Federal Register: October 12, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 196)

DOCID: FR Doc 05-18824

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Western Area Power Administration

CFR Citation: 40 CFR Parts 9, 63, 260, 264, 265, 266, 270 and 271

RIN ID: RIN 2050-AE01

FRL ID: [FRL-7971-8]

NOTICE: Part II

DOCUMENT ACTION: Final rule.

SUBJECT CATEGORY:

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Final Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Hazardous Waste Combustors (Phase I Final Replacement Standards and Phase II)

DATES: The final rule is effective December 12, 2005. The incorporation by reference of Method 0023A into Sec. 63.14 is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of December 12, 2005.

DOCUMENT SUMMARY:

This action finalizes national emission standards (NESHAP) for hazardous air pollutants for hazardous waste combustors (HWCs): hazardous waste burning incinerators, cement kilns, lightweight aggregate kilns, industrial/commercial/institutional boilers and process heaters, and hydrochloric acid production furnaces. EPA has identified HWCs as major sources of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions. These standards implement section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by requiring hazardous waste combustors to meet HAP emission standards reflecting the performance of the maximum achievable control technology (MACT).

The HAP emitted by HWCs include arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, dioxins and furans, hydrogen chloride and chlorine gas, lead, manganese, and mercury. Exposure to these substances has been demonstrated to cause adverse health effects such as irritation to the lung, skin, and mucus membranes, effects on the central nervous system, kidney damage, and cancer. The adverse health effects associated with exposure to these specific HAP are further described in the preamble. For many HAP, these findings have only been shown with concentrations higher than those typically in the ambient air.

This action also presents our decision regarding the February 28, 2002 petition for rulemaking submitted by the Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition, relating to EPA's implementation of the socalled omnibus permitting authority under section 3005(c) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). That section requires that each permit issued under RCRA contain such terms and conditions as permit writers determine to be necessary to protect human health and the environment. In that petition, the Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition requested that we repeal the existing sitespecific risk assessment policy and technical guidance for hazardous waste combustors and that we promulgate the policy and guidance as rules in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act if we continue to believe that sitespecific risk assessments may be necessary.

SUMMARY:

Environmental Protection Agency,

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Regulated Entities

The promulgation of the final rule would affect the following North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) and Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes:
Examples of potentially Category NAICS code SIC code regulated entities Any industry that combusts hazardous
waste as defined in the final rule.
562211 4953 Incinerator, hazardous waste 327310 3241 Cement manufacturing, clinker production 327992 3295 Ground or treated mineral and earth manufacturing 325 28 Chemical Manufacturers 324 29 Petroleum Refiners 331 33 Primary Aluminum 333 38 Photographic equipment and supplies 488, 561, 562 49 Sanitary Services, N.E.C. 421 50 Scrap and waste materials 422 51 Chemical and Allied Products, N.E.C 512, 541, 561, 812 73 Business Services, N.E.C. 512, 514, 541, 711 89 Services, N.E.C. 924 95 Air, Water and Solid Waste Management

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. This table lists examples of the types of entities EPA is now aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed could also be affected. To determine whether your facility, company, business, organization, etc., is regulated by this action, you should examine the applicability criteria in Part II of this preamble. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in This Document
acfm actual cubic feet per minute
Btu British thermal units
CAA Clean Air Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DRE destruction and removal efficiency
dscf dry standard cubic foot
dscm dry standard cubic meter
[[Page 59403]]
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FR Federal Register
gr/dscf grains per dry standard cubic foot
HAP hazardous air pollutant(s)
ICR Information Collection Request
kg/hr kilograms per hour
kWhour kilo Watt hour
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology
mg/dscm milligrams per dry standard cubic meter
MMBtu million British thermal unit
ng/dscm nanograms per dry standard cubic meter
NESHAP national emission standards for HAP
ng nanograms
POHC principal organic hazardous constituent
ppmv parts per million by volume
ppmw parts per million by weight
Pub. L. Public Law
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SRE system removal efficiency
TEQ toxicity equivalence
[mu]g/dscm micrograms per dry standard cubic meter
U.S.C. United States Code
Table of Contents
Part One: Background and Summary
I. What Is the Statutory Authority for this Standard?
II. What Is the Regulatory Development Background of the Source Categories in the Final Rule?

A. Phase I Source Categories

B. Phase II Source Categories
III. How Was the Final Rule Developed?
IV. What Is the Relationship Between the Final Rule and Other MACT Combustion Rules?
V. What Are the Health Effects Associated with Pollutants Emitted by Hazardous Waste Combustors?
Part Two: Summary of the Final Rule
I. What Source Categories and Subcategories Are Affected by the Final Rule?
II. What Are the Affected Sources and Emission Points?
III. What Pollutants Are Emitted and Controlled?
IV. Does the Final Rule Apply to Me?
V. What Are the Emission Limitations?
VI. What Are the Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements?

A. Compliance Dates

B. Testing Requirements

C. Initial Compliance Requirements
VII. What Are the Continuous Compliance Requirements?
VIII. What Are the Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements?
IX. What Is the HealthBased Compliance Alternative for Total Chlorine, and How Do I Demonstrate Eligibility?

A. Overview

B. HClEquivalent Emission Rates

C. Eligibility Demonstration

D. Assurance that the 1Hour HClEquivalent Emission Rate Will Not Be Exceeded

E. Review and Approval of Eligibility Demonstrations

F. Testing Requirements

G. Monitoring Requirements

H. Relationship Among Emission Rates, Emission Rate Limits, and Feedrate Limits

I. Changes
X. Overview on Floor Methodologies
Part Three: What Are the Major Changes Since Proposal?
I. Database

A. Hazardous Burning Incinerators

B. Hazardous Waste Cement Kilns

C. Hazardous Waste Lightweight Aggregate Kilns

D. Liquid Fuel Boilers

E. HCl Production Furnaces

F. Total Chlorine Emissions Data Below 20 ppmv
II. Emission Limits

A. Incinerators

B. Hazardous Waste Burning Cement Kilns

C. Hazardous Waste Burning Lightweight Aggregate Kilns

D. Solid Fuel Boilers

E. Liquid Fuel Boilers

F. Hydrochloric Acid Production Furnaces

G. Dioxin/Furan Testing for Sources Not Subject to a Numerical Standard

III. Statistics and Variability

A. Using Statistical Imputation to Address Variability of Nondetect Values

B. Degrees of Freedom when Imputing a Standard Deviation Using the Universal Variability Factor for Particulate Matter Controlled by a Fabric Filter
IV. Compliance Assurance for Fabric Filters, Electrostatic Precipitators, and Ionizing Wet Scrubbers
V. HealthBased Compliance Alternative for Total Chlorine
Part Four: What Are the Responses to Major Comments?

I. Database

A. Revisions to the EPA's Hazardous Waste Combustor Data Base

B. Use of Data from Recently Upgraded Sources

C. Correction of Total Chlorine Data to Address Potential Bias in Stack Measurement Method

D. Mercury Data for Cement Kilns

E. Mercury Data for Lightweight Aggregate Kilns

F. Incinerator Database

II. Affected Sources

A. Area Source Boilers and Hydrochloric Acid Production Furnaces

B. Boilers Eligible for the RCRA Low Risk Waste Exemption

C. Mobile Incinerators
III. Floor Approaches

A. Variability

B. SRE/Feed Methdology

C. Air Pollution Control Technology Methodologies for the Particulate Matter Standard and for the Total Chlorine Standard for Hydrochloric Acid Production Furnaces

D. Format of Standards

E. Standards Can Be No Less Stringent Than the Interim Standards

F. How Can EPA's Approach to Assessing Variability and its Ranking Methodologies be Reasonable when they Result in Standards Higher than the Interim Standards?

IV. Use of Surrogates

A. Particulate Matter as Surrogate for Metal HAP

B. Carbon Monoxide/Hydrocarbons and DRE as Surrogates for Dioxin/Furan

C. Use of Carbon Monoxide and Total Hydrocarbons as Surrogate for NonDioxin Organic HAP
V. Additional Issues Relating to Variability and Statistics

A. Data Sets Containing Nondetects

B. Using Statistical Imputation to Address Variability of Nondetect Values

C. Analysis of Variance Procedures to Assess Subcategorization VI. Emission Standards

A. Incinerators

B. Cement Kilns

C. Lightweight Aggregate Kilns

D. Liquid Fuel Boilers

E. General

VII. HealthBased Compliance Alternative for Total Chlorine

A. Authority for HealthBased Compliance Alternatives

B. Implementation of the HealthBased Standards

C. National HealthBased Standards for Cement Kilns. VIII. Implementation and Compliance

A. Compliance Assurance Issues for both Fabric Filters and Electrostatic Precipitators (and Ionizing Wet Scrubbers)

B. Compliance Assurance Issues for Fabric Filters

C. Compliance Issues for Electrostatic Precipitators and Ionizing Wet Scrubbers

D. Fugitive Emissions

E. Notification of Intent to Comply and Compliance Progress Report

F. Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction Plan

G. Public Notice of Test Plans

H. Using Method 23 Instead of Method 0023A

I. Extrapolating Feedrate Limits for Compliance with the Liquid Fuel Boiler Mercury and Semivolatile Metal Standards

J. Temporary Compliance with Alternative, Otherwise Applicable MACT Standards

K. Periodic DRE Testing and Limits on Minimum Combustion Chamber Temperature for Cement Kilns

L. One Time Dioxin and Furan Test for Sources Not Subject to a Numerical Limit for Dioxin and Furan

M. Miscellaneous Compliance Issues

IX. SiteSpecific Risk Assessment under RCRA

A. What Is the SiteSpecific Risk Assessment Policy?

B. Why Might SSRAs Continue To Be Necessary for Sources Complying With Phase 1 Replacement Standards and Phase 2 Standards?

C. What Changes Are EPA Finalizing With Respect To the Site Specific Risk Assessment Policy?

D. How Will the New SSRA Regulatory Provisions Work?

E. What Were Commenters' Reactions to EPA's Proposed Decision Not to Provide National Criteria for Determining When an SSRA Is or Is Not Necessary?

[[Page 59404]]

F. What Are EPA's Responses to the Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition's Comments on the Proposal and What is EPA's Final Decision on CKRC's Petition?

X. Permitting

A. What is the Statutory Authority for the RCRA Requirements Discussed in this Section?

B. Did Commenters Express any Concerns Regarding the Current Permitting Requirements?

C. Are There Any Changes to the Proposed Class 1 Permit Modification Procedure?

D. What Permitting Approach Is EPA Finalizing for New Units?

E. What Other Permitting Requirements Were Discussed In the Proposal?
Part Five: What Are the CAA Delegation Clarifications and RCRA State Authorization Requirements?
I. Authority for this Rule.
II. CAA Delegation Authority.
III. Clarifications to CAA Delegation Provisions for Subpart EEE.

A. Alternatives to Requirements.

B. Alternatives to Test Methods.

C. Alternatives to Monitoring.

D. Alternatives to Recordkeeping and Reporting.

E. Other Delegation Provisions
IV. RCRA State Authorization and Amendments To the RCRA Regulations. Part Six: Impacts of the Final Rule
I. What Are the Air Impacts?
II. What Are the Water and Solid Waste Impacts?
III. What Are the Energy Impacts?
IV. What Are the Control Costs?
V. What Are the Economic Impacts?

A. Market Exit Estimates

B. Waste Reallocations
VI. What Are the Social Costs and Benefits of the Final Rule?

A. Combustion Market Overview

B. Baseline Specification

C. Analytical Methodology and FindingsSocial Cost Analysis

D. Analytical Methodology and FindingsBenefits Assessment Part Seven: How Does the Final Rule Meet the RCRA Protectiveness Mandate?
I. Background
II. Evaluation of Protectiveness
Part Eight: Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
II. Paperwork Reduction Act
III. Regulatory Flexibility Act
IV. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
V. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
VI. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
VII. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
VIII. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
IX. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
X. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and LowIncome Populations
XI. Congressional Review
Part One: Background and Summary

I. What Is the Statutory Authority for This Standard?

Section 112 of the Clean Air Act requires that the EPA promulgate regulations requiring the control of HAP emissions from major and certain area sources. The control of HAP is achieved through promulgation of emission standards under sections 112(d) and (in a second round of standard setting) (f).

EPA's initial list of categories of major and area sources of HAP selected for regulation in accordance with section 112(c) of the Act was published in the Federal Register on July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576). Hazardous waste incinerators, Portland cement plants, clay products manufacturing (including lightweight aggregate kilns), industrial/ commercial/institutional boilers and process heaters, and hydrochloric acid production furnaces are among the listed 174 categories of sources. The listing was based on the Administrator's determination that these sources may reasonably be anticipated to emit one or more of the 186 listed HAP in quantities sufficient to designate them as major sources.
II. What Is the Regulatory Development Background of the Source Categories in the Final Rule?

Today's notice finalizes standards for controlling emissions of HAP from hazardous waste combustors: incinerators, cement kilns, lightweight aggregate kilns, boilers, process heaters \1\, and hydrochloric acid production furnaces that burn hazardous waste. We call incinerators, cement kilns, and lightweight aggregate kilns Phase I sources because we have already promulgated standards for those source categories. We call boilers and hydrochloric acid production furnaces Phase II sources because we intended to promulgate MACT standards for those source categories after promulgating MACT standards for Phase I sources. The regulatory background of Phase I and Phase II source categories is discussed below.
\1\ A process heater meets the RCRA definition of a boiler. Therefore, process heaters that burn hazardous wastes are covered under subpart EEE as boilers, and are discussed as such in subsequent parts of the preamble.

A. Phase I Source Categories

Phase I combustor sources are regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which establishes a ``cradleto grave'' regulatory structure overseeing the safe treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. We issued RCRA rules to control air emissions from hazardous waste burning incinerators in 1981, 40 CFR Parts 264 and 265, Subpart O, and from cement kilns and lightweight aggregate kilns that burn hazardous waste in 1991, 40 CFR Part 266, Subpart H. These rules rely generally on riskbased standards to assure control necessary to protect human health and the environment, the applicable RCRA standard. See RCRA section 3004 (a) and (q).

The Phase I source categories also are subject to standards under the Clean Air Act. We promulgated standards for Phase I sources on September 30, 1999 (64 FR 52828). This final rule is referred to in this preamble as the Phase I rule or 1999 final rule. These emission standards created a technologybased national cap for hazardous air pollutant emissions from the combustion of hazardous waste in these devices. The rule regulates emissions of numerous hazardous air pollutants: dioxin/furans, other toxic organics (through surrogates), mercury, other toxic metals (both directly and through a surrogate), and hydrogen chloride and chlorine gas. Where necessary, Section 3005(c)(3) of RCRA provides the authority to impose additional conditions on a sourcebysource basis in a RCRA permit if necessary to protect human health and the environment.

A number of parties, representing interests of both industrial sources and of the environmental community, sought judicial review of the Phase I rule. On July 24, 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit granted portions of the Sierra Club's petition for review and vacated the challenged portions of the standards. Cement Kiln Recycling Coalition v. EPA, 255 F. 3d 855 (D.C. Cir. 2001). The court held that EPA had not demonstrated that its calculation of MACT floors met the statutory requirement of being no less stringent than (1) the average emission limitation achieved by the best performing 12 percent of existing sources and, for new sources, (2) the emission control achieved in practice by the best controlled similar source for new sources. 255 F.3d at 861, 86566. As a remedy, the court, after declining to rule on most of the issues presented in the industry petitions for review, vacated the ``challenged regulations,'' stating that: ``[W]e have chosen not to reach the bulk of industry petitioners' claims, and leaving the regulations in place during remand would ignore petitioners' potentially meritorious challenges.'' Id.
[[Page 59405]]
at 872. Examples of the specific challenges the Court indicated might have merit were provisions relating to compliance during start up/shut down and malfunction events, including emergency safety vent openings, the dioxin/furan standard for lightweight aggregate kilns, and the semivolatile metal standard for cement kilns. Id. However, the Court stated, ``[b]ecause this decision leaves EPA without standards regulating [hazardous waste combustor] emissions, EPA (or any of the parties to this proceeding) may file a motion to delay issuance of the mandate to request either that the current standards remain in place or that EPA be allowed reasonable time to develop interim standards.'' Id.

Acting on this invitation, all parties moved the Court jointly to stay the issuance of its mandate for four months to allow EPA time to develop interim standards, which would replace the vacated standards temporarily, until final standards consistent with the Court's mandate are promulgated. The interim standards were published on February 13, 2002 (67 FR 6792). EPA did not justify or characterize these standards as conforming to MACT, but rather as an interim measure to prevent adverse consequences that would result from the regulatory gap resulting from no standards being in place. Id. at 6793, 679596; see also 69 FR at 21217 (April 20, 2004). EPA also entered into a settlement agreement, enforceable by the Court of Appeals, to issue final standard conforming to the Court's mandate by June 14, 2005. That date has since been extended to September 14, 2005.

B. Phase II Source Categories

Phase II combustorsboilers and hydrochloric acid production furnacesare also regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) pursuant to 40 CFR Part 266, Subpart H, and (for reasons discussed below) are also subject to the MACT standard setting process in section 112(d) of the CAA. We delayed promulgating MACT standards for these source categories pending reevaluation of the MACT standardsetting methodology following the Court's decision to vacate the standards for the Phase I source categories. We also have entered into a judicially enforceable consent decree with Sierra Club that requires EPA to promulgate MACT standards for the Phase II sources by June 14, 2005, since extended to September 14, 2005the same date that (for independent reasons) is required for the replacement standards for Phase I sources.

III. How Was the Final Rule Developed?

We proposed standards for HWCs on April 20, 2004 (69 FR 21197). The public comment period closed on July 6, 2004. In addition, on February 4, 2005, we requested certain key commenters to comment by email on a limited number of issues arising from public comments on the proposed rule. The comment period for those issues closed on March 7, 2005.

We received approximately 100 public comment letters on the proposed rule and the subsequent direct request for comments. Comments were submitted by owner/operators of HWCs, trade associations, state regulatory agencies and their representatives, and environmental groups. Today's final rule reflects our consideration of all of the comments and additional information we received. Major public comments on the proposed rule along with our responses, are summarized in this preamble.
IV. What Is the Relationship Between the Final Rule and Other MACT Combustion Rules?

The amendments to the Subpart EEE, Part 63, standards for hazardous waste combustors apply to the source categories that are currently subject to that subpartincinerators, cement kilns, and lightweight aggregate kilns that burn hazardous waste. Today's final rule, however, also amends Subpart EEE to establish MACT standards for the Phase II source categoriesthose boilers and hydrochloric acid production furnaces that burn hazardous waste.

Generally speaking, you are an affected source pursuant to Subpart EEE if you combust, or have previously combusted, hazardous waste in an incinerator, cement kiln, lightweight aggregate kiln, boiler, or hydrochloric acid production furnace. You continue to be an affected source until you cease burning hazardous waste and initiate closure requirements pursuant to RCRA. Affected sources do not include: (1) Sources exempt from regulation under 40 CFR part 266, subpart H, because the only hazardous waste they burn is listed under 40 CFR 266.100(c); (2) research, development, and demonstration sources exempt under Sec. 63.1200(b); and (3) boilers exempt from regulation under 40 CFR part 266, subpart H, because they meet the definition of small quantity burner under 40 CFR 266.108. See Sec. 63.1200(b).

If you never previously combusted hazardous waste, or have ceased burning hazardous waste and initiated RCRA closure requirements, you are not subject to Subpart EEE. Rather, EPA has promulgated separate MACT standards for sources that do not burn hazardous waste within the following source categories: commercial and industrial solid waste incinerators (40 CFR Part 60, Subparts CCCC and DDDD); Portland cement manufacturing facilities (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart LLL); industrial/ commercial/institutional boilers and process heaters (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart DDDDD); and hydrochloric acid production facilities (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart NNNNN). In addition, EPA considered whether to establish MACT standards for lightweight aggregate manufacturing facilities that do not burn hazardous waste, and determined that they are not major sources of HAP emissions. Thus, EPA has not established MACT standards for lightweight aggregate manufacturing facilities that do not burn hazardous waste.

Note that nonstack emissions points are not regulated under Subpart EEE.\2\ Emissions attributable to storage and handling of hazardous waste prior to combustion (i.e., emissions from tanks, containers, equipment, and process vents) would continue to be regulated pursuant to either RCRA Subpart AA, BB, and CC and/or an applicable MACT that applies to the beforementioned material handling devices. Emissions unrelated to the hazardous waste operations may be regulated pursuant to other MACT rulemakings. For example, Portland cement manufacturing facilities that combust hazardous waste are subject to both Subpart EEE and Subpart LLL, and hydrochloric acid production facilities that combust hazardous waste may be subject to both Subpart EEE and Subpart NNNNN.\3\ In these instances Subpart EEE controls HAP emissions from the cement kiln and hydrochloric acid production furnace stack, while Subparts LLL and NNNNN would control HAP emissions from other operations that are not directly related to the combustion of hazardous waste (e.g., clinker cooler emissions for cement production facilities, and hydrochloric acid product transportation and storage for hydrochloric acid production facilities).
\2\ Note, however, that fugitive emissions attributable to the combustion of hazardous waste from the combustion device are regulated pursuant to Subpart EEE.
\3\ Hydrochloric acid production furnaces that combust hazardous waste are also affected sources subject to Subpart NNNNN if they produce a liquid acid product that contains greater than 30% hydrochloric acid.

Note that if you temporarily cease burning hazardous waste for any reason, you remain an affected source and are still subject to the applicable Subpart
[[Page 59406]]
EEE requirements. However, even as an affected source, the emission standards or operating limits do not apply if: (1) Hazardous waste is not in the combustion chamber and you elect to comply with other MACT (or CAA section 129) standards that otherwise would be applicable if you were not burning hazardous waste, e.g., the nonhazardous waste burning Portland Cement Kiln MACT (Subpart LLL); or (2) you are in a startup, shutdown, or malfunction mode of operation.
V. What Are the Health Effects Associated With Pollutants Emitted by Hazardous Waste Combustors?

Today's final rule protects air quality and promotes the public health by reducing the emissions of some of the HAP listed in Section 112(b)(1) of the CAA. Emissions data collected in the development of this final rule show that metals, hydrogen chloride and chlorine gas, dioxins and furans, and other organic compounds are emitted from hazardous waste combustors. The HAP that would be controlled with this rule are associated with a variety of adverse health affects. These adverse health effects include chronic health disorders (e.g., irritation of the lung, skin, and mucus membranes and effects on the blood, digestive tract, kidneys, and central nervous system), and acute health disorders (e.g., lung irritation and congestion, alimentary effects such as nausea and vomiting, and effects on the central nervous system). Provided below are brief descriptions of risks associated with HAP that are emitted from hazardous waste combustors.

Antimony

Antimony occurs at very low levels in the environment, both in the soils and foods. Higher concentrations, however, are found at antimony processing sites, and in their hazardous wastes. The most common industrial use of antimony is as a fire retardant in the form of antimony trioxide. Chronic occupational exposure to antimony (generally antimony trioxide) is most commonly associated with ``antimony pneumoconiosis,'' a condition involving fibrosis and scarring of the lung tissues. Studies have shown that antimony accumulates in the lung and is retained for long periods of time. Effects are not limited to the lungs, however, and myocardial effects (effects on the heart muscle) and related effects (e.g., increased blood pressure, altered EKG readings) are among the bestcharacterized human health effects associated with antimony exposure. Reproductive effects (increased incidence of spontaneous abortions and higher rates of premature deliveries) have been observed in female workers exposed in an antimony processing facilities. Similar effects on the heart, lungs, and reproductive system have been observed in laboratory animals.

EPA assessed the carcinogenicity of antimony and found the evidence for carcinogenicity to be weak, with conflicting evidence from inhalation studies with laboratory animals, equivocal data from the occupational studies, negative results from studies of oral exposures in laboratory animals, and little evidence of mutagenicity or genotoxicity.\4\ As a consequence, EPA concluded that insufficient data are available to adequately characterize the carcinogenicity of antimony and, accordingly, the carcinogenicity of antimony cannot be determined based on available information. However, the International Agency for Research on Cancer in an earlier evaluation, concluded that antimony trioxide is ``possibly carcinogenic to humans'' (Group 2B). \4\ See ``Evaluating THe Carcinogenicity of Antimony,'' Rish Assessment Issue Paper (98030/072699), Superfund Technical Support Center, National Center for Environmental Assessment, July 26, 1999.

Arsenic

Chronic (longterm) inhalation exposure to inorganic arsenic in humans is associated with irritation of the skin and mucous membranes. Human data suggest a relationship between inhalation exposure of women working at or living near metal smelters and an increased risk of reproductive effects, such as spontaneous abortions. Inorganic arsenic exposure in humans by the inhalation route has been shown to be strongly associated with lung cancer, while ingestion or inorganic arsenic in humans has been linked to a form of skin cancer and also to bladder, liver, and lung cancer. EPA has classified inorganic arsenic as a Group A, human carcinogen.

Beryllium

Chronic inhalation exposure of humans to high levels of beryllium has been reported to cause chronic beryllium disease (berylliosis), in which granulomatous (noncancerous) lesions develop in the lung. Inhalation exposure to high levels of beryllium has been demonstrated to cause lung cancer in rats and monkeys. Human studies are limited, but suggest a causal relationship between beryllium exposure and an increased risk of lung cancer. We have classified beryllium as a Group B1, probable human carcinogen, when inhaled; data are inadequate to determine whether beryllium is carcinogenic when ingested.

Cadmium

Chronic inhalation or oral exposure to cadmium leads to a buildup of cadmium in the kidneys that can cause kidney disease. Cadmium has been shown to be a developmental toxicant in animals, resulting in fetal malformations and other effects, but no conclusive evidence exists in humans. An association between cadmium exposure and an increased risk of lung cancer has been reported from human studies, but these studies are inconclusive due to confounding factors. Animal studies have demonstrated an increase in lung cancer from longterm inhalation exposure to cadmium. EPA has classified cadmium as a Group B1, probable carcinogen.

Chlorine gas

Chlorine is an irritant to the eyes, the upper respiratory tract, and lungs. Chronic exposure to chlorine gas in workers has resulted in respiratory effects including eye and throat irritation and airflow obstruction. No information is available on the carcinogenic effects of chlorine in humans from inhalation exposure. A National Toxicology Program (NTP) study showed no evidence of carcinogenic activity in male rats or male and female mice, and equivocal evidence in female rats, from ingestion of chlorinated water. The EPA has not classified chlorine for potential carcinogenicity. In the absence of specific scientific evidence to the contrary, it is the Agency's policy to classify noncarcinogenic effects as threshold effects. RfC development is the default approach for threshold (or nonlinear) effects. Chromium

Chromium may be emitted in two forms, trivalent chromium (chromium III) or hexavalent chromium (chromium VI). The respiratory tract is the major target organ for chromium VI toxicity for inhalation exposures. Bronchitis, decreases pulmonary function, pneumonia, and other respiratory effects have been noted from chronic high does exposure in occupational settings due to chromium VI. Limited human studies suggest that chromium VI inhalation exposure may be associated with complications during pregnancy and childbirth, while animal studies have not reported reproductive effects from inhalation exposure to chromium VI. Human and animal studies have clearly established that inhaled chromium VI is
[[Page 59407]]
a carcinogen, resulting in an increased risk of lung cancer. EPA has classified chromium VI as a Group A, human carcinogen.

Chromium III is less toxic than chromium VI. The respiratory tract is also the major target organ for chromium III toxicity, similar to chromium VI. Chromium III is an essential element in humans, with a daily intake of 50 to 200 micrograms per day recommended for an adult. The body can detoxify some amount of chromium VI to chromium III. EPA has not classified chromium III with respect to carcinogenicity. Cobalt

Cobalt is a relatively rare metal that is produced primarily as a byproduct during refining of other metals, especially copper. Cobalt has been widely reported to cause respiratory effects in humans exposed by inhalation, including respiratory irritation, wheezing, asthma, and pneumonia. Cardiomyopathy (damage to the heart muscle) has also been reported, although this effect is better known from oral exposure. Other effects of oral exposure in humans are polycythemia (an abnormally high number of red blood cells) and the blocking of uptake of iodine by the thyroid. In addition, cobalt is a sensitizer in humans by any route of exposure. Sensitized individuals may react to inhalation of cobalt by developing asthma or to ingestion or dermal contact with cobalt by developing dermatitis. Cobalt is as a vital component of vitamin B12, though there is no evidence that intake of cobalt is ever limiting in the human diet.

A number of epidemiological studies have found that exposures to cobalt are associated with an increased incidence of lung cancer in occupational settings. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (part of the World Health Organization) classifies cobalt and cobalt compounds as ``possibly carcinogenic to humans'' (Group 2B). The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists has classified cobalt as a confirmed animal carcinogen with unknown relevance to humans (category A3). An EPA assessment concludes that under EPA's cancer guidelines, cobalt would be considered likely to be carcinogenic to humans.\5\
\5\ See ``Derivation of a Provisional Carcinogenicity Assessment for Cobalt and Compounds,'' Risk Assessment Issue Paper (00122/1 1502), Superfund Technical Support Center, National Center for Environmental Assessment, January 15, 2002. This is a provisional EPA assessment that has been externally peer reviewed but has not yet been incorporated in IRIS.

Dioxins and Furans

Exposures to 2,3,7,8tetrachlorodibenzopdioxin (2,3,7,8TCDD) and related compounds at levels 10 times or less above those modeled to approximate average background exposure have resulted in adverse non cancer health effects in animals. This statement is based on assumptions about the toxic equivalent for these compounds, for which there is acknowledged uncertainty. These effects include changes in hormone systems, alterations in fetal development, reduced reproductive capacity, and immunosuppression. Effects that may be linked to dioxin and furan exposures at low dose in humans include changes in markers of early development and hormone levels. Dioxin and furan exposures are associated with altered liver function and lipid metabolism changes in activity of various liver enzymes, depression of the immune system, and endocrine and nervous system effects. EPA in its 1985 dioxin assessment classified 2,3,7,8TCDD as a probable human carcinogen. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded in 1997 that the overall weight of the evidence was sufficient to characterize 2,3,7,8TCDD as a known human carcinogen.\6\ In 2001 the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National Toxicology Program in their 9th Report on Carcinogens classified 2,3,7,8TCDD as a known human carcinogen.\7\
\6\ IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). (1997) IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Vol. 69. Polychlorinated dibenzoparadioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans. Lyon, France.
\7\ The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Toxicology Program 9th Report on Carcinogens, Revised January 2001.

The chemical and environmental stability of dioxins and their tendency to accumulate in fat have resulted in their detection within many ecosystems. In the United States and elsewhere, accidental contamination of the environment by 2,3,7,8TCDD has resulted in deaths in many species of wildlife and domestic animals.\8\ High residues of this compound in fish have resulted in closing rivers to fishing. Laboratory studies with birds, mammals, aquatic organisms, and other species have demonstrated that exposure to 2,3,7,8TCDD can result in acute and delayed mortality as well as carcinogenic, teratogenic, mutagenic, histopathologic, immunotoxic, and reproductive effects, depending on dose received, which varied widely in the experiments.\9\ \8\ This does not necessarily apply in regard to laboratory testing, which tend to use 2,3,7,8 TCDD as the test compound. \9\ Eisler, R. 1986. Dioxin hazards to fish, wildlife, and invertebrates: a synoptic review. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report. 85(1.8).

Hydrogen chloride/hydrochloric acid

Hydrogen chloride, also called hydrochloric acid, is corrosive to the eyes, skin, and mucous membranes. Chronic (longterm) occupational exposure to hydrochloric acid has been reported to cause gastritis, bronchitis, and dermatitis in workers. Prolonged exposure to low concentrations may also cause dental discoloration and erosion. No information is available on the reproductive or developmental effects of hydrochloric acid in humans. In rats exposed to hydrochloric acid by inhalation, altered estrus cycles have been reported in females and increased fetal mortality and decreased fetal weight have been reported in offspring. EPA has not classified hydrochloric acid for carcinogenicity. In the absence of specific scientific evidence to the contrary, it is the Agency's policy to classify noncarcinogenic effects as threshold effects. RfC development is the default approach for threshold (or nonlinear) effects.

Lead

Lead can cause a variety of effects at low dose levels. Chronic exposure to high levels of lead in humans results in effects on the blood, central nervous system, blood pressure, and kidneys. Children are particularly sensitive to the chronic effects of lead, with slowed cognitive development, reduced growth and other effects reported. Reproductive effects, such as decreased sperm count in men and spontaneous abortions in women, have been associated with lead exposure. The developing fetus is at particular risk from maternal lead exposure, with low birth weight and slowed postnatal neurobehavioral development noted. Human studies are inconclusive regarding lead exposure and cancer, while animal studies have reported an increase in kidney cancer from lead exposure by the oral route. EPA has classified lead as a Group B2, probable human carcinogen.

Manganese

Health effects in humans have been associated with both deficiencies and excess intakes of manganese. Chronic exposure to low levels of manganese in the diet is considered to be nutritionally essential in humans, with a recommended daily allowance of 2 to 5 milligrams per day (mg/d). Chronic
[[Page 59408]]
exposure to high levels of manganese by inhalation in humans results primarily in central nervous system effects. Visual reaction time, hand steadiness, and eyehand coordination were affected in chronically exposed workers. Impotence and loss of libido have been noted in male workers afflicted with manganism attributed to inhalation exposures. EPA has classified manganese in Group D, not classifiable as to carcinogenicity in humans.

Mercury

Mercury exists in three forms: elemental mercury, inorganic mercury compounds (primarily mercuric chloride), and organic mercury compounds (primarily methyl mercury). Each form exhibits different health effects. Various sources may release elemental or inorganic mercury; environmental methyl mercury is typically formed by biological processes after mercury has precipitated from the air.

Chronic exposure to elemental mercury in humans also affects the central nervous system, with effects such as increased excitability, irritability, excessive shyness, and tremors. The EPA has not classified elemental mercury with respect to cancer.

The major effect from chronic exposure to inorganic mercury is kidney damage. Reproductive and developmental animal studies have reported effects such as alterations in testicular tissue, increased embryo resorption rates, and abnormalities of development. Mercuric chloride (an inorganic mercury compound) exposure has been shown to result in forestomach, thyroid, and renal tumors in experimental animals. EPA has classified mercuric chloride as a Group C, possible human carcinogen.

Nickel

Nickel is an essential element in some animal species, and it has been suggested it may be essential for human nutrition. Nickel dermatitis, consisting of itching of the fingers, hand and forearms, is the most common effect in humans from chronic exposure to nickel. Respiratory effects have also been reported in humans from inhalation exposure to nickel. No information is available regarding the reproductive of developmental effects of nickel in humans, but animal studies have reported such effects, although a consistent doseresponse relationship has not been seen. Nickel forms released from industrial boilers include soluble nickel compounds, nickel subsulfide, and nickel carbonyl. Human and animal studies have reported an increased risk of lung and nasal cancers from exposure to nickel refinery dusts and nickel subsulfide. Animal studies of soluble nickel compounds i.e., nickel carbonyl) have reported lung tumors. The EPA has classified nickel refinery subsulfide as a Group A, human carcinogen and nickel carbonyl as a Group B2, probable human carcinogen.

Organic HAP

Organic HAPs include halogenated and nonhalogenated organic classes of compounds such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Both PAHs and PCBs are classified as potential human carcinogens, and are considered toxic, persistent and bioaccumulative. Organic HAP also include compounds such as benzene, methane, propane, chlorinated alkanes and alkenes, phenols and chlorinated aromatics. Adverse health effects of HAPs include damage to the immune system, as well as neurological, reproductive,
developmental, respiratory and other health problems.

Particulate Matter

Atmospheric particulate matter (PM) is composed of sulfate, nitrate, ammonium, and other ions, elemental carbon, particlebound water, a wide variety of organic compounds, and a large number of elements contained in various compounds, some of which originate from crustal materials and others from combustion sources. Combustion sources are the primary origin of trace metals found in fine particles in the atmosphere. Ambient PM can be of primary or secondary origin.

Exposure to particles can lead to a variety of serious health effects. The largest particles do not get very far into the lungs, so they tend to cause fewer harmful health effects. Fine particles pose the greatest problems because they can get deep into the lungs. Scientific studies show links between these small particles and numerous adverse health effects. Epidemiological studies have shown a significant correlation between elevated PM levels and premature mortality. Other important effects associated with PM exposure include aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions, emergency room visits, absences from school or work, and restricted activity days), lung disease, decreased lung function, asthma attacks, and certain cardiovascular problems. Individuals particularly sensitive to PM exposure include older adults and people with heart and lung disease.

This is only a partial summary of adverse health and environmental effects associated with exposure to PM. Further information is found in the 2004 Criteria Document for PM (``Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter,'' EPA/600/P99/002bF) and the 2005 Staff Paper for PM (EPA, ``Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter, Policy Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information: OAQPS Staff Paper,'' (June 2005)).

Selenium

Selenium is a naturally occurring substance that is toxic at high concentrations but is also a nutritionally essential element. Studies of humans chronically exposed to high levels of selenium in food and water have reported discoloration of the skin, pathological deformation and loss of nails, loss of hair, excessive tooth decay and discoloration, lack of mental alertness, and listlessness. The consumption of high levels of selenium by pigs, sheep, and cattle has been shown to interfere with normal fetal development and to produce birth defects. Results of human and animal studies suggest that supplementation with some forms of selenium may result in a reduced incidence of several tumor types. One selenium compound, selenium sulfide, is carcinogenic in animals exposed orally. We have classified elemental selenium as a Group D, not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity, and selenium sulfide as a Group B2, probable human carcinogen.
Part Two: Summary of the Final Rule
I. What Source Categories and Subcategories Are Affected by the Final Rule?

Today's rule promulgates standards for controlling emissions of HAP from hazardous waste combustors: incinerators, cement kilns, lightweight aggregate kilns, boilers, and hydrochloric acid production furnaces that burn hazardous waste. A description of each source category can be found in the proposed rule (see 69 FR at 2120708).

Hazardous waste burning incinerators, cement kilns, and lightweight aggregate kilns are currently subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEE, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). Today's rule revises the emissions limits and certain compliance and monitoring provisions of subpart EEE for these
[[Page 59409]]
source categories. The definitions of hazardous waste incinerator, hazardous waste cement kiln, and hazardous waste lightweight aggregate kiln appear at 40 CFR 63.1201(a).

Boilers that burn hazardous waste are also affected sources under today's rule. The rule uses the RCRA definition of a boiler under 40 CFR 260.10 and includes industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers as well as thermal units known as process heaters. Hazardous waste burning boilers will continue to comply with the emission standards found under 40 CFR part 266, subpart H (i.e., the existing RCRA rules) until they demonstrate compliance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEE, and, for permitted sources, subsequently remove these requirements from their RCRA permit.

Finally, hydrochloric acid production furnaces that burn hazardous waste are affected sources under today's rule. These furnaces are a type of halogen acid furnace included in the definition of ``industrial furnace'' defined at Sec. 260.10. Hydrochloric acid production furnaces that burn hazardous waste will continue to comply with the emission standards found under 40 CFR part 266, subpart H, until they demonstrate compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEE, and, for permitted sources, subsequently remove these requirements from their RCRA permit.

II. What Are the Affected Sources and Emission Points?

Today's rule apply to each major and area source incinerator, cement kiln, lightweight aggregate kiln, boiler, and hydrochloric acid production furnace that burns hazardous waste.\10\ We note that only major source boilers and hydrochloric acid production furnaces are subject to the full suite of subpart EEE emission standards.\11\ The emissions limits apply to each emission point (e.g., stack) where gases from the combustion of hazardous waste are discharged or otherwise emitted into the atmosphere. For facilities that have multiple combustion gas discharge points, the emission limits generally apply to each emission point. A cement kiln, for example, could be configured to have dual stacks where the majority of combustion gases are discharged though the main stack and other combustion gases emitted through a separate stack, such as an alkali bypass stack. In that case, the emission standards would apply separately to each of these stacks.\12\ \10\ A major source emits or has the potential to emit 10 tons per year of any single hazardous air pollutant or 25 tons per year or greater of hazardous air pollutants in the aggregate. An area source is a source that is not a major source.
\11\ See Part Four, Section II.A for a discussion of the standards that are applicable to area source boilers and
hydrochloric acid production furnaces.
\12\ We note that there is a provision that allows cement kilns with dual stacks to average emissions on a flowweighted basis to demonstrate compliance with the metal and chlorine emission standards. See Sec. Sec. 63.1204(e) and 63.1220(3).

III. What Pollutants Are Emitted and Controlled?

Hazardous waste combustors emit dioxin/furans, sometimes at high levels depending on the design and operation of the emission control equipment, and, for incinerators, depending on whether a waste heat recovery boiler is used. All hazardous waste combustors can also emit high levels of other organic HAP if they are not designed, operated, and maintained to operate under good combustion conditions.

Hazardous waste combustors can also emit high levels of metal HAP, depending on the level of metals in the waste feed and the design and operation of air emissions control equipment. Hazardous waste burning hydrochloric acid production furnaces, however, generally feed and emit low levels of metal HAP.

All of these HAP metals (except for the volatile metal mercury) are emitted as a portion of the particulate matter emitted by these sources. Hazardous waste combustors can also emit high levels of particulate matter, except that hydrochloric acid production furnaces generally feed hazardous wastes with low ash content and consequently emit low levels of particulate matter. A majority of particulate matter emissions from hazardous waste combustors are in the form of fine particulate. Particulate emissions from incinerators and liquid fuel fired boilers depend on the ash content of the hazardous waste feed and the design and operation of air emission control equipment. Particulate emissions from cement kilns and lightweight aggregate kilns are not significantly affected by the ash content of the hazardous waste fuel because uncontrolled particulate emissions are attributable primarily to fine raw material entrained in the combustion gas. Thus, particulate emissions from kilns depends on operating conditions that effect entrainment of raw material, and the design and operation of the emission control equipment.

IV. Does the Final Rule Apply to Me?

The final rule applies to you if you own or operate a hazardous waste combustoran incinerator, cement kiln, lightweight aggregate kiln, boiler, or hydrochloric acid production facility that burns hazardous waste. The final rule does not apply to a source that meets the applicability requirements of Sec. 63.1200(b) for reasons explained at 69 FR at 2121213.

V. What Are the Emission Limitations?

You must meet the emission limits in Tables 1 and 2 of this preamble for your applicable source category and subcategory. Standards are corrected to 7 percent oxygen. As noted at proposal, we previously promulgated requirements for carbon monoxide, total hydrocarbon, and destruction and removal efficiency standards under subpart EEE for incinerators, cement kilns, and lightweight aggregate kilns. We view these standards as unaffected by the Court's vacature of the challenged regulations in its decision of July 24, 2001. We are therefore not re promulgating and reopening consideration of these standards in today's final rule, but are summarizing these standards in Tables 1 and 2 for reader's convenience.\13\ See 69 FR at 21221, 21248, 21261 and 21274. \13\ We are also republishing these standards, for reader's convenience only, in the new replacement standard section for these source categories. See Sec. 63.1219, Sec. 63.1220 and Sec. 673.1219.

Liquid fuel boilers equipped with dry air pollution control devices are subject to different dioxin/furan emission standards than liquid fuel boilers that are not equipped with dry air pollution control devices.\14\ Liquid fuel boilers processing hazardous waste with a heating value less than 10,000 BTU/lb must comply with the emission concentrationbased standards (expressed as mass of total HAP emissions per volume of stack gas emitted) for mercury, semivolatile metals, low volatile metals, and total chlorine. Liquid fuel boilers processing hazardous waste with heating values greater than 10,000 BTU/lb must comply with thermal emissionsbased standards (expressed as mass of HAP emissions attributable to the hazardous waste per million BTU input from the hazardous waste) for those same pollutants. Low volatile metal standards for liquid fuel boilers apply only to emissions of chromium, whereas the low volatile metal standard for the other source categories applies to the combined emissions of chromium, arsenic, and beryllium. Semivolatile metal standards apply to the combined emissions of lead and cadmium.
\14\ Liquid fuel boilers equipped with a wet air pollution control device followed by a dry air pollution control device do not meet the definition of a dry air pollution device.

For any of the source categories except hydrochloric acid production
[[Page 59410]]
furnaces, you may elect to comply with an alternative to the total chlorine standard under which you would establish sitespecific, healthbased emission limits for hydrogen chloride and chlorine based on national exposure standards. This alternative chlorine standard is discussed in part two, section IX and part four, section VII.

Incinerators and liquid and solid fuel boilers may elect to comply with an alternative to the particulate matter standard that would limit emissions of all the semivolatile metal HAPs and low volatile metal HAPs. Under this alternative, the numerical emission limits for semivolatile metal and low volatile metal emission HAP are identical to the limitations included in Tables 1 and 2. However, for semivolatile metals, the alternative standard applies to the combined emissions of lead, cadmium, and selenium; for low volatile metals, the standard applies to the combined emissions of chromium, arsenic, beryllium, antimony, cobalt, manganese, and nickel. See Sec. 63.1219(e). Table 1.Summary of Emission Limits for Existing Sources Hydrochloric acid Incinerators Cement kilns Lightweight Solid fuelfired Liquid fuelfired production aggregate kilns boilers \1\ boilers \1\ furnaces \1\ Dioxin/Furans (ng TEQ/dscm)..... 0.20 or 0.40 and 0.20 or 0.40 and 0.20 or rapid CO or HC and DRE 0.40 for dry APCD CO or HC and DRE temperature temperature quench below standard as a sources; CO or HC standard as control < control < 400[deg]F at kiln surrogate. and DRE standard surrogate. 400[deg]F at APCD 400[deg]F at APCD exit. as surrogate for inlet \6\. inlet. others. Mercury......................... 130 [mu]g/dscm.... Hazardous waste 120 hazardous 11 [mu]g/dscm..... 4.2E5lb/MMBtu Total chlorine feed restriction waste MTEC \11\ \2\, \5\ or 19 standard as of 3.0 ppmw and feed restriction [mu]g/dscm \2\; surrogate. 120 [mu]g/dscm or 120 [mu]g/dscm depending on BTU MTEC \11\; or 120 total emissions. content of [mu]g/dscm total hazardous waste emissions. \13\. Particulate Matter.............. 0.013 gr/dscf \8\. 0.028 gr/dscf and 0.025 gr/dscf..... 0.030 gr/dscf \8\. 0.035 gr/dscf \8\. Total chlorine 20% opacity \12\. standard as surrogate. Semivolatile Metals (lead + 230 [mu]g/dscm.... 7.6 E4 lbs/MMBtu 3.0E4 lb/MMBtu 180 [mu]g/dscm.... 8.2 E5 lb/MMBtu Total chlorine cadmium). \5\ and 330 [mu]g/ \5\ and 250 [mu]g/ \2\, \5\ or 150 standard as dscm \3\. dscm \3\. [mu]g/dscm \2\; surrogate. depending on BTU content of hazardous waste \13\. Low Volatile Metals (arsenic + 92 [mu]g/dscm..... 2.1 E5 lbs/MMBtu 9.5E5 lb/MMBtu 380 [mu]g/dscm.... 1.26E4 lbMMBtu Total chlorine beryllium + chromium). \5\ and 56 [mu]g/ \5\ and 110 [mu]g/ \4\, \5\ or 370 standard as dscm \3\. dscm \3\. [mu]g/dscm \4\; surrogate. depending on BTU content of hazardous waste \13\. Total Chlorine (hydrogen 32 ppmv \7\....... 120 ppmv \7\...... 600 ppmv \7\...... 440 ppmv \7\...... 5.08E2 lb/MMBtu 150 ppmv or chloride + chlorine gas). \5\, \7\ or 31 99.923% system ppmv \7\; removal depending on BTU efficiency. content of hazardous waste \13\. Carbon Monoxide (CO) or 100 ppmv CO \9\ or See Note 100 ppmv CO \9\ or (2) 100 ppmv CO \9\ or 10 ppmv HC Hydrocarbons (HC). 10 ppmv HC. 10 below. 20 ppmv HC. Destruction and Removal 99.99% for each principal organic hazardous pollutant. For sources burning hazardous wastes F020, F021, F022, F023, Efficiency. F026, or F027, however, 99.9999% for each principal organic hazardous pollutant. Notes:
\1\ Particulate matter, semivolatile metal, low volatile metal, and total chlorine standards for solid and liquid fuel boilers apply only to major sources. Particulate matter, semivolatile and low volatile metal standards for hydrochloric acid production furnaces apply only to major sources, although area sources must still comply with the surrogate total chlorine standard to control mercury emissions. \2\ Standard is based on normal emissions data, and is therefore expressed as an annual average emission limitation. \3\ Sources must comply with both the thermal emissions and emission concentration standards. \4\ Low volatile metal standard for liquid fuelfired boilers is for chromium only. \5\ Standards expressed as mass of pollutant contributed by hazardous waste per million BTU contributed by the hazardous waste. \6\ APCD means ``air pollution control device''.
\7\ Sources may elect to comply with sitespecific riskbased emission limits for hydrogen chloride and chlorine gas \8\ Sources may elect to comply with an alternative to the particulate matter standard. \9\ Sources that elect to comply with the CO standard must demonstrate compliance with the HC standard during the comprehensive performance test that demonstrates compliance with the destruction and removal efficiency requirement. \10\ Kilns without a bypass: 20 ppmv HC or 100 ppmv CO \9\. Kilns with a bypass/midkiln sampling system: 10 ppmv HC or 100 ppmv CO9 in the bypass duct, midkiln sampling system or bypass stack.
\11\ MTEC means ``maximum theoretical emission concentration'', and is equivalent to the feed rate divided by gas flow rate \12\ The opacity standard does not apply to a source equipped with a bag leak detection system under 63.1206(c)(8) or a particulate matter detection system under 63.1206(c)(9).
\13\ Emission concentrationbased standards apply to sources processing hazardous waste with energy content less than 10,000 BTU/lb; thermal emission standards apply to sources processing hazardous waste with energy content greater than 10,000 btu/lb. [[Page 59411]]
Table 2.Summary of Emission Limits for New or Reconstructed Sources Hydrochloric acid Incinerators Cement kilns Lightweight Solid fuel boilers Liquid fuel production aggregate kilns \1\ boilers \1\ furnaces \1\ Dioxin/Furans (ng TEQ/dscm)..... 0.11 for dry APCD 0.20 or 0.40 and 0.20 or rapid CO or HC and DRE 0.40 for sources CO or THC and DRE and/or WHB \5\ temperature quench < 400 standard as a with dry APCD; CO standard as a sources; 0.20 for control < 400 [deg]F at kiln surrogate. or HC and DRE surrogate. other sources. [deg]F at APCD exit. standard as a inlet. surrogate for other sources. Mercury......................... 8.1 [mu]g/dscm.... Hazardous waste 120 hazardous 11 [mu]g/dscm..... 1.2E6 lb/MMBtu 2 TCl as surrogate. feed restriction waste MTEC \10\ 4 or 6.8 [mu]g/ of 1.9 ppmw and feed restriction dscm \2\; 120 [

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

For more information concerning applicability and rule determinations, contact your State or local representative or appropriate EPA Regional Office representative. For information concerning rule development, contact Michael Galbraith, Waste Treatment Branch, Hazardous Waste Minimization and Management Division, (5302W), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20460, telephone number (703) 6050567, fax number (703) 3088433, electronic mail address galbraith.michael@epa.gov.