                          Indiana; Arkansas; Louisiana;
                                          Texas; Iowa; Kansas; Missouri;
                                          Nebraska; Colorado; Montana;
                                          Arizona; Maricopa County,
                                          Arizona; Pima County, Arizona;
                                          Pinal County, Arizona;
                                          California; Hawaii; Nevada;
                                          American Samoa; Guam; Alaska;
                                          Idaho; Oregon; Washington.
VII. Anticipated States to Accept        Connecticut; New Jersey; Virgin
 Delegation of Federal Plan.              Islands; Allegheny County,
                                          Pennsylvania; Michigan;
                                          Minnesota; Ohio; Wisconsin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The preamble of the final federal plan will list states that have
an EPA-approved plan in effect on the date the final federal plan is
signed by the EPA Administrator. As Regional Offices approve state
plans, they will also, in the same action, amend the appropriate
subpart of 40 CFR part 62 to codify their approvals.
    The EPA will maintain a list of revised/new state plan submittals
and approvals on the TTN Air Toxics Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/129/hmiwi/rihmiwi.html. The list will help HMIWI owners or
operators determine whether their HMIWI is affected by a state plan or
the federal plan.
    Hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerator owners and operators
can also contact the EPA Regional Office for the state in which their
HMIWI is

located to determine whether there is an approved and effective
revised/new state plan in place. The following table lists the names,
email addresses and telephone numbers of the EPA Regional Office
contacts and the states and protectorates that they cover.

                                            Regional Office Contacts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                States and
              Region                       Regional contact                Phone              protectorates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region I..........................  Ian Cohen<EMAIL_ADDRESS> (617) 918-1655......  Connecticut,
                                                                                Massachusetts, Maine,
                                                                                New Hampshire, Rhode
                                                                                Island, Vermont.
Region II.........................  Ted Gardella,<PHONE_NUMBER>......  New York, New Jersey,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                           Puerto Rico, Virgin
                                                                                Islands.
Region III........................  Mike Gordon,<PHONE_NUMBER>......  Virginia, Delaware,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                                District of Columbia,
                                                                                Maryland,
                                                                                Pennsylvania, West
                                                                                Virginia.
Region IV.........................  Donnette Sturdivant,           Sturdivant: (404)     Florida, Georgia, North
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>  562-9431.             Carolina,
                                    Daniel Garver,                 Garver: (404) 562-     Alabama, Kentucky,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>        9839.                 Mississippi, South
                                                                                Carolina, Tennessee.
Region V..........................  Margaret Sieffert,<PHONE_NUMBER>......  Minnesota, Wisconsin,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                          Illinois, Indiana,
                                                                                Michigan, Ohio.
Region VI.........................  Steve Thompson,<PHONE_NUMBER>......  Arkansas, Louisiana,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                             New Mexico, Oklahoma,
                                                                                Texas.
Region VII........................  Lisa Hanlon,<PHONE_NUMBER>......  Iowa, Kansas, Missouri,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                                Nebraska.
Region VIII.......................  Christopher Razzazian,<PHONE_NUMBER>......  Colorado, Montana,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                       North Dakota, South
                                     v                                                    Dakota, Utah, Wyoming.
Region IX.........................  Joseph Lapka,<PHONE_NUMBER>......  Arizona, California,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                               Hawaii, Nevada,
                                                                                American Samoa, Guam,
                                                                                Northern Mariana
                                                                                Islands.
Region X..........................  Heather Valdez,<PHONE_NUMBER>......  Alaska, Idaho, Oregon,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                             Washington.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Affected Facilities

A. What is a HMIWI?

    The term ``HMIWI'' means any device that combusts any amount of
hospital waste and/or medical/infectious waste, as defined in 40 CFR
part 62, subpart HHH. Six types of combustion units, which are listed
in Sec.  62.14400 of subpart HHH, are conditionally exempt from
specific provisions of the currently promulgated 2000 federal plan and
would continue to be so under today's proposed amended federal plan.

B. Does the federal plan apply to me?

    The amended federal plan would apply to you if you are the owner or
operator of a combustion device that combusts hospital waste and/or
medical/infectious waste (as defined in subpart HHH) and the device is
not covered by an approved and effective state plan as of October 6,
2011. The federal plan would cover your HMIWI until the EPA approves a
state plan that covers your HMIWI and that plan becomes effective.
    If you began the construction of your HMIWI on or before December
1, 2008, or began modification of your HMIWI on or before April 6,
2010, it would be considered an existing HMIWI and could be subject to
the federal plan. If you began the construction of your HMIWI after
December 1, 2008, or began modification of your HMIWI after April 6,
2010, it would be considered a new HMIWI and would be subject to the
NSPS.
    Your existing HMIWI would be subject to this federal plan, if on
the effective date of the amended federal plan, the EPA has not
approved the revised/new state plan implementing the amended EG that
covers your unit or the EPA-approved state plan has not become
effective. The specific applicability of the currently promulgated
federal plan is described in 40 CFR 62.14400 through 62.14403 of
subpart HHH, and would continue to apply, as amended, under the
proposed revised federal plan. The amended federal plan would become
effective 30 days after final promulgation of these amendments.
    Once an approved revised/new state plan is in effect, the amended
federal plan would no longer apply to HMIWI covered by such plan. An
approved state plan is a plan developed by a state that the EPA has
reviewed and approved based on the requirements in 40 CFR part 60,
subpart B, to implement and enforce 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ce. The
state plan is effective on the date specified in the notice published
in the Federal Register announcing the EPA's approval of the plan.
    The EPA's promulgation of an amended HMIWI federal plan will not
preclude states from submitting a plan. If a state submits a plan after
the promulgation of amendments to the HMIWI federal plan, the EPA will
review and approve or disapprove the state plan. If the EPA approves a
plan, then the amended HMIWI federal plan would no longer apply to
HMIWI covered by the state plan as of the effective date of the state
plan. If a HMIWI were overlooked by a state and the state submitted a
negative declaration letter, or if an individual HMIWI were not covered
by an approved and effective state plan, the HMIWI would be subject to
this amended federal plan.

C. How do I determine if my HMIWI is covered by an approved and
effective state plan?

    Part 62 of Title 40 of the CFR identifies the status of approval
and promulgation of section 111(d) and section 129 state plans for
designated facilities in each state. However, part 62 is updated only
once per year. Thus, if part 62 does not indicate that your state has
an approved and effective plan, you should contact your state
environmental agency's air director or your EPA Regional Office (see
table in section II.C of this preamble) to determine if approval
occurred since publication of the most recent version of part 62.

IV. Elements of the Current HMIWI Federal Plan

    The EPA is not proposing amendments to several elements of the
existing federal plan. For other elements, we are proposing amendments,
to reflect the amended EG. The basic elements of the federal plan
include: (1) Identification of legal authority and mechanisms for
implementation; (2) inventory of HMIWI; (3) emissions inventory; (4)

emissions limits; (5) compliance schedules; (6) public hearing; (7)
testing, monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting; (8) waste management
plan; (9) operator training and qualification; and (10) progress
reporting. See 40 CFR part 62 subparts HHH and sections 111 and 129 of
the CAA. For each element discussed below, we explain to what extent we
are proposing to amend the current federal plan requirements.

A. Legal Authority and Enforcement Mechanism

    Section 301(a) of the CAA provides the EPA with broad authority to
write regulations that carry out the functions of the CAA. Sections
111(d) and 129(b)(3) of the CAA direct the EPA to develop a federal
plan for states that do not submit approvable state plans. Sections 111
and 129 of the CAA provide the EPA with the authority to implement and
enforce the federal plan in cases where the state fails to submit a
satisfactory state plan. Section 129(b)(3) of the CAA requires the EPA
to develop, implement and enforce a federal plan within 2 years after
the date the relevant EG are promulgated (by October 6, 2011, for the
2009 HMIWI EG). Compliance with the EG cannot be later than 5 years
after the relevant EG are promulgated (by October 6, 2014, for the 2009
HMIWI EG). Today's action is not proposing any changes to this element.

B. Inventory of Affected HMIWI

    The federal plan, as currently promulgated, includes an inventory
of HMIWI affected by the EG. (See 40 CFR 62.14402.) Today's proposed
amendments to the federal plan will also include in Docket No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2011-0405 an inventory of the HMIWI that may potentially be covered
by these amendments in the absence of approved state plans. This
revised inventory contains 53 HMIWI in 21 states. It is based on
information collected from EPA Regions, states, HMIWI facilities; and
review of existing HMIWI inventories, Title V permits, emissions test
reports and facility Web sites. The EPA recognizes that this list may
not be complete. Therefore, sources potentially subject to this
proposed amended federal plan may include, but are not limited to, the
HMIWI listed in Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405. Any HMIWI that meets
the applicability criteria in the proposed amended federal plan rule
would be subject to the amended federal plan, regardless of whether it
is listed in the inventory. States or individuals are invited to
identify additional sources for inclusion to the list during the
comment period for this proposal.

C. Inventory of Emissions

    The federal plan, as currently promulgated, includes an emissions
estimate for HMIWI subject to the EG. The pollutants inventoried are
Cd, CO, dioxins/furans, HCl, Pb, Hg, PM, NOX and
SO2. For this proposal, the EPA has estimated the emissions
from each known HMIWI that potentially may be covered by the proposed
amended federal plan for the nine pollutants regulated by the EG and
covered by the proposed revised federal plan.
    The emissions inventory is based on available information about the
HMIWI, emissions factors and typical emissions rates developed for
calculating nationwide air impacts of the amended EG and the amended
federal plan. Refer to the inventory memorandum in Docket No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2011-0405 for the complete updated emissions inventory and details
on the emissions calculations associated with today's proposal.

D. Emissions Limits

    As the current federal plan contains emissions limits that
correspond to the 1997 HMIWI rule, today's proposed amended federal
plan includes emissions limits that correspond to those in the 2009 EG.
(See 40 CFR 62.14410-62.14413.) Section 129(b)(2) of the CAA requires
these emissions limits to be ``at least as protective as'' those in the
EG. The emissions limits in these proposed amendments to the HMIWI
federal plan are the same as those contained in the 2009 amended EG but
also include the PM emissions limits for medium HMIWI and HCl emissions
limits for small HMIWI that were previously subject to the 1997 NSPS
but are now subject to the amended EG. These two emissions limits are
more stringent than the corresponding EG emissions limits. We include
these limits because HMIWI units that were regulated as new sources
under the 1997 NSPS would be treated as existing sources under the 2009
EG, but would need to continue to comply with the 1997 NSPS limits
where those are more stringent than the 2009 EG limits. (See proposed
revised Table 1 to subpart HHH.) Section V.B of this preamble discusses
the amended emissions limits.

E. Compliance Schedules

    Increments of progress are required for HMIWI that need more than 1
year from state plan approval to comply, or in the case of the federal
plan, more than 1 year after promulgation of the final amended federal
plan. (See 40 CFR 62.14470-62.14472.) Increments of progress are
included to ensure that each HMIWI needing more time to comply is
making progress toward meeting the emissions limits.
    For HMIWI that need more than 1 year to comply, the proposed
amended federal plan includes in its compliance schedule the same five
increments of progress from 40 CFR 62.14470(b)(2). The proposed amended
federal plan includes defined and enforceable dates for completion of
each increment. These increments of progress are: (1) Submit final
control plan; (2) award contracts for control systems or process
modifications or orders for purchase of components; (3) begin on-site
construction or installation of the air pollution control device(s) or
process changes; (4) complete on-site construction or installation of
the air pollution control device(s) or process changes; and (5) final
compliance.

F. Waste Management Plan Requirements

    The current federal plan includes a waste management plan which is
a written plan that identifies both the feasibility and the methods
used to reduce or separate certain components of solid waste from the
waste stream to reduce or eliminate toxic emissions from incinerated
waste. (See 40 CFR 62.14430-62.14432.) Today's proposed amendments to
the federal plan include this element and require that the waste
management plan must be submitted no later than the date 60 days after
the initial compliance demonstration. This date is 240 days after the
final compliance date.

G. Testing, Monitoring, Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

    The current federal plan includes testing, monitoring,
recordkeeping and reporting requirements. (See 40 CFR 62.14440-
62.14465.) Today's proposed amendments update these requirements to
correspond with the 2009 EG. Testing, monitoring, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements are consistent with 40 CFR part 62 subpart HHH
and assure initial and ongoing compliance.

H. Operator Training and Qualification Requirements

    The current federal plan requires that the owner or operator must
qualify operators or their supervisors (at least one per facility) by
ensuring that they complete an operator training course and annual
review or refresher course. (See 40 CFR 62.14420-62.14425.) Today's
proposed amended federal plan also contains operator training and

qualification requirements that correspond to the 2009 EG; no changes
are proposed to this element.

I. Record of Public Hearings

    As the current federal plan provided the opportunity for public
hearings, today's proposed amended federal plan provides opportunity
for public participation in adopting the plan. If requested to do so,
the EPA will hold a public hearing in Research Triangle Park, NC. A
record of the public hearing, if any, will appear in Docket No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2011-0405. If a public hearing is requested and held, the EPA will
ask clarifying questions during the oral presentation but will not
respond to the presentations or comments. Written statements and
supporting information submitted during the public comment period will
be considered with equivalent weight as any oral statement and
supporting information subsequently presented at a public hearing, if
held.

J. Progress Reports

    As under the current federal plan, today's amendments request that
the EPA Regional Offices prepare annual progress reports to show the
progress of HMIWI toward implementation of the EG. States that have
been delegated the authority to implement and enforce this federal plan
would be required to submit annual progress reports to the appropriate
EPA Regional Office.
    Each progress report must include the following items: (1) Status
of enforcement actions; (2) status of increments of progress; (3)
identification of sources that have shutdown or started operation; (4)
emissions inventory data for sources that were not in operation at the
time of plan development but that began operation during the reporting
period; (5) additional data as necessary to update previously submitted
source and emissions information; and (6) copies of technical reports
on any performance testing and monitoring.

V. Summary of Today's Proposed Amendments to HMIWI Federal Plan

    Each amended plan element is described below as it relates to the
elements outlined above in the current HMIWI federal plan. The table
below lists each amended element and identifies where it is located or
codified.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Element of the HMIWI federal plan                 Location
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legal authority and enforcement          Sections 129(b)(3), 111(d),
 mechanism.                               301(a), and 301(d)(4) of the
                                          CAA.
Inventory of affected HMIWI units......  Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405.
Inventory of emissions.................  Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405.
Emissions limits.......................  40 CFR 62.14410-62.14413.
Compliance schedules...................  40 CFR 62.14470-62.14472.
Operator training and qualification....  40 CFR 62.14420-62.14425.
Waste management plan..................  40 CFR 62.14430-62.14432.
Record of public hearings..............  Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0405.
Testing, monitoring, recordkeeping and   40 CFR 62.14440-62.14465.
 reporting.
Progress reports.......................  Section IV.J of this preamble.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. What are the proposed amendments to applicability?

    Hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators were treated
differently under the 2009 amended EG than they were under the 1997 EG
in terms of whether they are ``existing'' or ``new'' sources. The 2009
amended EG included new dates defining what are ``existing'' and
``new'' sources for purposes of the revised NSPS and EG. All HMIWI that
complied with the 1997 EG (i.e., those units for which construction
commenced on or before June 20, 1996, or for which modification
commenced on or before March 16, 1998) were still considered
``existing'' sources under the 2009 amended EG and are required to meet
the emissions limits under the amended EG by the applicable compliance
date for the amended EG. All HMIWI that complied with the 1997 NSPS
(i.e., those units for which construction commenced after June 20,
1996, but no later than December 1, 2008, or for which modification
commenced after March 16, 1998, but no later than April 6, 2010) were
also considered ``existing'' sources under the amended EG. Those HMIWI
are required to meet the emissions limits under the amended EG by the
applicable compliance date for the amended EG, except where the
corresponding 1997 NSPS is more stringent, in which case the HMIWI are
to continue to comply with that 1997 NSPS. In the interim, those 1997
NSPS sources that must meet the amended EG must continue to be subject
to the NSPS as promulgated in 1997 until the date for compliance with
the revised EG. Those units for which construction commenced after the
December 1, 2008, HMIWI proposal, or for which modification commenced
on or after April 6, 2010, are considered ``new'' units subject to more
stringent revised NSPS emissions limits.
    Today's action proposes to incorporate these changes to the
applicability into the HMIWI federal plan. No other amendments are
being proposed for the other applicability provisions in the federal
plan (i.e., exemptions for incinerators burning pathological, low-level
radioactive, and/or chemotherapeutic waste; co-fired combustors;
combustors with permits under section 3005 of the Solid Waste Disposal
Act; certain municipal waste combustors; pyrolysis units; and cement
kilns firing hospital waste and/or medical/infectious waste).

B. What are the proposed amendments to the emissions limits?

    As noted in section II.A of this preamble, on October 6, 2009, the
EPA published final amendments to the September 15, 1997, NSPS and EG
in response to a Court remand of the 1997 regulations and to satisfy
the 5-year review requirement under CAA section 129(a)(5).
    The EPA's response to the remand and 5-year review resulted in a
revision to all of the emissions limits in the EG. Today's action
proposes to incorporate the amended EG emissions limits into the
existing HMIWI federal plan. Table 1 of this preamble summarizes the
amended EG emissions limits promulgated to respond to the remand and
fulfill the EPA's 5-year review obligation.

 Table 1--Summary of EG Emissions Limits Promulgated in Response to the
                        Remand for Existing HMIWI
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Final
         Pollutant (units)                 Unit size\1\        limit \2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HCl (ppmv).........................  L......................      6.6
                                     M......................      7.7
                                     S......................     44
                                     SR.....................    810
CO (ppmv)..........................  L......................     11

                                     M......................      5.5
                                     S,SR...................     20
Pb (mg/dscm).......................  L......................      0.036
                                     M......................      0.018
                                     S......................      0.31
                                     SR.....................      0.50
Cd (mg/dscm).......................  L......................      0.0092
                                     M......................      0.013
                                     S......................      0.017
                                     SR.....................      0.11
Hg (mg/dscm).......................  L......................      0.018
                                     M......................      0.025
                                     S......................      0.014
                                     SR.....................      0.0051
PM (gr/dscf).......................  L......................      0.011
                                     M......................      0.020
                                     S......................      0.029
                                     SR.....................      0.038
Dioxins/furans, total (ng/dscm)....  L......................      9.3
                                     M......................      0.85
                                     S......................     16
                                     SR.....................    240
Dioxins/furans, TEQ (ng/dscm)......  L......................      0.054
                                     M......................      0.020
                                     S......................      0.013
                                     SR.....................      5.1
NOX (ppmv).........................  L......................    140
                                     M, S...................    190
                                     SR.....................    130
SO2 (ppmv).........................  L......................      9.0
                                     M, S...................      4.2
                                     SR.....................     55
Opacity (%)........................  L, M, S, SR............      6.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ L = Large (>500 lb/hr of waste); M = Medium (>200 to <=500 lb/hr of
  waste); S = Small (<=200 lb/hr of waste); SR = Small rural (small
  HMIWI >50 miles from boundary of nearest SMSA, burning <2,000 lb/wk of
  waste).
\2\ All emissions limits are reported as corrected to 7 percent oxygen.

    The 2009 amended EG removed provisions from the 1997 standards at
40 CFR 60.56c and 60.37e that exempted HMIWI from the standards during
periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction (SSM) provided that no
hospital waste or medical/infectious waste was being changed to the
unit during those SSM periods. The 2009 EG requires that the emissions
limits as listed above in Table 1, regardless of a SSM event, be met at
all times. However, in one provision of the NSPS, section 60.56c(d)(2),
the EPA inadvertently failed to delete a SSM exemption we had intended
to eliminate, and to better reflect the EPA's intent in the 2009 final
rule, today's action also amends that section of the NSPS to remove the
accidentally retained SSM exemption. Please see section VI. of this
preamble, which further discusses the amendment of the NSPS. Today's
action also proposes to remove the SSM exemption from the 2000 federal
plan at 40 CFR 62.14413, and proposes that the emissions limits apply
at all times, for the same reasons.
    As noted in the previous section, the 2009 amended EG specified
that those HMIWI that previously complied with the 1997 NSPS would have
to meet the emissions limits under the 2009 amended EG or the 1997
NSPS, whichever was more stringent. In two cases, the HCl emissions
limit for small HMIWI and the PM emissions limit for medium HMIWI, the
1997 NSPS limits are more stringent than the 2009 amended EG limits, so
those HMIWI that previously complied with the 1997 NSPS would continue
to comply with the more stringent 1997 NSPS limits. Specifically, they
would have to meet the 1997 NSPS HCl emissions limit of 15 parts per
million by volume (ppmv) (at 7 percent oxygen) for small HMIWI and the
1997 NSPS PM limit of 0.015 grains per dry standard cubic foot (gr/
dscf) (at 7 percent oxygen) for medium HMIWI, in addition to the 2009
EG emissions limits for the other pollutants. Today's action proposes
to include these two 1997 NSPS emissions limits along with the 2009
amended EG emissions limits in the HMIWI federal plan.
    Under the 1997 NSPS, new large HMIWI were required to demonstrate
compliance with the 5 percent visible emissions limit for fugitive
emissions generated during ash handling, by conducting annual
performance tests using EPA Method 22. As discussed in section V.E.1
below, the 2009 amendments to the EG expanded this requirement to
include all HMIWI, but only as an initial test requirement. As a
result, under the amended EG, all HMIWI were made subject to the same 5
percent visible emissions limit. Today's action proposes to include
this visible emissions limit for existing HMIWI in the HMIWI federal
plan.
    To provide greater clarity, the 2009 amendments to the EG also
included averaging times and EPA reference test methods in the
emissions limit tables for existing sources. It should be noted that
the averaging times and EPA reference test methods added to the
emissions limits tables were not new requirements but simply a
restating of requirements presented elsewhere in the HMIWI regulations.
Today's action proposes to add these additional columns to the
emissions limits table in the HMIWI federal plan.

C. What are the proposed amendments to the waste management plan
requirements?

    Under the HMIWI EG promulgated on September 15, 1997, and HMIWI
federal plan promulgated on August 15, 2000, existing HMIWI were
required to submit a written plan that identified both the feasibility
and methods used to reduce or separate certain components of solid
waste from the waste stream to reduce or eliminate toxic emissions from
incinerated waste.
    Commenters on the December 1, 2008, reproposal of the HMIWI EG
amendments recommended that the EPA minimize or eliminate from the
HMIWI waste stream any plastic wastes, Hg and other hazardous wastes
(e.g., Hg-containing dental waste, Hg-containing devices),
pharmaceuticals and confidential documents and other paper products
that could be shredded and recycled. One commenter recommended that the
EPA take action to regulate emissions of polychlorinated biphenyls and
polycyclic organic matter from HMIWI. Some commenters recommended that
the EPA require commercial HMIWI to provide training and education to
their customers regarding waste segregation and make incinerator
operators responsible for the waste in their possession.
    To address the various commenters' concerns, the waste management
plan provisions in the HMIWI regulations were revised to promote the
segregation of the aforementioned wastes and specify that commercial
facilities train and educate their clients to conduct their own waste
segregation. Today's action proposes to incorporate these revisions
into the HMIWI federal plan.

D. What are the proposed amendments to the inspection requirements?

    Under the 1997 EG and 2000 federal plan, existing small rural HMIWI
were required to conduct annual equipment inspections to compensate for
the lack of annual emissions testing at those sources. The inspections
included the incinerator, air pollution control device (if any) and
monitoring equipment. For the 2009 amendments to the EG, the EPA
expanded annual air pollution control device inspections to the other
HMIWI to allow those sources to demonstrate that their air pollution
control devices are operating sufficiently well to allow compliance
with the tighter emissions limits under the amended EG. Today's action
proposes to incorporate this additional requirement into the HMIWI
federal plan.

E. What are the proposed amendments to the performance testing and
monitoring requirements?

    The following paragraphs list a number of additional testing and
monitoring requirements in the 2009 amendments to the EG that are
proposed to be incorporated into the HMIWI federal plan in today's
action.
1. Performance Testing
    The 1997 EG and 2000 federal plan required existing large, medium
and small non-rural HMIWI to conduct initial performance tests for Cd,
CO, dioxins/furans, HCl, Pb, Hg, opacity and PM and annual performance
tests for CO, HCl, opacity and PM. (An owner or operator could conduct
less frequent testing if the facility demonstrated that it was in
compliance with the emissions limits for 3 consecutive performance
tests.) The 2009 amendments to the EG added the requirement that all
HMIWI conduct initial performance tests for NOX and
SO2 to demonstrate initial compliance with the revised
emissions limits for those pollutants.
    Under the 1997 EG and 2000 federal plan, small rural HMIWI were
only required to conduct initial performance tests for CO, dioxins/
furans, Hg, opacity and PM, and annual performance tests for opacity.
Under the 2009 amendments to the EG, small rural HMIWI were required to
also conduct initial performance tests for the other five regulated
pollutants (Cd, HCl, Pb, NOX and SO2) and also
conduct annual performance tests for CO, HCl and PM.
    Under the 1997 NSPS, new large HMIWI were subject to a 5 percent
visible emissions limit for fugitive emissions generated during ash
handling. To demonstrate compliance with this emissions limit, new
large HMIWI were required to conduct annual performance tests for
fugitive emissions from ash handling using EPA Method 22. In the 2009
amendments to the EG, the EPA extended this minimal testing requirement
to the other HMIWI, but only as an initial test requirement, to
determine whether fugitive ash emissions are a concern from these
sources. Existing HMIWI would be required to measure fugitive ash
emissions during their next performance test.
    In order to reduce the burden of complying with the additional
testing requirements in the 2009 amendments to the EG, sources were
allowed to use results of their previous emissions tests to demonstrate
initial compliance with the revised emissions limits as long as the
sources certify that the previous test results are representative of
current operations. Only those sources who could not so certify and/or
whose previous emissions tests do not demonstrate compliance with one
or more revised emissions limits would be required to conduct another
emissions test for those pollutants. (Note that most sources were
already required under the 1997 EG to test for CO, HCl, opacity and PM
on an annual basis and those annual tests are still required.)
    To provide HMIWI with greater flexibility in demonstrating
compliance, the 2009 amendments to the EG also incorporated by
reference two alternatives to EPA reference test methods American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) PTC 19.10-1981 and American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D6784-02)), discussed further
in section IX.I of this preamble.
2. Monitoring
    Monitoring of operating parameters can be used to indicate whether
air pollution control equipment and practices are functioning properly
to minimize air pollution. The 1997 HMIWI EG and 2000 federal plan
included the following parameter monitoring requirements for good
combustion, wet scrubbers and dry scrubbers with fabric filters (FFs):
     If using a dry scrubber followed by a FF to comply with
the emissions limits, continuously monitor charge rate, FF inlet
temperature, flue gas temperature, secondary chamber temperature and
sorbent flow rates for dioxin/furan, HCl and Hg sorbents.
     If using a wet scrubber to comply with the emissions
limits, continuously monitor charge rate, flue gas temperature,
secondary chamber temperature, pressure drop across the wet scrubber
(or horsepower or amperage), scrubber liquor flow rate and scrubber
liquor pH.
     If using a dry scrubber followed by a FF and wet scrubber,
continuously monitor all of the aforementioned parameters.
     If using something other than the aforementioned air
pollution control devices to comply with the emissions limits, petition
the Administrator for other site-specific operating parameters to be
established during the initial performance test and continuously
monitored thereafter.
    In the 2009 amendments to the EG, the EPA kept these parameter
monitoring requirements and added a parameter requirement for those
HMIWI expected to install selective noncatalytic reduction (SNCR)
systems in order to comply with the more stringent NOX
limits in the 2009 EG. Those HMIWI installing SNCR technology to comply
with the NOX emissions limit were required to continuously
monitor the charge rate, secondary chamber temperature and reagent
(e.g., ammonia or urea) flow rate.
    Since the 1997 EG, bag leak detectors have been shown to be an
effective method for demonstrating continuous compliance for sources
equipped with FFs. Although the 2009 amendments to the EG did not
require existing HMIWI equipped with FFs to install bag leak detectors,
use of bag leak detectors was presented as an option for these HMIWI.
    The most direct means of monitoring compliance with emissions
limits is the use of continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) to
measure the emissions of a pollutant on a continuous basis. In addition
to CEMS, sorbent trap biweekly monitoring systems for Hg and dioxins/
furans are also available. Although the 2009 amendments to the EG did
not require CO, HCl, PM, Hg or multi-metal CEMS or sorbent trap
biweekly Hg and dioxin/furan monitoring systems for existing HMIWI,
such systems were presented as alternative monitoring requirements in
lieu of annual testing for all sources.
3. Electronic Data Submittal
    The EPA must have performance test data to conduct effective 5-year
reviews of CAA section 129 standards, as well as for many other
purposes, including compliance determinations, development of emissions
factors and determining annual emissions rates. In conducting 5-year
reviews, the EPA has found it ineffective and time-consuming, not only
for us, but also for regulatory agencies and source owners and
operators, to locate, collect, and submit performance test data because
of varied locations for data storage and varied data storage methods.
In recent years, though, stack testing firms have typically collected
performance test data in electronic format, making it possible to move
to an electronic data submittal system that would increase the ease and
efficiency of data submittal and improve data accessibility.
    In the 2009 amendments to the EG, to improve data accessibility, we
gave HMIWI the option of submitting to an EPA electronic database an
electronic copy of annual stack test reports. Data entry would be
through an electronic emissions test report structure used by the staff
as part of the emissions testing project. The electronic reporting tool
(ERT) was developed with input from stack testing companies who
generally collect and compile performance test data electronically. The
ERT is currently available and access to direct data

submittal to the EPA's electronic emissions database (WebFIRE).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See http://cfpub.epa.gov/oarweb/index.cfm?action=fire.main,
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The option to submit source test data electronically to the EPA
would not require any additional performance testing. In addition, when
a facility elects to submit performance test data to WebFIRE, there
would be no additional requirements for data compilation. Further
discussion of the benefits of using electronic data submittal is
provided in the preamble to the October 6, 2009, amendments. (See 74 FR
51373-4.)
    The electronic database that would be used is the EPA's WebFIRE,
which is a Web site accessible through the EPA's TTN. The WebFIRE Web
site was constructed to store emissions test data for use in developing
emissions factors. A description of the WebFIRE database can be found
at http://cfpub.epa.gov/oarweb/index.cfm?action=fire.main. The ERT
would be able to transmit the electronic report which would be
submitted using the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface
(CEDRI). The submitted report would be submitted through the EPA's
Central Data Exchange (CDX) network for storage in the WebFIRE database
making submittal of data very straightforward and easy. A description
of the ERT can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html and CEDRI can be accessed through the CDX Web site
(www.epa.gov/cdx). The ERT can be used to document stack tests data for
those performance tests conducted using test methods that will be
supported by the ERT. The ERT contains a specific electronic data entry
form for most of the commonly used EPA reference methods. A listing of
the pollutants and test methods supported by the ERT is available at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/index.html. We believe that industry
would benefit from this option of electronic data submittal. Having
these data, EPA would be able to develop improved emission factors,
make fewer information requests, and promulgate better regulations.
    One major advantage of the option to submit performance test data
through the ERT is a standardized method to compile and store much of
the documentation required to be reported by this rule. Another
advantage is that the ERT clearly states what testing information would
be required. Another important proposed benefit of submitting these
data to EPA at the time the source test is conducted is that it should
substantially reduce the effort involved in data collection activities
in the future. When EPA has performance test data in hand, there will
likely be fewer or less substantial data collection requests in
conjunction with prospective required residual risk assessments or
technology reviews. This would result in a reduced burden on both
affected facilities (in terms of reduced manpower to respond to data
collection requests) and EPA (in terms of preparing and distributing
data collection requests and assessing the results).
    State, local, and tribal agencies could also benefit from more
streamlined and accurate review of electronic data submitted to them.
The ERT would allow for an electronic review process rather than a
manual data assessment making review and evaluation of the source
provided data and calculations easier and more efficient. Finally,
another benefit of the proposed data submittal to WebFIRE
electronically is that these data would greatly improve the overall
quality of existing and new emissions factors by supplementing the pool
of emissions test data for establishing emissions factors and by
ensuring that the factors are more representative of current industry
operational procedures. A common complaint heard from industry and
regulators is that emission factors are outdated or not representative
of a particular source category. With timely receipt and incorporation
of data from most performance tests, EPA would be able to ensure that
emission factors, when updated, represent the most current range of
operational practices. In summary, in addition to supporting regulation
development, control strategy development, and other air pollution
control activities, having an electronic database populated with
performance test data would save industry, state, local, tribal
agencies, and EPA significant time, money, and effort while also
improving the quality of emission inventories and, as a result, air
quality regulations.

F. What are the proposed amendments to recordkeeping and reporting
requirements?

    The following paragraphs list a number of additional recordkeeping
and reporting requirements in the 2009 amendments to the EG, that would
be incorporated into the HMIWI federal plan in today's proposed
amendments.
1. Recordkeeping
    The 1997 EG and 2000 federal plan required owners and operators to
maintain for 5 years records of opacity and emissions measurements,
operating parameters, equipment inspections and maintenance (small
rural units only), deviations, initial performance tests and all
subsequent performance tests, operator training and qualification and
calibration of monitoring devices.
    The 2009 amendments to the EG added the requirement that owners and
operators maintain records of the amount and type of NOX
reagent used, records of the annual air pollution control device
inspections (including any maintenance), and a description, included
with each test report, of how operating parameters were established
during the initial performance test and re-established during
subsequent performance tests.
2. Reporting
    Under the 1997 EG and 2000 federal plan, owners and operators were
required to submit the results of the initial performance tests and all
subsequent performance tests, values for the operating parameters,
waste management plan, equipment inspections and maintenance (small
rural units only) and annual compliance reports and semiannual reports
of any deviations from the emissions limits.
    The 2009 amendments to the EG added requirements for existing HMIWI
to submit, along with each test report, a description of how operating
parameters were established or re-established and submit records of
annual air pollution control device inspections (including any
maintenance).

G. What are the proposed amendments to the compliance schedule?

    Similar to the approach of the 2000 HMIWI federal plan, as
described in section IV.J. ``Progress Reports,'' today's proposed
revised federal plan requires owners or operators of HMIWI to either:
(1) Come into compliance with the plan within 1 year after the plan is
promulgated; or (2) meet increments of progress and come into
compliance by October 6, 2014. Increments of progress are necessary in
order to ensure that HMIWI needing more time to comply are making
progress toward meeting the emissions limits. The amended federal plan,
as proposed, includes as its compliance schedule the same five
increments of progress from 40 CFR 62.14470(b)(2), along with defined
and enforceable dates for completion of each increment.
    The HMIWI owner or operator is responsible for meeting each of the
five increments of progress for each HMIWI no later than the applicable
compliance date. The owner or operator must notify

the EPA as each increment of progress is achieved, as well as when any
is missed. The notification must identify the increment and the date
the increment is achieved (or missed). If an owner or operator misses
an increment deadline, the owner or operator must also notify the EPA
when the increment is finally achieved. The owner or operator must mail
the notification to the applicable EPA Regional Office within 10
business days after the increment date defined in the amended federal
plan. (See the table under section II.C. of this document for a list of
Regional Offices.)
    The definition of each increment of progress, along with its
required completion date, follows.
    Submit Final Control Plan. To meet this increment, the owner or
operator of each HMIWI must submit a plan that describes, at a minimum,
the air pollution control device and/or process changes that will be
employed so that each HMIWI complies with the emissions limits and
other requirements. A final control plan is not required for units that
will be shutdown. Completion date: October 6, 2012.
    Award Contract. To award a contract means the HMIWI owner or
operator enters into legally binding agreements or contractual
obligations that cannot be canceled or modified without substantial
financial loss to the owner or operator. The EPA anticipates that the
owner or operator may award a number of contracts to complete the
retrofit. To meet this increment of progress, the HMIWI owner or
operator must award a contract or contracts to initiate on-site
construction, to initiate on-site installation of air pollution control
devices, and/or to incorporate process changes. The owner or operator
must mail a copy of the signed contract(s) to the EPA within 10
business days of entering the contract(s). Completion date: May 6,
2013.
    Begin On-site Construction. To begin on-site construction,
installation of air pollution control devices or process change means
to begin any of the following:
    (1) Installation of an air pollution control device in order to
comply with the final emissions limits as outlined in the final control
plan;
    (2) Physical preparation necessary for the installation of an air
pollution control device in order to comply with the final emissions
limits as outlined in the final control plan;
    (3) Alteration of an existing air pollution control device in order
to comply with the final emissions limits as outlined in the final
control plan;
    (4) Alteration of the waste combustion process to accommodate
installation of an air pollution control device in order to comply with
the final emissions limits as outlined in the final control plan; or
    (5) Process changes identified in the final control plan in order
to meet the emissions standards. Completion date: January 6, 2014.
    Complete On-site Construction. To complete on-site construction
means that all necessary air pollution control devices or process
changes identified in the final control plan are in place, on-site and
ready for operation on the HMIWI. Completion date: August 6, 2014.
    Final Compliance. To be in final compliance means to incorporate
all process changes or complete retrofit construction in accordance
with the final control plan and to connect the air pollution control
equipment or process changes such that, if the HMIWI is brought online,
all necessary process changes or air pollution control equipment will
operate as designed. Completion date: October 6, 2014.
    If a HMIWI does not achieve final compliance by October 6, 2014,
the amended federal plan, as proposed, requires the HMIWI to shutdown
by October 6, 2014, complete the retrofit while not operating and be in
compliance upon restarting. Shutdown is necessary in order to avoid
being out of compliance and subject to possible enforcement action.

H. What are the other proposed amendments?

1. Definitions
    For clarification, the 2009 amendments to the EG revised the
definition of ``Minimum secondary chamber temperature'' to read
``Minimum secondary chamber temperature means 90 percent of the highest
3-hour average secondary chamber temperature (taken, at a minimum, once
every minute) measured during the most recent performance test
demonstrating compliance with the PM, CO, and dioxin/furan emissions
limits.''
    To address the introduction of some new terms, the 2009 amendments
to the EG added the following definitions:
     ``Bag leak detection system'' means ``an instrument that
is capable of monitoring PM loadings in the exhaust of a fabric filter
in order to detect bag failures,'' and examples of such a system were
provided.
     ``Commercial HMIWI'' means ``a HMIWI which offers
incineration services for hospital/medical/infectious waste generated
offsite by firms unrelated to the firm that owns the HMIWI.''
     ``Minimum reagent flow rate'' means ``90 percent of the
highest 3-hour average reagent flow rate at the inlet to the selective
noncatalytic reduction technology (taken, at a minimum, once every
minute) measured during the most recent performance test demonstrating
compliance with the NOX emissions limit.''
    Today's action proposes to amend the HMIWI federal plan to include
these revised and new definitions from the amended EG. Today's action
also proposes to include a revised definition for ``modification or
modified HMIWI'' to address the change in applicability for modified
HMIWI under the amended federal plan.
2. Toxicity Equivalence Factors
    In a January 6, 2011, Federal Register notice, the EPA announced
the availability of the final ``Recommended Toxicity Equivalence
Factors (TEFs) for Human Health Risk Assessments of 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds'' (EPA/100/R-10/
005). Various stakeholders, inside and outside the EPA, had called for
a more comprehensive characterization of risks, so the EPA re-examined
the current recommended approach for applying the toxicity equivalence
methodology. The EPA developed and revised, in response to public
comments and recommendations from peer reviewers, the aforementioned
guidance document to assist the EPA scientists in using this
methodology and to inform the EPA decision makers, other agencies and
the public about this methodology. The revised methodology includes the
following changes to TEFs that HMIWI would use to determine compliance
with the HMIWI dioxin/furan TEQ emissions limits:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Toxicity equivalence factor
                                                                ------------------------------------------------
                     Dioxin/furan congener                                                   Today's proposed
                                                                  1997 EG/2000 federal    amendments to federal
                                                                          plan                     plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin....................                   0.5                     1

Octachlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin...............................                   0.001                   0.0003
2,3,4,7,8-pentachlorinated dibenzofuran........................                   0.5                     0.3
1,2,3,7,8-pentachlorinated dibenzofuran........................                   0.05                    0.03
Octachlorinated dibenzofuran...................................                   0.001                   0.0003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To incorporate these latest revisions to TEFs, we are proposing to
amend Table 2 to subpart HHH in today's action.

VI. Summary of Proposed Amendments to HMIWI New Source Performance
Standards

A. What are the proposed amendments to the emissions limits?

    The 2009 amended EG removed provisions from the 1997 standards at
40 CFR 60.56c and 60.37e that exempted HMIWI from the standards during
periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction (SSM) provided that no
hospital waste or medical/infectious waste was being charged to the
unit during those SSM periods. The 2009 EG requires that the emissions
limits as listed above in Table 1, regardless of a SSM event, be met at
all times. However, in one provision of the NSPS, section 60.56c(d)(2),
the EPA inadvertently failed to delete a SSM exemption we had intended
to eliminate, and to better reflect the EPA's intent in the 2009 final
rule, today's action also proposes to amend that section of the NSPS to
remove the accidentally retained SSM exemption. This action is
necessary to make the NSPS continuously applicable, as required under
CAA section 302(k) and under the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC
Circuit's 2008 Sierra Club v. EPA ruling. Our rationale for this
amendment was presented in the Oct. 6. 2009 final rule, at 74 FR 51368,
51375 and 51393-95 (Oct. 6, 2009), and we hereby incorporate by
reference that rationale in order to complete the regulatory amendments
we intended to make at the time. Today's action also proposes to remove
the SSM exemption from the 2000 federal plan at 40 CFR 62.14413, and
proposes that the emissions limits apply at all times, for the same
reasons.

VII. HMIWI That Have or Will Shutdown

A. Units That Plan to Close Rather Than Comply

    The 2000 federal plan established that if you planned to
permanently close your currently operating HMIWI, you must have done so
by the date 1 year after publication of the final federal plan in the
Federal Register. Today's proposed amended federal plan retains this
provision so that if you plan to permanently close your currently
operating HMIWI, you must do so by the date 1 year after publication of
the final amended federal plan in the Federal Register. The proposed
amendments will allow HMIWI owners or operators that are planning to
shutdown the opportunity to petition the EPA for an extension beyond
the 1-year compliance date (but no later than October 6, 2014). An
example of a facility that might petition the EPA for such an extension
is a facility installing an on-site alternative waste treatment
technology. It is possible that installation cannot be completed within
1 year and the facility has no feasible waste disposal options other
than on-site incineration while the alternative technology is being
installed. The requirements for a petition for an extension to shutdown
under today's proposed federal plan will update the compliance date
requirements set forth at Sec.  62.14471 of subpart HHH.
    If you continue to operate your HMIWI 1 year after publication of
the final amendments to the federal plan in the Federal Register, then
you must comply with the operator training and qualification
requirements and the inspection requirements of the plan by the date 1
year after publication of the final amendments. This requirement
includes HMIWI that comply within 1 year, as well as those that have
been granted an extension beyond the 1-year compliance date (i.e.,
HMIWI with extended retrofit schedules and HMIWI granted an extension
to shutdown after the 1-year compliance date). In addition, while still
in operation, you are subject to the same requirements for Title V
operating permits that apply to units that will not shutdown.

B. Inoperable Units

    Retaining certain aspects of the 2000 federal plan, today's
proposed revised federal plan includes that in cases where a HMIWI has
already shutdown, has been rendered inoperable and does not intend to
restart, the HMIWI may be left off the source inventory in a revised/
new state plan or this proposed amended federal plan. A HMIWI that has
been rendered inoperable would not be covered by the amended federal
plan. The HMIWI owner or operator may do one the following to render a
HMIWI inoperable: (1) Weld the waste charge door shut, (2) remove stack
(and by-pass stack, if applicable), (3) remove combustion air blowers,
or (4) remove burners or fuel supply appurtenances.

C. HMIWI That Have Shutdown

    Retaining certain aspects of the 2000 federal plan, today's revised
federal plan proposal includes any HMIWI that are known to have already
shutdown (but are not known to be inoperable) in the source inventory.
These HMIWI should be identified in any revised/new state plan
submitted to the EPA.
1. Restarting Before the Final Compliance Date
    If the owner or operator of an inactive HMIWI plans to restart
before the final compliance date, the owner or operator must submit a
control plan for the HMIWI and bring the HMIWI into compliance with the
applicable compliance schedule. Final compliance is required for all
pollutants and all HMIWI no later than the final compliance date.
2. Restarting After the Final Compliance Date
    Under this federal plan, as amended, a control plan is not needed
for inactive HMIWI that restart after the final compliance date.
However, before restarting, operators of these HMIWI would have to
complete the operator training and qualification requirements and
inspection requirements (if applicable) and complete retrofit or
process modifications upon restarting. Performance testing to
demonstrate compliance would be required within 180 days after
restarting. There is no need to show that the increments of progress
have been met since these steps would have occurred before restart
while the HMIWI was shutdown and not generating emissions. A HMIWI that
operates out of compliance after the final compliance date would be in

violation of the amended federal plan and subject to enforcement
action.

VIII. Implementation of the Federal Plan and Delegation

A. Background of Authority

    Under sections 111(d) and 129(b) of the CAA, the EPA is required to
adopt EG that are applicable to existing solid waste incineration
sources. These EG are not enforceable until the EPA approves a state
plan or adopts a federal plan that implements and enforces them and the
state or federal plan has become effective. As discussed above, the
federal plan regulates HMIWI in states that do not have approved plans
in effect to implement the amended EG.
    Congress has determined that the primary responsibility for air
pollution prevention and control rests with state and local agencies.
(See section 101(a)(3) of the CAA.) Consistent with that overall
determination, Congress established sections 111 and 129 of the CAA
with the intent that the state and local agencies take the primary
responsibility for ensuring that the emissions limitations and other
requirements in the EG are achieved. Also, in section 111(d) of the
CAA, Congress explicitly required that the EPA establish procedures
that are similar to those under section 110(c) for state implementation
plans. Although Congress required the EPA to propose and promulgate a
federal plan for states that fail to submit approvable state plans on
time, states may submit approvable revised/new plans after promulgation
of the amended HMIWI federal plan. The EPA strongly encourages states
that are unable to submit approvable revised/new plans to request
delegation of the amended federal plan so that they can have primary
responsibility for implementing the revised EG, consistent with the
intent of Congress.
    Approved and effective revised/new state plans or delegation of the
amended federal plan is the EPA's preferred outcome since the EPA
believes that state and local agencies not only have the responsibility
to carry out the revised EG but also have the practical knowledge and
enforcement resources critical to achieving the highest rate of
compliance. For these reasons, the EPA will do all that it can to
expedite delegation of the amended federal plan to state and local
agencies, whenever possible, in cases where states are unable to
develop and submit approvable state plans.

B. Delegation of the Federal Plan and Retained Authorities

    As similarly described in the 2000 federal plan, if a state or
tribe intends to take delegation of the amended federal plan, the state
or tribe should submit to the appropriate EPA Regional Office a written
request for delegation of authority. The state or tribe should explain
how it meets the criteria for delegation. See generally ``Good
Practices Manual for Delegation of NSPS and NESHAP'' (EPA, February
1983). The letter requesting delegation of authority to implement the
amended federal plan should: (1) Demonstrate that the state or tribe
has adequate resources, as well as the legal and enforcement authority
to administer and enforce the program, (2) include an inventory of
affected HMIWI units, which includes those that have ceased operation
but have not been dismantled, include an inventory of the affected
units' air emissions and a provision for state progress reports to the
EPA, (3) certify that a public hearing is held on the state delegation
request, and (4) include a memorandum of agreement between the state or
tribe and the EPA that sets forth the terms and conditions of the
delegation, the effective date of the agreement and would serve as the
mechanism to transfer authority. Upon signature of the agreement, the
appropriate EPA Regional Office would publish an approval notice in the
Federal Register, thereby incorporating the delegation of authority
into the appropriate subpart of 40 CFR part 62.
    If authority is not delegated to a state or tribe, the EPA will
implement the amended federal plan. Also, if a state or tribe fails to
properly implement a delegated portion of the amended federal plan, the
EPA will assume direct implementation and enforcement of that portion.
The EPA will continue to hold enforcement authority along with the
state or tribe even when a state or tribe has received delegation of
the amended federal plan. In all cases where the amended federal plan
is delegated, the EPA will retain and will not transfer authority to a
state or tribe to approve the following items that include additional
items to those listed in the 2000 federal plan as to correspond to
those changes promulgated in the 2009 HMIWI rules:
    (1) Alternative site-specific operating parameters established by
facilities using HMIWI controls other than a wet scrubber, dry scrubber
followed by a FF, or dry scrubber followed by a FF and wet scrubber;
    (2) Alternative methods of demonstrating compliance, including the
following methods outlined in the October 6, 2009, amendments to the
HMIWI EG:
     Approval of CEMS for PM, HCl, multi-metals and Hg where
used for purposes of demonstrating compliance;
     Approval of continuous automated sampling systems for
dioxin/furan and Hg where used for purposes of demonstrating
compliance; and
     Approval of major alternatives to test methods;
    (3) Approval of major alternatives to monitoring (added in 2009
amended EG);
    (4) Waiver of recordkeeping requirements (added in 2009 amended
EG); and
    (5) Performance test and data reduction waivers under 40 CFR
60.8(b) (added in 2009 amended EG).
    Retaining what was established in the 2000 federal plan, today's
proposed amended federal plan also specifies that hospital/medical/
infectious waste incinerator owners or operators who wish to establish
alternative operating parameters, alternative methods of demonstrating
compliance, major alternatives to monitoring, waiver of recordkeeping
requirements or performance test and data reduction waivers should
submit a request to the Regional Office Administrator with a copy to
the appropriate state.

C. Mechanisms for Transferring Authority

    There are two mechanisms for transferring implementation authority
to state and local agencies: (1) The EPA approval of a revised/new
state plan after the amended federal plan is in effect; and (2) if a
state does not submit or obtain approval of its own revised/new plan,
the EPA delegation to a state of the authority to implement certain
portions of this amended federal plan to the extent appropriate and if
allowed by state law. Both of these options are maintained from those
which were first outlined in the 2000 federal plan, are described in
more detail below.
1. Federal Plan Becomes Effective Prior to Approval of a State Plan
    After HMIWI in a state become subject to the amended federal plan,
the state or local agency may still adopt and submit a revised/new plan
to the EPA. If the EPA determines that the revised/new state plan is as
protective as the revised EG, the EPA will approve the revised/new
state plan. If the EPA determines that the plan is not as protective as
the revised EG, the EPA will disapprove the plan and the HMIWI covered
in the state plan would remain subject to the amended federal plan
until a revised

state plan covering those HMIWI is approved and effective. Prior to
disapproval, EPA will work with states to attempt to reconcile areas of
the plan that remain not as protective as the revised EG.
    Upon the effective date of a revised/new state plan, the amended
federal plan would no longer apply to HMIWI covered by such a plan and
the state or local agency would implement and enforce the revised/new
state plan in lieu of the amended federal plan. When an EPA Regional
Office approves a revised/new state plan, it will amend the appropriate
subpart of 40 CFR part 62 to indicate such approval.
2. State Takes Delegation of the Federal Plan
    The EPA, in its discretion, may delegate to state agencies the
authority to implement this amended federal plan. As discussed above,
the EPA believes that it is advantageous and the best use of resources
for state or local agencies to agree to undertake, on the EPA's behalf,
administrative and substantive roles in implementing the amended
federal plan to the extent appropriate and where authorized by state
law. If a state requests delegation, the EPA will generally delegate
the entire amended federal plan to the state agency. These functions
include administration and oversight of compliance reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, HMIWI inspections and preparation of draft
notices of violation but will not include any retained authorities.
State agencies that have taken delegation, as well as the EPA, will
have responsibility for bringing enforcement actions against sources
violating federal plan provisions.

D. Implementing Authority

    The EPA Regional Administrators have been delegated the authority
for implementing the HMIWI federal plan amendments. All reports
required by these amendments to the federal plan should be submitted to
the appropriate Regional Office Administrator. Section II.C. of this
preamble includes a table that lists names and addresses of the EPA
Regional Office contacts and the states they cover.

IX. Title V Operating Permits

    All existing HMIWI regulated under state or federal plans
implementing the 1997 EG and any HMIWI that was regulated under the
1997 NSPS should have already applied for and obtained Title V
operating permits, as required under the EG. Title V operating permits
assure compliance with all applicable federal requirements for HMIWI,
including all applicable CAA section 129 requirements. (See 40 CFR
70.2,70.6(a)(1), 71.2 and 71.6(a)(1).) Title V operating permits for
the above-noted sources may, however, need to be reopened to
incorporate the requirements of a revised/new state plan, this amended
federal plan or more stringent NSPS requirements.
    For more background information on the interface between CAA
section 129 and Title V, including the EPA's interpretation of CAA
section 129(e), as well as information on submitting Title V permit
applications, updating existing Title V permit applications and
reopening existing Title V permits, see the final Federal Plan for
Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators, October 3, 2003 (68
FR 57518, 57532). See also the final Federal Plan for Hospital Medical
Infectious Waste Incinerators, August 15, 2000 (65 FR 49868, 49877).
    Today's proposed revised federal plan maintains the 2000 federal
plan approach, specifying that owners or operators of HMIWI that burn
only pathological waste, low-level radioactive waste and/or
chemotherapeutic waste and co-fired combustors, as defined in Sec.
62.14490 of subpart HHH, must comply only with certain recordkeeping
and reporting requirements set forth in today's proposed amended
federal plan. (See Sec.  62.14400.) These HMIWI and co-fired combustors
would not be subject to the emissions control-related requirements of
the amended federal plan as long as they complied with the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements set forth as conditions for
their exemption. Consistent with the 2000 federal plan, owners and
operators of these sources as listed above would not be required to
obtain Title V operating permits as a matter of federal law if the only
reason they would potentially be subject to Title V is these non-
emissions control-related recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
(See Sec.  62.14480.) Originally explained in the 2000 federal plan,
today's rule maintains that owners and operators of HMIWI that burn
only pathological waste, low-level radioactive waste and/or
chemotherapeutic waste and co-fired combustors that do not comply with
the recordkeeping and reporting requirements necessary to qualify for
exemption from the other requirements of the amended federal plan would
become subject to those other requirements and would have to obtain
Title V permits. Moreover as stated in the 2000 federal plan and again
in today's proposal, if, in the future, the EPA promulgates regulations
subjecting any of these sources to requirements other than these
recordkeeping and reporting requirements, these sources could become
subject to Title V at that time.

A. Title V and Delegation of a Federal Plan

    We have previously stated our position that issuance of a Title V
permit is not equivalent to the approval of a state plan or delegation
of a federal plan.\3\ Legally, delegation of a standard or requirement
results in a delegated state or tribe standing in for the EPA as a
matter of federal law. This means that obligations a source may have to
the EPA under a federally promulgated standard become obligations to a
state (except for functions that the EPA retains for itself) upon
delegation.\4\ Although a state or tribe may have the authority under
state or tribal law to incorporate section 111/129 requirements into
its Title V permits, and implement and enforce these requirements in
these permits without first taking delegation of the section 111/129
federal plan, the state or tribe is not standing in for the EPA as a
matter of federal law in this situation. Where a state or tribe does
not take delegation of a section 111/129 federal plan, obligations that
a source has to the EPA under the federal plan continue after a Title V
permit is issued to the source. As a result, the EPA continues to
maintain that an approved part 70 operating permits program cannot be
used as a mechanism to transfer the authority to implement and enforce
the federal plan from the EPA to a state or tribe. As mentioned above,
a state or tribe may have the authority under state or tribal law to
incorporate section 111/129 requirements into its Title V permits, and
implement and enforce these requirements in that context without first
taking delegation of the section 111/129 federal plan.\5\ Some

states or tribes, however, may not be able to implement and enforce a
section 111/129 standard in a Title V permit until the section 111/129
standard has been delegated. In these situations, a state or tribe
should not issue a part 70 permit to a source subject to a federal plan
before taking delegation of the section 111/129 federal plan. If a
state or tribe can provide an Attorney General's (AG's) opinion
delineating its authority to incorporate section 111/129 requirements
into its Title V permits, and then implement and enforce these
requirements through its Title V permits without first taking
delegation of the requirements, then a state or tribe does not need to
take delegation of the section 111/129 requirements for purposes of
Title V permittin.\6\ In practical terms, without approval of a state
or tribal plan, delegation of a federal plan, or an adequate AG's
opinion, states and tribes with approved part 70 permitting programs
open themselves up to potential questions regarding their authority to
issue permits containing section 111/129 requirements and to assure
compliance with these requirements. Such questions could lead to the
issuance of a notice of deficiency for a state's or tribe's part 70
program. As a result, prior to a state or tribal permitting authority
drafting a part 70 permit for a source subject to a section 111/129
federal plan, the state or tribe, the EPA Regional Office and source in
question are advised to ensure that delegation of the relevant federal
plan has taken place or that the permitting authority has provided to
the EPA Regional Office an adequate AG's opinion. In addition, if a
permitting authority chooses to rely on an AG's opinion and not take
delegation of a federal plan, a section 111/129 source subject to the
federal plan in that state must simultaneously submit to both the EPA
and the state or tribe all reports required by the standard to be
submitted to the EPA. Given that these reports are necessary to
implement and enforce the section 111/129 requirements when they have
been included in Title V permits, the permitting authority needs to
receive these reports at the same time as the EPA. In the situation
where a permitting authority chooses to rely on an AG's opinion and not
take delegation of a federal plan, the EPA Regional Offices will be
responsible for implementing and enforcing section 111/129 requirements
outside of any Title V permits. Moreover, in this situation, the EPA
Regional Offices will continue to be responsible for developing
progress reports and conducting any other administrative functions
required under this federal plan or any other section 111/129 federal
plan. See the section IV.J. of this preamble titled ``Progress
Reports''. It is important to note that the EPA is not using its
authority under 40 CFR part 70.4(i)(3) to request that all states and
tribes which do not take delegation of this federal plan submit
supplemental AG's opinions at this time. However, the EPA Regional
Offices shall request, and permitting authorities shall provide, such
opinions when the EPA questions a state's or tribe's authority to
incorporate section 111/129 requirements into a Title V permit and
implement and enforce these requirements in that context without
delegation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For the sake of brevity, the discussion from the proposed
federal plan regarding Title V and delegation of a federal plan is
not being repeated. See ``Title V and Delegation of a Federal Plan''
section of the proposed federal plan for CISWI, November 25, 2002
(67 FR 70640, 70652). Nevertheless, the preamble language from this
section in the proposed rule is hereby reaffirmed in this final
rule.
    \4\ If the Administrator chooses to retain certain authorities
under a standard, those authorities cannot be delegated, e.g.,
alternative methods of demonstrating compliance.
    \5\ The EPA interprets the phrase ``assure compliance'' in
section 502(b)(5)(A) to mean that permitting authorities will
implement and enforce each applicable standard, regulation or
requirement which must be included in the Title V permits the
permitting authorities issue. See definition of ``applicable
requirement'' in 40 CFR 70.2. See also 40 CFR 70.4(b)(3)(i) and
70.6(a)(1).
    \6\ It is important to note that an AG's opinion submitted at
the time of initial Title V program approval is sufficient if it
demonstrates that a state or tribe has adequate authority to
incorporate CAA section 111/129 requirements into its Title V
permits and to implement and enforce these requirements through its
Title V permits without delegation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This section addresses the following administrative requirements:
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, 13132, 13175, 13045, 13211 and 12898,
PRA, RFA, UMRA and the NTTAA. This two-part action proposes a revised
federal plan and proposes amendments to the final 2009 NSPS. Since this
proposed federal plan rule merely implements the amended HMIWI EG
promulgated on October 6, 2009 (codified at 40 part 60, subpart Ce) as
they apply to HMIWI and the proposed NSPS amendments clarify EPA's
original intent removing the startup, shutdown, and malfunction
exemption in the final NSPS rule October 6, 2009 (codified at 40 part
60, subpart Ec) and does not impose any new requirements, much of the
following discussion of administrative requirements refers to the
documentation of applicable administrative requirements in the preamble
to the 2009 rule promulgating the amended EG and NSPS (74 FR 51368-
51402, October 6, 2009).

A. Executive Order 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993)
and is, therefore, not subject to review under the Executive Orders
12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
    The EPA considered the 2009 amendments to the HMIWI EG to be
significant and the rule was reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in 2009. (See 74 FR 51400.) The federal plan proposed
today would simply implement the EG as amended in 2009 and does not
result in any additional control requirements or impose any additional
costs above those previously considered during promulgation of the 2009
amended EG. Therefore, this regulatory action is considered ``not
significant'' under Executive Order 12866 and 13563.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This proposed action does not impose any new information collection
burden. This action simply proposes amendments to the hospital/medical/
infectious waste incinerators federal plan to implement the amended
emission guidelines adopted on October 6, 2009, for those states that
do not have an approved revised/new state plan implementing the
emission guidelines. Additionally, today's action also proposes to
amend the new source performance standards to better reflect EPA's
original intent in the October 6, 2009, final rule in eliminating an
exemption during startup, shutdown and malfunction periods from the
requirement to comply with standards at all times. However, the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information
collection requirements contained in the existing regulations 40 CFR
part 60 subparts CE and EC under the provisions on the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB Control
Number 2060-0422. The OMB Control Numbers for EPA's regulation in 40
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
(SISNOSE). Small entities include small businesses, small organizations
and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this proposed action on
small entities, small entity is defined as follows: (1) A small
business as defined by the Small Business Administration's regulations
at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a
government of a city, county, town, school district or special district
with a population of less than 50,000; or (3) a small organization that
is any not-for-profit enterprise that is independently

owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. During the
2009 HMIWI EG rulemaking, the EPA estimated that a substantial number
of small entities would not be significantly impacted by the
promulgated EG. (See 74 FR at 51400-51401.) This proposed amended
federal plan does not establish any new requirements.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This proposed action does not contain a federal mandate that may
result in expenditures of $100 million or more for state and local
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 year. In
the preamble to the 2009 EG, the national total cost to comply with the
final rule was estimated to be approximately $15.5 million in each of
the first 3 years of compliance. This proposed federal plan, as
amended, will apply to only a subset of the units considered in the
cost analysis for the EG, and less than 10 percent of the units
nationwide are state or locally owned. Thus, the proposed federal plan,
as amended, is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205
of UMRA.
    In addition, the EPA has determined that the proposed rule contains
no regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect
small governments because, as noted above, the burden is small and the
regulation does not unfairly apply to small governments. Therefore, the
proposed rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This proposed action will not
impose substantial direct compliance costs on state or local
governments and will not preempt state law. Thus, Executive Order 13132
does not apply to this proposed action.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with the EPA
policy to promote communications between the EPA and state and local
governments, the EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed
action from state and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This proposed action does not have tribal implications, as
specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The
EPA is not aware of any HMIWI owned or operated by Indian tribal
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
proposed action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885; April 23,
1997) as applying to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
based solely on technology performance.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA, Public Law 104-113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when the EPA decides not to use available and
applicable VCS.
    This proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. The EPA
proposes to use two VCS in today's action. One VCS, ASME PTC 19.10-
1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses,'' is cited in the 2009 EG and
the proposed rule for its manual method of measuring the content of the
exhaust gas as an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 3B of appendix
A-2. This standard is available from the ASME, P.O. Box 2900,
Fairfield, NJ 07007-2900; or Global Engineering Documents, Sales
Department, 15 Inverness Way East, Englewood, CO 80112.
    Another VCS, ASTM D6784-02, ``Standard Test Method for Elemental,
Oxidized, Particle-Bound and Total Mercury Gas Generated from Coal-
Fired Stationary Sources (Ontario Hydro Method),'' is cited in the 2009
EG and the proposed rule as an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 29
of appendix A-8 (portion for Hg only) for measuring Hg. This standard
is available from the ASTM, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, Post Office Box
C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959; or ProQuest, 300 North Zeeb
Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106.
    While the EPA has identified 16 VCS as being potentially applicable
to the proposed rule, we have decided not to use these VCS in this
rulemaking. The use of these VCS would be impractical because they do
not meet the objectives of the standards cited in this proposed rule.
See the docket for the 2009 EG (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0534),
which is being implemented under today's proposed action, for the
reasons for these determinations.
    Under 40 CFR 62.14495, the EPA Administrator retains the authority
of approving alternative methods of demonstrating compliance as
established under 40 CFR 60.8(b) and 60.13(i) of 40 CFR part 60,
subpart A (NSPS General Provisions). A source may apply to the EPA for
permission to use alternative test methods or alternative monitoring
requirements in place of any required EPA test methods, performance
specifications or procedures.
    The EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking
and, specifically, invites the public to identify potentially-
applicable VCS and to explain why such standards should be used in this
regulation.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice (EJ) in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629; Feb. 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on EJ. Its main provision directs federal
agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to
make EJ part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as
appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs, policies and activities on
minority populations and low-income populations in the United States.

    The EPA has determined that this proposed action will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low-
income population.
    This proposed action implements national standards in the 2009
amendments to the HMIWI EG that would result in reductions in emissions
of Cd, CO, dioxins/furans, HCl, Pb, Hg, NOX, PM and
SO2 from all HMIWI and thus decrease the amount of such
emissions to which all affected populations are exposed.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 60 and 62

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,
Environmental protection, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: March 27, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.

PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES:
HOSPITAL/MEDICAL/INFECTIOUS WASTE INCINERATORS

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, Title 40, chapter I, parts
60 and 62 of the CFR are proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 60--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.

Subpart Ec--[Amended]

    2. The subpart heading for subpart Ec is revised to read as
follows:

Subpart Ec--Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources:
Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators: Final Rule
Amendments

    3. Section 60.56c is amended by revising the first sentence of
paragraph (d)(2) to read as follows:

Sec.  60.56c  Compliance and performance testing.

    (d) * * *
    (2) Following the date on which the initial performance test is
completed or is required to be completed under Sec.  60.8, whichever
date comes first, ensure that the affected facility does not operate
above any of the applicable maximum operating parameters or below any
of the applicable minimum operating parameters listed in table 3 of
this subpart and measured as 3-hour rolling averages (calculated each
hour as the average of the previous 3 operating hours) at all times. *
* *
* * * * *

PART 62--FEDERAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR HOSPITAL/MEDICAL/INFECTIOUS
WASTE INCINERATORS CONSTRUCTED ON OR BEFORE DECEMBER 1, 2008

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

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.

Subpart HHH--[Amended]

    5. The subpart heading for subpart HHH is revised to read as
follows:

Subpart HHH--Federal Plan Requirements for Hospital/Medical/
Infectious Waste Incinerators Constructed On or Before December 1,
2008

    6. Section 62.14400 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)
introductory text, (a)(2), and (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  62.14400  Am I subject to this subpart?

    (a) You are subject to this subpart if paragraphs (a)(1), (2)(i) or
(ii), and (3) of this section are all true:
* * * * *
    (2)(i) Construction of the HMIWI commenced on or before June 20,
1996, or modification of the HMIWI commenced on or before March 16,
1998; or
    (ii) Construction of the HMIWI commenced after June 20, 1996 but no
later than December 1, 2008, or modification of the HMIWI commenced
after March 16, 1998 but no later than April 6, 2010; and
* * * * *
    (c) Owners or operators of sources that qualify for the exemptions
in paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section must submit records
required to support their claims of exemption to the EPA Administrator
(or delegated enforcement authority) upon request. Upon request by any
person under the regulation at part 2 of this chapter (or a comparable
law or regulation governing a delegated enforcement authority), the EPA
Administrator (or delegated enforcement authority) must request the
records in (b)(1) or (b)(2) from an owner or operator and make such
records available to the requestor to the extent required by part 2 of
this chapter (or a comparable law governing a delegated enforcement
authority). Records required under paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this
section must be maintained by the source for a period of at least 5
years. Notifications of exemption claims required under paragraphs
(b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section must be maintained by the EPA or
delegated enforcement authority for as long as the source is operating
under such exempt status. Any information obtained from an owner or
operator of a source accompanied by a claim of confidentiality will be
treated in accordance with the regulations in part 2 of this chapter
(or a comparable law governing a delegated enforcement authority).
    7. Section 62.14401 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  62.14401  How do I determine if my HMIWI is covered by an
approved and effective state or tribal plan?

    This part (40 CFR part 62) contains a list of all states and tribal
areas with approved Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111(d)/129 plans in
effect. However, this part is only updated once a year. Thus, if this
part does not indicate that your state or tribal area has an approved
and effective plan, you should contact your state environmental
agency's air director or your EPA Regional Office to determine if
approval occurred since publication of the most recent version of this
part. A state may also meet its CAA section 111(d)/129 obligations by
submitting an acceptable written request for delegation of the federal
plan that meets the requirements of this section. This is the only
other option for a state to meet its 111(d)/129 obligations.
    (a) An acceptable federal plan delegation request must include the
following:
    (1) A demonstration of adequate resources and legal authority to
administer and enforce the federal plan.
    (2) The items under Sec.  60.25(a) and 60.39e(c).
    (3) Certification that the hearing on the state delegation request,
similar to the hearing for a state plan submittal, was held, a list of
witnesses and their organizational affiliations, if any, appearing at
the hearing, and a brief written summary of each presentation or
written submission.
    (4) A commitment to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the
Regional Administrator who sets forth the terms, conditions and
effective date of the delegation and that serves as the mechanism for
the transfer of authority. Additional guidance and information is given
in the EPA's Delegation Manual,

Item 7-139, Implementation and Enforcement of 111(d)(2) and 111(d)/(2)/
129(b)(3) federal plans.
    (b) A state with an already approved HMIWI CAA section 111(d)/129
state plan is not precluded from receiving EPA approval of a delegation
request for the revised federal plan, providing the requirements of
paragraph (a) of this section are met, and at the time of the
delegation request, the state also requests withdrawal of the EPA's
previous state plan approval.
    (c) A state's CAA section 111(d)/129 obligations are separate from
its obligations under Title V of the CAA.
    8. Section 62.14402 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  62.14402  If my HMIWI is not listed on the federal plan
inventory, am I exempt from this subpart?

    Not necessarily. Sources subject to this subpart include, but are
not limited to, the inventory of sources listed in Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2011-0405 for the federal plan. Review the applicability of
Sec.  62.14400 to determine if you are subject.
    9. Section 62.14403 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  62.14403  What happens if I modify an existing HMIWI?

    (a) If you commenced modification (defined in 40 CFR 62.14490) of
an existing HMIWI after April 6, 2010, you are subject to 40 CFR part
60, subpart Ec (40 CFR 60.50c through 60.58c), as amended, and you are
not subject to this subpart, except as provided in paragraph (b) of
this section.
    (b) If you made physical or operational changes to your existing
HMIWI solely for the purpose of complying with this subpart, these
changes are not considered a modification and you are not subject to 40
CFR part 60, subpart Ec (40 CFR 60.50c through 60.58c), as amended. You
remain subject to this subpart.
    10. Section 62.14412 is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  62.14412  What stack opacity and visible emissions requirements
apply?

    (a) Your HMIWI (regardless of size category) must not discharge
into the atmosphere from the stack any gases that exhibit greater than
6 percent opacity (6-minute block average).
    (b) Your HMIWI (regardless of size category) must not discharge