Section 63.1207(b)(3) of the final rule requires a one-time only
test for dioxin/furan emissions for those sources that are not required
to meet a numerical dioxin/furan emission standard. You are only
required to repeat this test if you change the design or operation of
the source in a manner that may increase dioxin/furan emissions.
Because dioxin/furan testing is the only component of the confirmatory
performance test (see Sec.  63.1207(b)(2)), it logically follows that
confirmatory performance testing is not required for these sources.
Nevertheless, the final rule did not include an explicit exemption from
the confirmatory performance test requirement. In today's notice, we
are proposing to add a new paragraph (vi) to Sec.  63.1207(b)(3) to
clarify this point.

D. Periodic Performance Tests for Phase I Sources

    Section 63.1207(d)(1) requires periodic comprehensive performance
testing to begin no later than 61 months after commencing the previous
comprehensive performance test. Section 63.1207(d)(2) requires
confirmatory performance testing to begin no later than 31 months after
commencing the previous performance test. However, in the Interim
Standards Rule, promulgated on February 13, 2002, we added Sec.
63.1207(d)(4) that waived these periodic test requirements under the
interim standards (67 FR at 6815).
    Section 63.1207(d)(4) also includes language reinstating the
periodic test requirements upon promulgation of the final replacement
standards (i.e., October 12, 2005). Our intent was to reinstate
periodic testing only for sources operating under the October 12, 2005
replacement standards, not the

interim standards. However, the current language could also be
misinterpreted to require periodic testing by sources that remain under
the interim standards. In today's rule, we propose to amend Sec.
63.1207(d) to clarify that periodic comprehensive performance testing
and confirmatory performance testing are only required for sources
operating under the final replacement standards. For the reasons
discussed in the preamble to the interim standards rule (67 FR at
6802), periodic testing is not required for sources that remain
operating under the interim standards.

E. Performance Test Waiver for Sources Subject to Hazardous Waste
Thermal Concentration Limits

    In the 1999 final rule (64 FR at 52828), we waived the performance
test requirement for mercury, semivolatile metals, low volatile metals,
or hydrogen chloride/chlorine gas for sources that demonstrated that
the maximum theoretical emission concentration (MTEC) did not exceed
the emission standard for that HAP. See Sec.  63.1207(m). In essence,
this provision waives the performance test if the constituent feed rate
(after conversion to an exhaust gas concentration using continuously
monitored exhaust gas flow data) is less than the applicable emission
rate, assuming that 100% of the constituent in the feed is emitted from
the combustion unit.
    In the 2005 final rule (70 FR at 59402), for certain source
categories (i.e., liquid fuel boilers, cement kilns, and lightweight
aggregate kilns), we limited the feedrate of these same constituents in
proportion to the heat input from hazardous waste. See, for example,
Sec.  63.1217(a)(2)(ii). We refer to these as hazardous waste thermal
concentration emission limits.\50\ In today's notice, we propose to
amend Sec.  63.1207(m) to waive performance tests for any constituent
whose thermal concentration in the waste feed is at or below the
applicable thermal concentration emission limit. This is analogous to
the performance test waiver for sources that comply with MTEC
standards. Although performance tests would not be required, the
thermal concentration emission limits would remain in effect during
source operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ Note that are granting reconsideration of the decision to
subcategorize the liquid fuel boiler source category by heating
value, which includes standards based on this potential normalizing
parameter. See Section IV.A above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Averaging Method When Calculating 12-Hour Rolling Average Thermal
Concentration Limits

    The replacement standards for cement kilns and lightweight
aggregate kilns limit the emissions of semivolatile metals (cadmium and
lead) and low volatile metals (arsenic, beryllium, and chromium) from
hazardous waste feeds relative to the heating value of those feeds. In
order to monitor compliance with those requirements, Sec.
63.1209(n)(2)(iii) requires the source to establish a 12-hour rolling
average feedrate limit for those metals on a thermal concentration
(e.g., pounds per million British thermal unit) basis. The limits are
derived from operating levels during the comprehensive performance
test.
    For reasons discussed in the 1999 final rule (64 FR at 52922), EPA
has consistently required sources to calculate most of their operating
parameter limits as the average of each relevant test run average
recorded during the comprehensive performance test. Section
63.1209(n)(2)(iii) describes how to calculate the average thermal
concentration of metals for each test run, but it does not explicitly
describe how to calculate the thermal concentration limit. In today's
notice, we are proposing to amend Sec.  63.1209(n)(2)(iii) to indicate
that the metal thermal concentration limit is the average of the
individual test run averages.

G. Calculating Rolling Averages for Averaging Periods in Excess of 12
Hours

    The final rule allows operators of liquid fuel boilers to average
certain feed rate limits over a period of up to one year. This applies
to the mercury and semivolatile feed rate limits. Sec. Sec.
63.1209(n)(2)(v)(A)(iv) and (n)(3)(v) as well as Sec. Sec.
63.1209(l)(1)(ii)(B)(5) and (l)(1)(C)(5) all describe the same method
for calculating averages of longer than 12 hours upon initial
compliance with the rule. They require that you calculate the average
of all 1-minute average values until you have acquired data for the
full averaging period (i.e., up to one year). Thereafter, you are
required to update this value each hour using the 60-minute average
feedrate from the previous hour.
    EPA recognizes that these approaches may needlessly complicate data
management and could require increased data storage. Therefore, we are
proposing to amend these sections of the regulation in two ways. The
first change will explicitly allow you to calculate long-term rolling
averages using only the 1-minute data that you are otherwise required
to record. If you choose this approach, you would calculate long-term
averages in exactly the same manner as all other rolling averages, with
the value being updated every minute. There would be no requirement to
switch to a different system after completion of the initial averaging
period. Alternatively, you may still choose to use the hourly update
option specified in the current regulations. If you choose this latter
option, however, we are proposing to allow you to begin using hourly
updates after completing at least 12 hours of monitoring using 1-minute
updates. (The current regulation only allows hourly updates after
completing the first long-term averaging period, that could be up to
one year.) We believe that this will allow you to begin ``normal''
monitoring operations as soon as possible without any significant
effect on accuracy.
    We wish to emphasize that the definition of continuous monitor
requires that you maintain all one-minute average values in your
operating record regardless of whether you elect one-minute or hourly
updates to the rolling average. Pursuant to Sec.  63.10(b)(1) of the
MACT General Provisions, these data must be retained for a period of at
least five years.

H. Calculating Rolling Averages

    Most of the feed rate, emission rate, and operating parameter
limits established in the HWC MACT rule are monitored on a rolling
average basis that varies from hourly to annually. Continuously
monitored parameters must be recorded at least once each minute. The
rolling average is then calculated as the average of the one-minute
values for the duration of the most recent averaging period. For
example, a one-hour rolling average temperature value would be
calculated by averaging the 60 most recent one-minute temperature
readings, with a new hourly rolling average value being generated every
minute.
    In the 1999 final rule, the longest permissible rolling average
period was 12 hours. However, in the 2005 final rule, we allowed up to
annual averaging for those emission standards that are based on
``normal'' feed data. (See the liquid fuel boiler standards for mercury
and semivolatile metals under Sec.  63.1217.) In recognition of the
fact that these long-term averages would not vary significantly over
short time periods, we chose to allow you to update these rolling
averages hourly, rather than every minute. Our intent was to retain
one-minute updates for averaging periods up to 12 hours while allowing

hourly updates for longer averaging periods. However, we inadvertently
specified hourly updates for several parameters that are not subject to
long-term (i.e., greater than 12-hour) averaging. This occurred for
three parameters: the chromium feedrate in liquid fuel boilers burning
hazardous waste with a heating value of 10,000 Btu per pound or greater
under Sec.  63.1209(n)(2)(v)(B)(1)(i), the chromium feedrate in liquid
fuel boilers burning hazardous waste with a heating value of less than
10,000 Btu per pound under Sec.  63.1209(n)(2)(v)(B)(2), and the
chlorine thermal concentration feedrate limit for liquid fuel boilers
burning hazardous waste with a heating value of not less than 10,000
Btu per pound under Sec.  63.1209(o)(1)(ii)(A)(3). In today's notice,
we are proposing to delete the hourly update references for these three
parameters.

I. Timing of the Periodic Review of Eligibility for the Health-Based
Compliance Alternatives for Total Chlorine

    If you choose to comply with the health-based compliance
alternatives for total chlorine, Sec.  63.1215(h)(2)(i) requires you to
review your eligibility under that alternative at least every five
years. The results must be submitted to the regulatory authority for
review and approval. However, there is some ambiguity in the exact
timing of that submission in the current regulatory language.
    In this action, we propose to eliminate the ambiguity by amending
Sec.  63.1215(h)(2)(i) to indicate that the results of your 5-year
review are due to the permitting authority at the time you submit your
comprehensive performance test plan (as specified in the current rule).
This will most likely be approximately four years (not five, as
indicated in the current rule) after your last comprehensive
performance test.

J. Expressing Particulate Matter Standards Using the International
System of Units (SI)

    In the final rule, we expressed the particulate matter standards
for incinerators, cement kilns, and lightweight aggregate kilns using
English units (gr/dscf) while expressing the particulate matter
standards for liquid and solid fuel boilers using SI units (mg/dscm).
Our preference is to express all particulate matter standards in SI
units and we are proposing to revise the particulate matter standards
in Sec. Sec.  63.1216 through 63.1221 by expressing the standards in SI
units.\51\ When making the conversion from English units to SI units,
we are proposing to convert the calculated particulate matter results
prior to the step in which the results were rounded to two significant
figures. For example, the calculated MACT floor for existing
incinerators was 0.0133 gr/dscf, that was rounded to 0.013 gr/dscf (the
latter being the promulgated standard).\52\ Thus, our proposed approach
would convert 0.0133 gr/dscf to SI units. We believe this approach for
converting English to SI units more accurately reflects the MACT
standards identified in the final rule because making the conversion to
SI units after rounding the results (in English units) can introduce
imprecision. In addition, we also would recalculate and revise as
necessary the liquid and solid fuel boiler standards using the same
approach (i.e., existing solid fuel boilers and existing liquid fuel
boilers). The table below shows the results of the conversion to SI
units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ We are not proposing to revise the particulate matter
standards in Sec. Sec.  63.1203 thru 63.1205 because affected
sources are already complying with these standards.
    \52\ See USEPA, ``Technical Support Document for HWC MACT
Standards, Volume III: Selection of MACT Standards,'' September
2005, Appendix F, Table ``APCD-INC-PM.''

                           Proposed Particulate Matter Standards Expressed in SI Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Proposed  standard  in
         Source category                 Type of source         Promulgated standard            SI units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solid Fuel Boilers (Sec.           Existing New.............  68 mg/dscm                69 mg/dscm
 63.1216).                                                    34 mg/dscm                34 mg/dscm
Liquid Fuel Boilers (Sec.          Existing New.............  80 mg/dscm                79 mg/dscm
 63.1217).                                                    20 mg/dscm                20 mg/dscm
Incinerators (Sec.   63.1219)....  Existing New.............  0.013 gr/dscf             30 mg/dscm
                                                              0.0015 gr/dscf            3.5 mg/dscm
Cement Kilns (Sec.   63.1220)....  Existing New.............  0.028 gr/dscf             65 mg/dscm
                                                              0.0023 gr/dscf            5.3 mg/dscm
Lightweight Aggregate Kilns (Sec.  Existing New.............  0.025 gr/dscf             57 mg/dscm
   63.1221).                                                  0.0098 gr/dscf            22 mg/dscm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We acknowledge that several of the particulate matter standards
shown in the table above may be revised as a result of the
reconsideration of the particulate matter standard for new cement kilns
(71 FR at 14665). If any particulate matter standards are revised, we
would apply the same procedure to convert the new standards to SI
units.
    Accordingly, we propose to revise the following particulate matter
standards: Sec. Sec.  63.1216(a)(7); 63.1217(a)(7); 63.1219(a)(7) and
(b)(7); 63.1220(a)(7)(i) and (b)(7)(i); and 63.1221(a)(7) and (b)(7).

K. Mercury Standards for Cement Kilns

    In the final rule, we intended to establish a two-pronged approach
for controlling mercury emissions from cement kilns. See preamble
discussion at 70 FR at 59468. Step one establishes a maximum
concentration of mercury in the hazardous waste feed. Step two allows
the source to choose between either a traditional approach of limiting
the total mercury feed rate and relevant operating parameters, or a
maximum theoretical emission concentration (MTEC) approach. The MTEC is
calculated as described in Sec.  63.1207(m)(2) except that, in this
case, it is calculated for the hazardous waste feed(s) only.
    Although we believe that the preamble description of this approach
is clear, the regulatory language, promulgated in Sec. Sec.
63.1220(a)(2) and (b)(2), is not.\53\ Our intent was to require all
affected cement kilns to comply with Sec.  63.1220(a)(2)(i). In
addition, the source has the option of complying with either Sec.
63.1220(a)(2)(ii) or (a)(2)(iii). However, the current language could
be misinterpreted to allow the source to comply only with Sec.
63.1220(a)(2)(iii).

Today, we are proposing to amend Sec.  63.1220(a)(2) to more clearly
reflect our original intent. Conforming changes to the mercury
monitoring requirements of Sec.  63.1209(l)(1)(iii) and (iv) are also
proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ For brevity, the remaining regulatory citations refer only
to the standards for existing cement kilns. However, the same
changes are proposed for both existing and new kilns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

L. Facilities Operating Under RCRA Interim Status

    In response to the proposed rule (69 FR at 21198), one commenter
expressed concern that sources operating under Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) interim status would have to obtain approval of
the RCRA implementing authority before proceeding with facility
modifications required to meet the MACT standards. The commenter noted
that delays in gaining that approval would adversely affect a source's
ability to comply with the MACT standards on time. We responded to this
issue in our response to comments document.\54\ However, we did not
address it in either the preamble or the final rule itself.
Consequently, this appears to be an ongoing source of confusion among
affected sources, as well as some regulatory agencies. In order to
promote consistent interpretation of the RCRA interim status
requirements across all jurisdictions, the discussion that follows
reiterates EPA's long-standing position previously set forth in the
comment response document. States are strongly encouraged to adhere to
this interpretation in order to facilitate timely compliance with the
HWC MACT replacement standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ USEPA, ``Response to Comments on April 20, 2004 HWC MACT
Proposed Rule, Volume IV: Permitting,'' September 2005, Pages 16-17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At issue here is the interpretation of Sec.  270.72(a)(3), that
requires sources operating under interim status to obtain approval from
the regulatory authority for ``Changes in the processes for the
treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous waste or addition of
processes * * *'' The term ``process'' refers to the general category
of waste treatment, storage, or disposal (e.g., incinerator, cement
kiln, boiler, etc.) as indicated on the Part A permit form (EPA Form
8700-23). It does not include air pollution control devices, monitoring
equipment, or process controls, none of which are identified on the
Part A form. Consequently, changes to those monitoring and control
systems do not require approval under Sec.  270.72(a)(3). Neither would
a change in operating conditions (e.g., an increase in the combustion
temperature) be subject to Sec.  272.72(a)(3) because operating
conditions are also not included in the Part A permit form.
    We note that sources subject to the boiler and industrial furnace
(BIF) requirements (40 CFR part 266, subpart H) under RCRA would be
required to submit revised certifications of compliance when making any
changes that could affect emissions or operating parameter limits.
However, those changes do not require prior approval of the regulatory
authority so they should not impede your compliance with the HWC MACT
standards.

VI. Revised Time Lines

    The time line labeled as Figure 1 published in the final rule at 70
FR at 59524, depicts an incorrect ``effective'' date for the Phase 1
Replacement Standards and Phase 2 Standards final rule. As a result,
all subsequent dates on the time line are also incorrect. The time line
labeled as Figure 2 published in the final rule at 70 FR at 59525
incorrectly includes the rule's effective date, as well as subsequent
dates based on the effective date. Today's notice revises both time
lines to reflect the correct dates or time frames associated with the
compliance activities for both Phase 1 and Phase 2 sources. In addition
to revising the dates, we felt it would be helpful to include the
following remarks for both Figures 1 and 2.
    With respect to figure 1, the time line is now broken into three
sections to reflect the separate requirements (i.e., different time
frames) negotiated for Phase 1 sources for the Replacement Standards.
The first section of the time line, beginning with the promulgation
date, provides compliance activities and dates applicable to both Phase
1 and Phase 2 sources. The second and third portions of the time line
represent Phase 1 and Phase 2 sources individually, beginning with the
first compliance activity that specifies a different deadline; that is,
the comprehensive performance test (CPT) plan and continuous monitoring
system (CMS) performance evaluation test plan due date.
    Note that the dates on the time line generally do not apply to
sources that elect to comply with the final standards early, as well as
to sources that have received site-specific compliance date or
performance test date extensions. Also, as a result of expanding the
time line into three sections from the previous two, we have removed
the note at the bottom of the page, identified by an asterisk that
discussed Title V requirements, to provide better visual clarity.
Rather, we have chosen to reiterate it here in this notice. Therefore,
for the activity identified as Include NOC in Title V Permit, we note
that because of the variability of the Title V program requirements,
most Title V permit actions (application due dates, revisions,
reopenings, etc.) are not included in this time line. Please refer to
the particular source's current Title V permit status, Title V
regulations, and individual permitting authority's requirements.
    Finally, the compliance activity dates that are tied to when
sources commence their performance test are identified with an
asterisk. We characterize these dates as ``no later than dates.'' This
assumes that the source commences testing on the last allowable day.
All compliance activities marked with an asterisk would therefore shift
back by the number of days the source commences testing prior to the
last allowable day. For example, if a Phase 2 source commences testing
on April 4, 2009 (versus the 14th, which is the last allowable day
without an extension), then it must submit its CPT plan and CMS
performance evaluation test plan on April 4, 2008. Also, that source
must complete its CPT by June 4, 2009 and submit its notification of
compliance no later than September 4, 2009.
    In regard to Figure 2, we have removed the dates from the time
line, since they would not be representative of a new unit's compliance
deadlines. A new unit's compliance activity deadlines are based on when
it begins operations, which is the unit's compliance date and the date
it must place a Documentation of Compliance in the operating record.
Thus, the effective date of the rule is not applicable to new units and
consequently, the Notice of Intent to Comply (NIC) provisions in
Sec. Sec.  63.1210(b)(3) and (c)(1) that specify a deadline based on
the effective date of the rule, also would not apply. Since we have
always intended that new units follow the same NIC procedures as
existing units, we have revised Sec. Sec.  63.1210(b)(3) and (c)(1) to
also include the period of time between the NIC activities so that they
correctly apply to both existing and new units. (See Section VII.C
(Clarifications to the NIC Provisions for New Units) below for
additional discussion.) The time line now reflects the period of time
that elapses between public review of the draft NIC and CPT plan, the
NIC public meeting, and the final NIC submission deadline. Aside from
the corrections

made to this time line, we would like to remind readers that the
preamble to the final rule contains a detailed discussion of the
compliance activities listed on Figure 2. See 70 FR at 59522-59523.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06SE06.000

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06SE06.001

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C

VII. Technical Corrections and Other Clarification

    We identified minor drafting errors and inadvertent omissions after
promulgation of the HWC NESHAP. In this section we are providing
advance notice of technical corrections that we plan to promulgate when
we take final action on this proposed rule. In addition, we provide
clarification of the applicability of Title V permit requirements to
Phase 2 area sources.

A. What Typographical Errors Would We Correct?

    We would revise Sec.  63.1206(a)(2)(ii)(A) to correct the cut-off
date after which a new or reconstructed source is subject to the new
source emission standards. Currently, this paragraph incorrectly
specifies October 12, 2005, which is the date the final rule was
published, instead of April 20, 2004, which is the date the proposed
rule was published. See proposed revision to Sec.
63.1206(a)(2)(ii)(A).
    We also would correct the paragraph heading to Sec.  63.1206(a)(2)
that currently refers to ``hydrogen chloride production furnaces''
instead of ``hydrochloric acid production furnaces.'' See proposed
revision to Sec.  63.1206(a)(2). In addition, we would correct a
provision that inadvertently uses incorrect terminology when referring
to emissions of ``hydrogen chloride and chlorine gas.'' See proposed
revision Sec.  63.1206(b)(16).
    We also would revise Sec.  63.1210(b) to clarify that the public
meeting and notice requirements of the notice of intent to comply (NIC)
provisions under paragraph (c) of this section do not apply to sources
that have already submitted their NIC. We would also revise Sec.
63.1210(b) to make clear that the NIC certification requirements under
Sec.  63.1212(a) likewise do not apply to sources that have already
submitted their NIC. See proposed revision to Sec.  63.1210(b).
    We also would correct the formula under Sec.  63.1215(b)(2) that is
used to calculate the annual average toxicity-weighted HCl-equivalent
emission rate for each hazardous waste combustor under the health-based
compliance alternatives for total chlorine. The formula uses
incorrectly the term ERtw instead of ERLTtw for
the annual average HCl toxicity-weighted emission rate considering
long-term exposures. See proposed revision to Sec.  63.1215(b)(2).
    We also would correct several other typographical errors in Sec.
63.1215. First, paragraph (b)(6)(ii)(C) would be revised by replacing
the word ``the se'' with ``these'' and the term ``Method 26/26a'' with
``Method 26/26A.'' Additionally, paragraph (f)(5)(ii)(A) would be
revised by replacing the word ``you'' with ``your.'' Finally, we would
revise paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(3) so that the term ``aREL'' (acute
reference exposure level) is used consistently throughout Sec.
63.1215. See proposed revisions to Sec. Sec.  63.1215(a)(2), (b)(3),
(b)(6)(ii)(C) and (f)(5)(ii)(A).
    We also would revise the total chlorine standards for existing and
new liquid fuel boilers that burn hazardous waste with an as-fired
heating value of 10,000 Btu/lb or greater by expressing the emission
standard with two significant figures. Currently, the total chlorine
standards under Sec. Sec.  63.1217(a)(6)(ii) and (b)(6)(ii) are
expressed with three significant figures. This is inconsistent with how
emission standards are expressed in the HWC NESHAP (see Sec.
63.1217(d) and 64 FR at 52848). Therefore, we would revise the total
chlorine standard from 5.08E-02 to 5.1E-02 lb combined emissions of
hydrogen chloride and chlorine gas attributable to the hazardous waste
per million Btu heat input from the hazardous waste. See proposed
revisions to Sec.  63.1217(a)(6)(ii) and (b)(6)(ii).

B. What Citations Would We Correct?

    We would revise an incorrect citation in Sec.  63.1206(b)(14)(iv)
that refers inadvertently to paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(3) instead of
(b)(14)(ii) and (iii) in Sec.  63.1206. See proposed revision to Sec.
63.1206(b)(14)(iv).
    Paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and (ii) under Sec.  63.1209 refer
inadvertently to paragraph (g)(2)(iv) instead of (g)(2)(v). We would
revise these incorrect citations. See proposed revisions to Sec. Sec.
63.1209(g)(2)(i) and (ii).
    We also would revise an incorrect citation in Sec.
63.1209(n)(2)(vii) that refers inadvertently to paragraphs (l)(1)(i)
through (iii) instead of (n)(2)(ii) through (vi). See proposed revision
to Sec.  63.1209(n)(2)(vii).
    We also would revise an incorrect citation in Sec.
63.1215(a)(1)(i). This paragraph refers inadvertently to paragraph
(b)(4) instead of (b)(7) of Sec.  63.1215. See proposed revision to
Sec.  63.1215(a)(1)(i).
    In the final rule, we amended Sec.  264.340(b) by adding a new
paragraph (b)(5) stating that the particulate matter standard under
Sec.  264.343(c) remains in effect for incinerators that elect to
comply with the alternative to the particulate matter standards under
Sec. Sec.  63.1206(b)(14) and 63.1219(e). However, the addition of
paragraph (b)(5) included a requirement that was redundant to existing
requirements under paragraph (b)(3) of that same section. We would
remove this redundancy by combining the requirements of paragraphs
(b)(3) and (b)(5) into a revised paragraph (b)(3). See proposed
revision to Sec.  264.340(b).
    We also would revise an incorrect citation in Sec.  266.100(b)(3)
that contains two subparagraphs designated as (b)(3)(ii). This revision
would redesignate the second paragraph (b)(3)(ii) as (b)(3)(iii). See
proposed revision to Sec.  266.100(b)(3).

C. Corrections to the NIC Provisions for New Units

    In the final rule, we established additional Notice of Intent to
Comply (NIC) provisions for new units to ensure that the public would
be provided opportunities to participate early in the regulatory
development process. This included providing the public with combustor-
specific information equivalent to what would be required via the RCRA
permitting process for hazardous waste combustors. Recall that we no
longer require new units to develop trial burn plans and provide
suggested conditions for the various phases of operation in their
permit applications or permit modification requests. See 70 FR at
59520. The NIC provisions for new units, located under Sec. Sec.
63.1212(b) and (c), were developed with the above in mind.
    While revising the time line for new units (see Figure 2 shown
above in Section VI (Revised Time Lines)) it became apparent that we
overlooked the fact that the final rule's effective date has no bearing
on new units. A new unit's compliance activity deadlines are based on
when it begins operations, which is the unit's compliance date and the
date it must place a Documentation of Compliance in the operating
record. Therefore, the NIC deadlines are only based upon each
individual NIC compliance activity. For example, the clock will begin
when the new unit provides the draft NIC and draft CPT plan to the
public for review. Once the draft NIC and draft CPT plan are made
available for public review, the combined public meeting must occur 30
days later, followed by the final NIC submission an additional 60 days
later. Since the public meetings for the NIC and the RCRA pre-
application or modification request must occur simultaneously, we
anticipate that the new unit will plan accordingly and work with its
permitting authorities to determine the most suitable time to begin the
NIC compliance process.
    Although the time line for new units has been corrected to remove
the effective date and the dates listed for the NIC activities, the NIC
regulatory

language in Sec.  63.1210(b)(3) and (c)(1) must be amended to also
account for new units. While the additional NIC provisions for new
units are located in Sec.  63.1212(b) and (c), they contain several
references to the core NIC provisions in Sec.  63.1210(b) and (c).
Obviously, we have always intended that new units follow the same NIC
procedures as existing units, in additionto the supplemental
requirements for new units. In developing the additional requirements
under Sec.  63.1212, we inadvertently neglected to revise Sec.
63.1210(b)(3) and (c)(1) to include a specific number of days between
NIC compliance activities in addition to the effective date. Therefore,
the NIC provisions under Sec. Sec.  63.1210(b)(3) and (c)(1) would be
revised to correctly apply to both existing and new units.
    Lastly, upon review of the regulations at Sec.  63.1212, we have
discovered that paragraph (b)(4) should have included references to
Sec.  63.1210(c)(1) and (c)(2). As discussed above, it has always been
our intent that new units follow the same NIC procedures as existing
units. However, without the proper references in Sec.  63.1212(b)(4),
the requirements of Sec.  63.1210(c)(1) and (c)(2) could be read to not
apply to new units. Section 63.1212(b)(4) would be revised to clarify
that the core NIC provisions continue to be applicable. Also, Sec.
63.1212 (b)(1) would be revised to remove ``according to'' and ``per''
and add the words ``pursuant to'' so that it is consistent with other
paragraphs in (b); and Sec.  63.1212(b)(3) would be revised to correct
a typographical error.

D. Clarification of the Applicability of Title V Permit Requirements to
Phase 2 Area Sources

    In the preamble to the final rule, we discuss the applicability of
Title V permit requirements to Phase 2 area sources (see 70 FR at
59523). For example, we note that in the 2004 proposal we stated that
we were not making a positive area source finding for Phase 2 area
sources as we have for Phase 1 area sources (69 FR at 21212 and 21325).
Regardless of this, however, we explain that Phase 2 area sources are
still subject to the requirement to obtain a Title V permit because
they are subject to section 112 standards. See section 502(a) of the
CAA and 40 CFR 70.3(b)(2) and 71.3(b)(2).
    On this same page in the final rule preamble, we further explain
that, in accordance with 40 CFR 70.3(c) and 70.5(c)(3), a Title V
permit application needs to include emissions information relative to
all regulated air pollutants that are emitted from the subject units,
not just the specific HAP pollutants regulated by the MACT standards.
However, we then say, ``Although, the permit itself would contain
standards only for the HAP subject to MACT standards (the section
112(c)(6) HAP).'' Initially this phrase was part of a longer sentence
in a draft version of the preamble and was inadvertently incorporated
into the final preamble. While the intent of the sentence was to note
that a source cannot be required to control more HAP than is regulated
by the relevant MACT standards, this sentence is not needed given that
Title V permits cannot modify applicable requirements to address
additional HAP. Moreover, this phrase is confusing given that all
applicable requirements that apply to the subject area source units,
not just the relevant MACT standard requirements, are required to be
included in the permits for these units. Lastly, this phrase is
confusing because it was included at a point in the discussion where
permit applications, not permits, were being discussed.
    Therefore, in this action, we reiterate that a Title V permit
application needs to include emissions information relative to all
regulated air pollutants that are emitted from the units subject to the
MACT standards, not just the specific HAP pollutants regulated by the
MACT standards. Additionally, all MACT standards that apply to the
subject units (e.g., subpart EEE for hazardous waste burning boilers
and subpart DDDDD for non-hazardous waste burning boilers, etc.), as
well as all other applicable requirements that apply to these subject
units, e.g., State Implementation Plan requirements, are required to be
included in the Title V permits for Phase 2 area sources.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993),
this action is a ``significant regulatory action.'' Pursuant to the
terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been determined that today's
proposed rule constitutes a ``significant regulatory action'' because
this action raises novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order. Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under EO 12866 and any
changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in
the docket for this action.
    This proposed rule is not considered to be an economically
significant action because the total social costs for this proposed
rule are significantly below the $100 million threshold established for
economically significant actions.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
because there is no additional burden on the industry as a result of
the proposed rule, and the ICR has not been revised.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (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. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impact of today's proposed rule on
small entities, a small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as
defined by the Small Business Administrations' 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; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently

owned and operated and is not dominant in the field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. EPA has
determined that none of the small entities will experience a
significant economic impact because the notice imposes no additional
regulatory requirements on owners or operators of affected sources. We
continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule
on small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such
impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory
requirements.
    EPA has determined that today's notice of reconsideration does not
contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or to the private sector in any one year. Although our best
estimate of total social costs of the final rule was $22.6 million per
year, today's notice does not add new requirements that would increase
this cost. See 70 FR at 59532. Thus, today's proposed rule is not
subject to sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. EPA has also determined
that the notice of reconsideration contains no regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments because
it contains no regulatory requirements that apply to such governments
or impose obligations upon them. Thus, today's proposed rule is not
subject to the requirements of section 203.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
    Today's proposed rule 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 rule, as
proposed, is not projected to result in economic impacts to privately
owned hazardous waste combustion facilities. Marginal administrative
burden impacts may occur at selected States and/or EPA regional offices
if these entities experience increased administrative needs or
information requests. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to
this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This notice of
reconsideration does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. No affected facilities are owned or operated by
Indian tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this notice of reconsideration.

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

    ``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: (1) is
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O.
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children.
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered
by the Agency.
    Today's proposed rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined under point one of the Order,
and because the Agency does not have reason to believe the
environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a
disproportionate risk to children.

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

    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 Fed Reg
28355 (May 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Further,
we have concluded that this rule is not likely to have any adverse
energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    As described in the October 2005 final rule, Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''),
Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use
voluntary consensus standards 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 voluntary
consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available
and applicable voluntary consensus standards. During the development of
the final rule, EPA searched for voluntary consensus standards that
might be applicable. The search identified the following consensus
standards that were considered practical alternatives to the specified
EPA test methods: (1) American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
D6735-01, ``Standard Test Method for Measurement of Gaseous Chlorides
and Fluorides from Mineral Calcining Exhaust Sources--Impinger
Method,'' and (2) American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
standard QHO-1-2004, ``Standard for the Qualification and Certification
of Hazardous Waste Incineration Operators.'' Today's notice of
reconsideration does not propose the use of any additional technical
standards beyond those cited in the final rule. Therefore, EPA is not
considering the use of any additional voluntary consensus standards for
this notice.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 264

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous waste,
Insurance, Packaging and containers, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures, Surety bonds.

40 CFR Part 266

    Environmental protection, Energy, Hazardous waste, Recycling,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 24, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSIONS STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

    1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

    2. Section 63.1203 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.1203  What are the standards for hazardous waste incinerators
that are effective until compliance with the standards under Sec.
63.1219?

* * * * *
    (e) The provisions of this section no longer apply after any of the
following dates, whichever occurs first:
    (1) The date that your source begins to comply with Sec.  63.1219
by placing a Documentation of Compliance in the operating record
pursuant to Sec.  63.1211(c);
    (2) The date that your source begins to comply with Sec.  63.1219
by submitting a Notification of Compliance pursuant to Sec.
63.1210(b); or
    (3) The date for your source to comply with Sec.  63.1219 pursuant
to Sec.  63.1206 and any extensions granted thereunder.
    3. Section 63.1204 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.1204  What are the standards for hazardous waste burning
cement kilns that are effective until compliance with the standards
under Sec.  63.1220?

* * * * *
    (i) The provisions of this section no longer apply after any of the
following dates, whichever occurs first:
    (1) The date that your source begins to comply with Sec.  63.1220
by placing a Documentation of Compliance in the operating record
pursuant to Sec.  63.1211(c);
    (2) The date that your source begins to comply with Sec.  63.1220
by submitting a Notification of Compliance pursuant to Sec.
63.1210(b); or
    (3) The date for your source to comply with Sec.  63.1220 pursuant
to Sec.  63.1206 and any extensions granted thereunder.
    4. Section 63.1205 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.1205  What are the standards for hazardous waste burning
lightweight aggregate kilns that are effective until compliance with
the standards under Sec.  63.1221?

* * * * *
    (e) The provisions of this section no longer apply after any of the
following dates, whichever occurs first:
    (1) The date that your source begins to comply with Sec.  63.1221
by placing a Documentation of Compliance in the operating record
pursuant to Sec.  63.1211(c);
    (2) The date that your source begins to comply with Sec.  63.1221
by submitting a Notification of Compliance pursuant to Sec.
63.1210(b); or
    (3) The date for your source to comply with Sec.  63.1221 pursuant
to Sec.  63.1206 and any extensions granted thereunder.
    5. Section 63.1206 is amended as follows:
    a. By revising paragraph (a)(2) paragraph heading and the first
sentence of paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A).
    b. By revising paragraphs (b)(14)(iv) and (b)(16) introductory
text.
    c. By revising paragraph (c)(9) introductory text.

Sec.  63.1206  When and how must you comply with the standards and
operating requirements?

    (a) * * *
    (2) Compliance date for solid fuel boilers, liquid fuel boilers,
and hydrochloric acid production furnaces that burn hazardous waste for
standards under Sec. Sec.  63.1216, 63.1217, and 63.1218. * * *
* * * * *
    (ii) * * * (A) If you commenced construction or reconstruction of
your hazardous waste combustor after April 20, 2004, you must comply
with the new source emission standards of this subpart by the later of
October 12, 2005, or the date the source starts operations, except as
provided by paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(B) of this section. * * *
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (14) * * *
    (iv) Operating limits. Semivolatile and low volatile metal
operating parameter limits must be established to ensure compliance
with the alternative emission limitations described in paragraphs
(b)(14)(ii) and (iii) of this section pursuant to Sec.  63.1209(n),
except that semivolatile metal feedrate limits apply to lead, cadmium,
and selenium, combined, and low volatile metal feedrate limits apply to
arsenic, beryllium, chromium, antimony, cobalt, manganese, and nickel,
combined.
* * * * *
    (16) Compliance with subcategory standards for liquid fuel boilers.
You must comply with the mercury, semivolatile metals, low volatile
metals, and hydrogen chloride and chlorine gas standards for liquid
fuel boilers under Sec.  63.1217 as follows:
    (c) * * *
    (9) Particulate matter detection system requirements. If your
combustor is equipped with an electrostatic precipitator or ionizing
wet scrubber and you elect not to establish under Sec.
63.1209(m)(1)(iv) site-specific control

device operating parameter limits that are linked to the automatic
waste feed cutoff system under paragraph (c)(3) of this section, or
your combustor is equipped with a fabric filter and you elect to use a
particulate matter detection system pursuant to paragraph (c)(8)(i)(B)
of this section, you must continuously operate a particulate matter
detection system that meets the specifications and requirements of
paragraph (c)(9)(i) through (iii) of this section and you must comply
with the corrective measures and notification requirements of
paragraphs (c)(9)(iv) through (v) of this section.
* * * * *
    6. Section 63.1207 is amended as follows:
    a. By adding paragraph (b)(3)(vi).
    b. By revising paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2), and (d)(4).
    c. By revising the first sentence of paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and
(g)(2)(ii).
    d. By revising paragraph (m).

Sec.  63.1207  What are the performance testing requirements?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (vi) Sources that are required to perform the one-time dioxin/furan
test pursuant to paragraph (b)(3) of this section are not required to
perform confirmatory performance tests.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) Comprehensive performance testing. Except as otherwise
specified in paragraph (d)(4) of this section, you must commence
testing no later than 61 months after the date of commencing the
previous comprehensive performance test used to show compliance with
Sec. Sec.  63.1216, 63.1217, 63.1218, 63.1219, 63.1220, or 63.1221. If
you submit data in lieu of the initial performance test, you must
commence the subsequent comprehensive performance test within 61 months
of commencing the test used to provide the data in lieu of the initial
performance test.
    (2) Confirmatory performance testing. Except as otherwise specified
in paragraph (d)(4) of this section, you must commence confirmatory
performance testing no later than 31 months after the date of
commencing the previous comprehensive performance test used to show
compliance with Sec. Sec.  63.1216, 63.1217, 63.1218, 63.1219, 63.1220,
or 63.1221. If you submit data in lieu of the initial performance test,
you must commence the initial confirmatory performance test within 31
months of the date six months after the compliance date. To ensure that
the confirmatory test is conducted approximately midway between
comprehensive performance tests, the Administrator will not approve a
test plan that schedules testing within 18 months of commencing the
previous comprehensive performance test.
* * * * *
    (4) Applicable testing requirements under the interim standards.
(i) Waiver of periodic comprehensive performance tests. Except as
provided by paragraph (c)(2) of this section, you must conduct only an
initial comprehensive performance test under the interim standards
(i.e., the standards published in the Federal Register on February 13,
2002); all subsequent comprehensive performance testing requirements
are waived under the interim standards. The provisions in the
introductory text to paragraph (d) and in paragraph (d)(1) of this
section apply only to tests used to demonstrate compliance with the
permanent replacement standards promulgated on or after October 12,
2005.
    (ii) Waiver of confirmatory performance tests. You are not required
to conduct a confirmatory test under the interim standards (i.e., the
standards published in the Federal Register on February 13, 2002). The
confirmatory testing requirements in the introductory text to paragraph
(d) and in paragraph (d)(2) of this section apply only after you have
demonstrated compliance with the permanent replacement standards
promulgated on or after October 12, 2005.
* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Carbon monoxide (or hydrocarbon) CEMS emissions levels must be
within the range of the average value to the maximum value allowed,
except as provided by paragraph (g)(2)(v) of this section. * * *
    (ii) Each operating limit (specified in Sec.  63.1209) established
to maintain compliance with the dioxin/furan emission standard must be
held within the range of the average value over the previous 12 months
and the maximum or minimum, as appropriate, that is allowed, except as
provided by paragraph (g)(2)(v) of this section. * * *
* * * * *
    (m) Waiver of performance test. You are not required to conduct
performance tests to document compliance with the mercury, semivolatile
metals, low volatile metals, or hydrogen chloride/chlorine gas emission
standards under the conditions specified in paragraphs (m)(1) or (m)(2)
of this section. The waiver provisions of this paragraph apply in
addition to the provisions of Sec.  63.7(h).
    (1) Emission standards based on exhaust gas flow rate. (i) You are
deemed to be in compliance with an emission standard based on the
volumetric flow rate of exhaust gas (i.e. [mu]g/dscm or ppmv) if the
twelve-hour rolling average maximum theoretical emission concentration
(MTEC) determined as specified below does not exceed the emission
standard:
    (A) Determine the feedrate of mercury, semivolatile metals, low
volatile metals, or total chlorine and chloride from all feedstreams;
    (B) Determine the stack gas flowrate; and
    (C) Calculate a MTEC for each standard assuming all mercury,
semivolatile metals, low volatile metals, or total chlorine (organic
and inorganic) from all feedstreams is emitted;
    (ii) To document compliance with this provision, you must:
    (A) Monitor and record the feedrate of mercury, semivolatile
metals, low volatile metals, and total chlorine and chloride from all
feedstreams according to Sec.  63.1209(c);
    (B) Monitor with a CMS and record in the operating record the gas
flowrate (either directly or by monitoring a surrogate parameter that
you have correlated to gas flowrate);
    (C) Continuously calculate and record in the operating record the
MTEC under the procedures of paragraph (m)(1)(i) of this section; and
    (D) Interlock the MTEC calculated in paragraph (m)(1)(i)(C) of this
section to the AWFCO system to stop hazardous waste burning when the
MTEC exceeds the emission standard.
    (iii) In lieu of the requirement in paragraphs (m)(1)(ii)(C) and
(D) of this section, you may:
    (A) Identify in the Notification of Compliance a minimum gas
flowrate limit and a maximum feedrate limit of mercury, semivolatile
metals, low volatile metals, and/or total chlorine and chloride from
all feedstreams that ensures the MTEC as calculated in paragraph
(m)(1)(i)(C) of this section is below the applicable emission standard;
and
    (B) Interlock the minimum gas flowrate limit and maximum feedrate
limit of paragraph (m)(1)(iii)(A) of this section to the AWFCO system
to stop hazardous waste burning when the gas flowrate or mercury,
semivolatile metals, low volatile metals, and/or total chlorine and
chloride feedrate exceeds the limits of paragraph (m)(1)(iii)(A) of
this section.
    (2) Emission standards based on hazardous waste thermal
concentration.

(i) You are deemed to be in compliance with an emission standard
specified on a hazardous waste thermal concentration basis (i.e.,
pounds emitted per million Btu of heat input) if the HAP thermal
concentration in the waste feed does not exceed the allowable HAP
thermal concentration emission rate.
    (ii) To document compliance with this provision, you must:
    (A) Monitor and record the feedrate of mercury, semivolatile
metals, low volatile metals, and total chlorine and chloride from all
hazardous waste feedstreams in accordance with Sec.  63.1209(c);
    (B) Determine and record the higher heating value of each hazardous
waste feed;
    (C) Continuously calculate and record the thermal feed rate of all
hazardous waste feedstreams by summing the products of each hazardous
waste feed rate multiplied by the higher heating value of that
hazardous waste;
    (D) Continuously calculate and record the total HAP thermal feed
concentration for each constituent by dividing the HAP feedrate
determined in paragraph (m)(2)(ii)(A) of this section by the thermal
feed rate determined in paragraph (m)(2)(ii)(C) of this section for all
hazardous waste feedstreams;
    (E) Interlock the HAP thermal feed concentration for each
constituent with the AWFCO to stop hazardous waste feed when the
thermal feed concentration exceeds the applicable thermal emission
standard.
    (3) When you determine the feedrate of mercury, semivolatile
metals, low volatile metals, or total chlorine and chloride for
purposes of this provision, except as provided by paragraph (m)(4) of
this section, you must assume that the analyte is present at the full
detection limit when the feedstream analysis determines that the
analyte is not detected is the feedstream.
    (4) Owners and operators of hazardous waste burning cement kilns
and lightweight aggregate kilns may assume that mercury is present in
raw material at half the detection limit when the raw material
feedstream analysis determines that mercury is not detected.
    (5) You must state in the site-specific test plan that you submit
for review and approval under paragraph (e) of this section that you
intend to comply with the provisions of this paragraph. You must
include in the test plan documentation that any surrogate that is
proposed for gas flowrate adequately correlates with the gas flowrate.
    7. Section 63.1209 is amended as follows:
    a. By revising paragraphs (l)(1)(iii)(B), (l)(1)(iii)(C)
introductory text, (l)(1)(iii)(D)(1), and (l)(1)(iii)(D)(2).
    b. By revising paragraphs (n)(2)(iii)(A), (n)(2)(v)(A)(2)(iv),
(n)(2)(v)(B)(1)(i), (n)(2)(v)(B)(1)(ii), (n)(2)(v)(B)(2), and the first
sentence of paragraph (n)(2)(vii) introductory text.
    c. By revising paragraph (o)(1)(ii)(A)(3).

Sec.  63.1209  What are the monitoring requirements?

* * * * *
    (l) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (B) When complying with the emission standards under Sec. Sec.
63.1204 and 63.1220(a)(2)(ii)(A) and (b)(2)(ii)(A), you must establish
a 12-hour rolling average limit for the feedrate of mercury in all
feedstreams as the average of the test run averages;
    (C) Except as provided by paragraph (l)(1)(iii)(D) of this section,
when complying with the hazardous waste maximum theoretical emission
concentration (MTEC) under Sec.  63.1220(a)(2)(ii)(B) and
(b)(2)(ii)(B), you must:
* * * * *
    (D) * * *
    (1) Identify in the Notification of Compliance a minimum gas
flowrate limit and a maximum feedrate limit of mercury from all
hazardous waste feedstreams that ensures the MTEC calculated in
paragraph (l)(1)(iii)(C)(4) of this section is below the operating
requirement under paragraphs Sec. Sec.  63.1220(a)(2)(ii)(B) and
(b)(2)(ii)(B); and
    (2) Initiate an automatic waste feed cutoff that immediately and
automatically cuts off the hazardous waste feed when either the gas
flowrate or mercury feedrate exceeds the limits identified in paragraph
(l)(1)(iii)(D)(1) of this section.
* * * * *
    (n) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) * * * (A) When complying with the emission standards under
Sec.  63.1220(a)(3)(i), (a)(4)(i), (b)(3)(i), and (b)(4)(i), you must
establish 12-hour rolling average feedrate limits for semivolatile and
low volatile metals as the thermal concentration of semivolatile metals
or low volatile metals in all hazardous waste feedstreams. You must
calculate hazardous waste thermal concentrations for semivolatile
metals and low volatile metals for each run as the total mass feedrate
of semivolatile metals or low volatile metals for all hazardous waste
feedstreams divided by the total heat input rate for all hazardous
waste feedstreams. The 12-hour rolling average feedrate limits for
semivolatile metals and low volatile metals are the average of the test
run averages, calculated on a thermal concentration basis, for all
hazardous waste feeds.
* * * * *
    (v) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) If you select an averaging period for the feedrate limit that
is greater than a 12-hour rolling average, you must calculate the
initial rolling average as though you had selected a 12-hour rolling
average, as provided by paragraph (b)(5)(i) of this section.
Thereafter, you must calculate rolling averages using either one-minute
or one-hour updates. Hourly updates shall be calculated using the
average of the one-minute average data for the preceding hour. For the
period beginning with initial operation under this standard until the
source has operated for the full averaging period that you select, the
average feedrate shall be based only on actual operation under this
standard.
* * * * *
    (B) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) The 12-hour rolling average feedrate limit is a hazardous waste
thermal concentration limit expressed as pounds of chromium in all
hazardous waste feedstreams per million Btu of hazardous waste fed to
the boiler. You must establish the 12-hour rolling average feedrate
limit as the average of the test run averages.
    (ii) You must comply with the hazardous waste chromium thermal
concentration limit by determining the feedrate of chromium in all
hazardous waste feedstreams (lb/hr) and the hazardous waste thermal
feedrate (MMBtu/hr) at least once each minute as [hazardous waste
chromium feedrate (lb/hr)/hazardous waste thermal feedrate (MMBtu/hr)].
    (2) Boilers that feed hazardous waste with a heating value less
than 10,000 Btu/lb. You must establish a 12-hour rolling average limit
for the total feedrate (lb/hr) of chromium in all feedstreams as the
average of the test run averages.
* * * * *
    (vii) Extrapolation of feedrate levels. In lieu of establishing
feedrate limits as specified in paragraphs (n)(2)(ii) through (vi) of
this section, you may request as part of the performance test plan
under Sec. Sec.  63.7(b) and (c) and Sec. Sec.  63.1207(e) and (f) to
use the semivolatile metal and low volatile metal feedrates and
associated emission

rates during the comprehensive performance test to extrapolate to
higher allowable feedrate limits and emission rates. * * *
* * * * *
    (o) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (3) You must comply with the feedrate limit by determining the mass
feedrate of hazardous waste feedstreams (lb/hr) at least once a minute
and by knowing the chlorine content (organic and inorganic, lb of
chlorine/lb of hazardous waste) and heating value (Btu/lb) of hazardous
waste feedstreams at all times to calculate a 1-minute average feedrate
measurement as [hazardous waste chlorine content (lb of chlorine/lb of
hazardous waste feed)/hazardous waste heating value (Btu/lb of
hazardous waste)]. You must update the rolling average feedrate each
hour with this 60-minute average feedrate measurement.
* * * * *
    8. Section 63.1210 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)
introductory text, (b)(3), and (c)(1) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.1210  What are the notification requirements?

* * * * *
    (b) Notification of intent to comply (NIC). These procedures apply
to sources that have not previously complied with the requirements of
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, and to sources that previously
complied with the NIC requirements of Sec. Sec.  63.1210 and
63.1212(a), which were in effect prior to October 11, 2000, that must
make a technology change requiring a Class 1 permit modification to
meet the standards of Sec. Sec.  63.1219, 63.1220, and 63.1221.
* * * * *
    (3) You must submit the final NIC to the Administrator no later
than one year following the effective date of the emission standards of
this subpart or 60 days following the informal public meeting.
    (c) * * * (1) Prior to the submission of the NIC to the permitting
agency, and no later than 10 months after the effective date of the
emission standards of this subpart or 30 days following notice of the
informal public meeting, you must hold at least one informal meeting
with the public to discuss the anticipated activities described in the
draft NIC for achieving compliance with the emission standards of this
subpart. You must post a sign-in sheet or otherwise provide a voluntary
opportunity for attendees to provide their names and addresses.
* * * * *
    9. Section 63.1212 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1),
(b)(3), and (b)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.1212  What are the other requirements pertaining to the NIC?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Prepare a draft NIC pursuant to Sec.  63.1210(b) and make it
available to the public upon issuance of the notice of public meeting
pursuant to Sec.  63.1210(c)(3);
* * * * *
    (3) Provide notice to the public of a pre-application meeting
pursuant to Sec.  124.30 of this chapter or notice to the public of a
permit modification request pursuant to Sec.  270.42 of this chapter;
and
    (4) Hold an informal public meeting, pursuant to Sec. Sec.
63.1210(c)(1) and (c)(2), 30 days following notice of the NIC public
meeting and notice of the pre-application meeting or notice of the
permit modification request to discuss anticipated activities described
in the draft NIC and pre-application or permit modification request for
achieving compliance with the emission standards of this subpart.
* * * * *
    10. Section 63.1215 is amended as follows:
    a. By revising paragraph (a)(1)(i).
    b. By revising the definitions of ``1-Hour Average HCl-Equivalent
Emission Rate'' and ``1-Hour Average HCl-Equivalent Emission Rate
Limit'' in paragraph (a)(2).
    c. By revising paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), and (b)(6)(ii)(C).
    d. By revising paragraphs (e)(2)(i)(B), (e)(2)(i)(C), and
(e)(2)(i)(D).
    e. By adding paragraph (e)(3).
    f. By revising paragraph (f)(5)(ii)(A).
    g. By revising paragraph (h)(2)(i).

Sec.  63.1215  What are health-based compliance alternatives for total
chlorine?

    (a) * * *
    (1)
    (i) Identify a total chlorine emission concentration (ppmv)
expressed as chloride (Cl(-)) equivalent for each on-site hazardous
waste combustor. You may select total chlorine emission concentrations
as you choose to demonstrate eligibility for the risk-based limits
under this section, except as provided by paragraph (b)(7) of this
section;
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    1-Hour Average HCl-Equivalent Emission Rate means the HCl-
equivalent emission rate (lb/hr) determined by equating the toxicity of
chlorine to HCl using aRELs as the health risk metric for acute
exposure.
    1-Hour Average HCl-Equivalent Emission Rate Limit means the HCl-
equivalent emission rate (lb/hr) determined by equating the toxicity of
chlorine to HCl using aRELs as the health risk metric for acute
exposure and which ensures that maximum 1-hour average ambient
concentrations of HCl-equivalents do not exceed a Hazard Index of 1.0,
rounded to the nearest tenths decimal place (0.1), at an off-site
receptor location.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Annual average rates. You must calculate annual average
toxicity-weighted HCl-equivalent emission rates for each combustor as
follows:

ERLTtw = ERHCl + ERCl2 x
(RfCHCl/RfCCl2)

Where:

ERLTtw is the annual average HCl toxicity-weighted emission
rate (HCl-equivalent emission rate) considering long-term exposures,
lb/hr
ERHCl is the emission rate of HCl in lbs/hr
ERCl2 is the emission rate of chlorine in lbs/hr
RfCHCl is the reference concentration of HCl
RfCCl2 is the reference concentration of chlorine
    (3) 1-hour average rates. You must calculate 1-hour average
toxicity-weighted HCl-equivalent emission rates for each combustor as
follows:
ERSTtw = ERHCl + ERCl2 x
(aRELHCl/aRELCl2)

Where:

ERSTtw is the 1-hour average HCl-toxicity-weighted emission
rate (HCl-equivalent emission rate) considering 1-hour (short-term)
exposures, lb/hr
ERHCl is the emission rate of HCl in lbs/hr
ERCl2 is the emission rate of chlorine in lbs/hr
aRELHCl is the aREL for HCl
aRELCl2 is the aREL for chlorine
* * * * *
    (6) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (C) You must calculate the 1-hour average HCl-equivalent emission
rate using these HCl and Cl2 emission rates and the equation
in paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) * * *

    (B) Your permitting authority should notify you of approval or
intent to disapprove your eligibility demonstration within 6 months
after receipt of the original demonstration, and within 3 months after
receipt of any supplemental information that you submit. A notice of
intent to disapprove your eligibility demonstration, whether before or
after the compliance date, will identify incomplete or inaccurate
information or noncompliance with prescribed procedures and specify how
much time you will have to submit additional information or to achieve
the MACT standards for total chlorine under Sec. Sec.  63.1216,
63.1217, 63.1219, 63.1220, and 63.1221. If your eligibility
demonstration is disapproved, the permitting authority may extend the
compliance date of the total chlorine standards up to one year to allow
you to make changes to the design or operation of the combustor or
related systems as quickly as practicable to enable you to achieve
compliance with the MACT total chlorine standards.
    (C) If your permitting authority has not approved your eligibility
demonstration by the compliance date, and has not issued a notice of
intent to disapprove your demonstration, you may begin complying, on
the compliance date, with the HCl-equivalent emission rate limits you
present in your eligibility demonstration provided that you have made a
good faith effort to provide complete and accurate information and to
respond to any requests for additional information in a timely manner.
If the permitting authority believes that you have not made a good
faith effort to provide complete and accurate information or to respond
to any requests for additional information, however, the authority may
notify you in writing by the compliance date that you have not met the
conditions for complying with the health-based compliance alternative
without prior approval. Such notice will explain the basis for
concluding that you have not made a good faith effort to comply with
the health-based compliance alternative by the compliance date.
    (D) If your permitting authority issues a notice of intent to
disapprove your eligibility demonstration after the compliance date,
the authority will identify the basis for that notice and specify how
much time you will have to submit additional information or to comply
with the MACT standards for total chlorine under Sec. Sec.  63.1216,
63.1217, 63.1219, 63.1220, and 63.1221. The permitting authority may
extend the compliance date of the total chlorine standards up to one-
year to allow you to make changes to the design or operation of the
combustor or related systems as quickly as practicable to enable you to
achieve compliance with the MACT standards for total chlorine.
* * * * *
    (3) The operating requirements in the eligibility demonstration are
applicable requirements for purposes of parts 70 and 71 of this chapter
and will be incorporated in the title V permit.
    (f) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) You must determine your chlorine emissions to be the higher of
the value measured by Method 26/26A, or an equivalent method, or the
value calculated by the difference between the combined hydrogen
chloride and chlorine levels measured by Method 26/26A, or an
equivalent method, and the hydrogen chloride measurement from EPA
Method 320/321 or ASTM D 6735-01, or an equivalent method.
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Proactive review. You must submit for review and approval with
each comprehensive performance test plan either a certification that
the information used in your eligibility demonstration has not changed
in a manner that would decrease the annual average or 1-hour average
HCl-equivalent emission rate limit, or a revised eligibility
demonstration.
* * * * *
    11. Section 63.1216 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(7) to read
as follows:

Sec.  63.1216  What are the standards for solid fuel boilers that burn
hazardous waste?

    (a) * * *
    (7) For particulate matter, except for an area source as defined
under Sec.  63.2 or as provided by paragraph (e) of this section,
emissions in excess of 69 mg/dscm corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
* * * * *
    12. Section 63.1217 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(6)(ii),
(a)(7), and (b)(6)(ii) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.1217  What are the standards for liquid fuel boilers that burn
hazardous waste?

    (a) * * *
    (6) * * *
    (ii) When you burn hazardous waste with an as-fired heating value
of 10,000 Btu/lb or greater, emissions in excess of 5.1 x 10
-\2\ lbs combined emissions of hydrogen chloride and
chlorine gas attributable to the hazardous waste per million Btu heat
input from the hazardous waste;
    (7) For particulate matter, except for an area source as defined
under Sec.  63.2 or as provided by paragraph (e) of this section,
emissions in excess of 79 mg/dscm corrected to 7 percent oxygen.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (6) * * *
    (ii) When you burn hazardous waste with an as-fired heating value
of 10,000 Btu/lb or greater, emissions in excess of 5.1 x 10
-2 lbs combined emissions of hydrogen chloride and chlorine
gas attributable to the hazardous waste per million Btu heat input from
the hazardous waste;
* * * * *
    13. Section 63.1219 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(7) and
(b)(7) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.1219  What are the replacement standards for hazardous waste
incinerators?

    (a) * * *
    (7) Except as provided by paragraph (e) of this section,
particulate matter in excess of 30 mg/dscm corrected to 7 percent
oxygen.
    (b) * * *
    (7) Except as provided by paragraph (e) of this section,
particulate matter in excess of 3.5 mg/dscm corrected to 7 percent
oxygen.
* * * * *
    14. Section 63.1220 is amended as follows:
    a. By revising paragraphs (a)(2)(ii) and (a)(7)(i).
    b. By revising paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (b)(7)(i).

Sec.  63.1220  What are the replacement standards for hazardous waste
burning cement kilns?

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) Either:
    (A) Emissions in excess of 120 [mu]g/dscm, corrected to 7 percent
oxygen, or
    (B) A hazardous waste feed maximum theoretical emission
concentration (MTEC) in excess of 120 [mu]g/dscm;
* * * * *
    (7) * * *
    (i) Emissions in excess of 65 mg/dscm corrected to 7 percent
oxygen; and
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) Either:
    (A) Emissions in excess of 120 [mu]g/dscm, corrected to 7 percent
oxygen, or
    (B) A hazardous waste feed maximum theoretical emission
concentration (MTEC) in excess of 120 [mu]g/dscm;
* * * * *
    (7) * * *

    (i) Emissions in excess of 5.3 mg/dscm corrected to 7 percent
oxygen; and
* * * * *
    15. Section 63.1221 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(7) and
(b)(7) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.1221  What are the replacement standards for hazardous waste
burning lightweight aggregate kilns?

    (a) * * *
    (7) Particulate matter emissions in excess of 57 mg/dscm corrected
to 7 percent oxygen.
    (b) * * *
    (7) Particulate matter emissions in excess of 22 mg/dscm corrected
to 7 percent oxygen.
* * * * *

PART 264--STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE
TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES

    16. The authority citation for part 264 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6905, 6912(a), 6924, and 6925.

    17. Section 264.340 is amended as follows:
    a. By revising the first sentence of paragraph (b)(1) and paragraph
(b)(3).
    b. By removing paragraph (b)(5).

Sec.  264.340  Applicability.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * (1) Except as provided by paragraphs (b)(2) through
(b)(4) of this section, the standards of this part do not apply to a
new hazardous waste incineration unit that becomes subject to RCRA
permit requirements after October 12, 2005; or no longer apply when an
owner or operator of an existing hazardous waste incineration unit
demonstrates compliance with the maximum achievable control technology
(MACT) requirements of part 63, subpart EEE, of this chapter by
conducting a comprehensive performance test and submitting to the
Administrator a Notification of Compliance under Sec. Sec.  63.1207(j)
and 63.1210(d) of this chapter documenting compliance with the
requirements of part 63, subpart EEE, of this chapter. * * *
* * * * *
    (3) The particulate matter standard of Sec.  264.343(c) remains in
effect for incinerators that elect to comply with the alternative to
the particulate matter standard under Sec. Sec.  63.1206(b)(14) and
63.1219(e) of this chapter.
* * * * *

PART 266--STANDARDS FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF SPECIFIC HAZARDOUS WASTES
AND SPECIFIC TYPES OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES

    18. The authority citation for part 266 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1006, 2002(a), 3001-3009, 3014, 6905, 6906,
6912, 6921, 6922, 6924-6927, 6934, and 6937.

    19. Section 266.100 is amended by redesignating the second
paragraph (b)(3)(ii) as (b)(3)(iii).

Sec.  266.100  [Amended]

[FR Doc. 06-7251 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


P-20-0170-0172 Sanitized Support Documents Index:
 P-20-0170-0172 Sanitized Determination Document (linked)
 P-20-0170 Sanitized CHEM Report (attached)
 P-20-0171 Sanitized CHEM Report (attached)
 P-20-0172 Sanitized CHEM Report (attached)
 P-20-0170 Sanitized ECO Report (attached)
 P-20-0171 Sanitized ECO Report (attached)
 P-20-0172 Sanitized ECO Report (attached)
 P-20-0170-0172 Sanitized ENG Report (attached)
 P-20-0170 Sanitized EXP Report (attached)
 P-20-0171 Sanitized EXP Report (attached)
 P-20-0172 Sanitized EXP Report (attached)
 P-20-0170 Sanitized Fate Report (attached)
 P-20-0171 Sanitized Fate Report (attached)
 P-20-0172 Sanitized Fate Report (attached)
 P-20-0170-0172 Sanitized HLTH Report_POST-FOCUS FINAL (attached)