[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 166 (Thursday, August 27, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52162-52168]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20897]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0215; FRL-9928-96-OAR]
RIN 2060-AM08
Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Supplemental proposal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing this
supplemental proposal for the Standards of Performance for Municipal
Solid Waste (MSW) Landfills to address the nonmethane organic compound
(NMOC) emission rate threshold at which an affected MSW landfill must
install controls. The EPA is in the process of reviewing the Standards
of Performance for MSW Landfills based on changes in the landfills
industry since the standards were promulgated in 1996 and issued a
proposed rulemaking on July 17, 2014. The EPA's review of the Standards
of Performance for MSW Landfills (also referred to as the New Source
Performance Standards or NSPS for MSW Landfills) applies to landfills
that commenced construction, reconstruction, or modification after July
17, 2014.
This document proposes to achieve additional reductions of landfill
gas (LFG) and its components, including methane, through a lower
emission threshold at which MSW landfills must install and operate a
gas collection and control system (GCCS). This document supplements the
proposed July 17, 2014, rulemaking by further lowering, from 40
megagrams per year (Mg/yr) to 34 Mg/yr, the proposed NMOC emissions
threshold at which controls would be required. This change to the 2014
proposed threshold is based on additional data we have reviewed that
indicate greater potential for reductions in methane emissions from
these sources than we originally estimated that can be achieved at
reasonable cost. Accordingly, the EPA is proposing to establish the
NMOC emission rate threshold for installing a GCCS at 34 Mg/yr and is
requesting comment specifically on whether this is appropriate. The EPA
is also soliciting comment on the number of facilities that might
ultimately become subject to proposed new subpart XXX. The EPA intends
to consider the information received in response to this supplemental
proposal prior to finalizing revised Standards of Performance for MSW
Landfills. The EPA is seeking comment only on the two issues addressed
by this supplemental proposal and the supplemental proposal does not
otherwise reopen the comment period for the July 17, 2014, proposed
rule.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before October 26,
2015. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), comments on the
information collection provisions are best assured of consideration if
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of your
comments on or before September 28, 2015.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting a public
hearing by September 1, 2015, the EPA will hold a public hearing on
September 11, 2015 from 1:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time) to 5:00 p.m.
(Eastern Standard Time) at the location in the ADDRESSES section. If no
one contacts the EPA requesting a public hearing to be held concerning
this proposed rule by September 1, 2015, a public hearing will not take
place. Information regarding whether or not a hearing will be held will
be posted on the rule's Web site located at http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/landfill/landflpg.htm. Please contact Ms. Aimee St. Clair at
(919) 541-1063 or at [email protected] to register to speak at the
hearing. The last day to pre-register to speak at the hearing will be
September 8, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2003-0215, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency building located at 109 T.W. Alexander
Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. Information regarding whether
or not a hearing will be held will be posted on the rule's Web site
located at http://www.epa.gov/ttnatw01/landfill/landflpg.htm.
Please see section I.C of the Supplementary Information for
detailed information on the public hearing.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. The Docket Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number
for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning this
supplemental proposal, contact Ms. Hillary Ward, Fuels and Incineration
Group, Sector Policies and Programs Division, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (E143-05), Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-3154; fax
[[Page 52163]]
number: (919) 541-0246; email address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Acronyms and Abbreviations. The following acronyms and
abbreviations are used in this document.
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential business information
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
GCCS Gas collection and control system
GHG Greenhouse gas
GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
ICR Information collection request
LFG Landfill gas
m\3\ Cubic meters
Mg Megagram
Mg/yr Megagram per year
MSW Municipal solid waste
mtCO2e Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
NMOC Nonmethane organic compound
NSPS New source performance standards
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OMB Office of Management & Budget
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RIA Regulatory impacts analysis
U.S. United States
VCS Voluntary consensus standard
Organization of This Document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.
I. Background and Purpose of This Regulatory Action
A. Background
B. Proposed NMOC Emission Rate Threshold
C. Public hearing
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. Background and Purpose of This Regulatory Action
The purpose of this regulatory action is to propose and take
comment on a supplemental change to the proposed Standards of
Performance for MSW Landfills resulting from the EPA's ongoing review
of the standards under Clean Air Act (CAA) section 111. The EPA is also
soliciting comments on the number of facilities that might ultimately
become subject to proposed new 40 CFR part 60, subpart XXX.
A. Background
On July 17, 2014, the EPA proposed a new NSPS subpart (40 CFR part
60, subpart XXX) based on its ongoing review of the MSW Landfills NSPS
(40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW) (79 FR 41796) (referred to as ``NSPS
proposal'' in this document). The NSPS proposal is consistent with
President Obama's Climate Action Plan and corresponding Methane
Strategy. The June 2013 Climate Action Plan directed federal agencies
to focus on ``assessing current emissions data, addressing data gaps,
identifying technologies and best practices for reducing emissions, and
identifying existing authorities and incentive-based opportunities to
reduce methane emissions.'' Methane is a potent greenhouse gas (GHG)
that has a warming potential that is 28-36 times greater than carbon
dioxide (CO2) and has an atmospheric life of about 12 years.
Given methane's potency as a GHG and its atmospheric life, reducing
methane emissions is one of the best ways to achieve near-term
beneficial impact in mitigating global climate change. The March 2014
``Climate Action Plan: Strategy to Reduce Methane Emissions'' (the
Methane Strategy) directed the EPA to continue to pursue emission
reductions through regulatory updates and to encourage LFG energy
recovery through voluntary programs.
The proposed new subpart retained the same design capacity size
thresholds of 2.5 million cubic meters (m\3\) and 2.5 million Mg as 40
CFR part 60, subparts Cc and WWW, but lowered the NMOC emission rate at
which an MSW landfill must install controls to 40 Mg/yr. Several
additional options for revising the NMOC emission rate were also
presented, including an NMOC emission rate of 34 Mg/yr. Since
presenting these options, the EPA has updated its model that estimates
the emission reductions and cost impacts of changes to the design
capacity thresholds and/or the NMOC emission rate trigger based on
public comments and new data. This supplemental proposal provides
information about these updates for public review and comment.
B. Proposed NMOC Emission Rate Threshold
For the reasons presented below, the EPA is now proposing to
establish the NMOC emissions threshold for requiring installation of a
GCCS in proposed subpart XXX (of 40 CFR part 60) at 34 Mg/yr, rather
than the 40 Mg/yr proposed on July 17, 2014, and is requesting specific
comments on whether this is appropriate. The EPA is not proposing to
revise the design capacity threshold of 2.5 million m\3\ and 2.5
million Mg.
For the July 17, 2014, NSPS proposal, the EPA estimated the
emission reductions and costs associated with 17 new ``greenfield'' MSW
landfills that the EPA projected to commence construction,
reconstruction, or modification between 2014 and 2018 and have a design
capacity of 2.5 million m\3\ and 2.5 million Mg. The basis of the
projected number of new landfills and associated emission reductions
are presented in the MSW Landfills NSPS Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-
0215 (see the docketed memorandum ``Methodology for Estimating Cost and
Emission Impacts of MSW Landfills Regulations. 2014''). Multiple
commenters on the MSW Landfills NSPS proposal stated that the EPA
underestimated the cost impacts of the proposed NSPS because the EPA
failed to consider the number of MSW landfills that are expected to
become subject to the proposed NSPS through modification.
In response to these comments, the EPA consulted with its Regional
Offices, as well as state and local authorities, to identify landfills
expected to undergo a modification as defined in proposed 40 CFR part
60, subpart XXX within the next 5 years. Based on this information, the
EPA estimated the number of existing landfills likely to modify after
July 17, 2014, and thereby become subject to proposed subpart XXX. In
addition, the EPA made several changes to its underlying dataset and
methodology used to analyze the impacts of potential control options,
as discussed in the docketed memoranda, ``Updated Methodology for
Estimating Cost and Emission Impacts of MSW Landfills Regulations.
2015,'' and ``Updated Methodology for Estimating Testing and Monitoring
Costs for the MSW Landfill Regulations. 2015.'' The EPA also updated
the technical attributes of over 1,200 landfills based on new detailed
data reported to 40 CFR part 98, subpart HH of the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Program (GHGRP). A detailed discussion of updates made to the
landfill dataset is in the docketed
[[Page 52164]]
memorandum, ``Summary of Updated Landfill Dataset Used in the Cost and
Emission Reduction Analysis of Landfills Regulations. 2015.''
As a result of the changes to the dataset, the number and
characteristics of new landfills that the EPA projected to commence
construction, reconstruction, or modification between 2014 and 2018 and
modified landfills that are expected to become subject to proposed 40
CFR part 60, subpart XXX have changed.\1\ Based on the revised dataset,
the number of landfills estimated to be affected by proposed subpart
XXX went from 17 new landfills to 140 new or modified landfills,
assuming a design capacity of 2.5 million m\3\ and 2.5 million Mg.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Under CAA section 111(a) and proposed 40 CFR part 60,
subpart XXX the term new landfills encompasses both greenfield
facilities and facilities that meet proposed subpart XXX's
definition of ``modification''. Because the characteristics of a
greenfield site and an existing landfill that undergoes modification
are different, the dataset distinguishes between the two types of
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using the revised dataset, the EPA re-ran the model using control
options similar to the options presented in the proposed NSPS. The
EPA's analysis showed that lowering the NMOC emission rate threshold to
34 Mg/yr NMOC would accelerate the schedule for installing a GCCS and
also increase the number of landfills required to install controls,
thereby achieving additional reductions in emissions of both NMOC and
methane.
On July 17, 2014, the EPA proposed an NMOC threshold of 40 Mg/yr
and discussed an alternative NMOC emission threshold of 34 Mg/yr in the
NSPS proposal and in an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM)
for the Emission Guidelines (for existing landfills). The EPA
considered the information received in response to the ANPRM in
evaluating whether additional changes beyond those in the proposed
revisions for new sources are warranted (79 FR 41772). Commenters on
the proposed NSPS for new landfills and the ANPRM for existing
landfills expressed mixed reactions to a lower NMOC emission rate
threshold. Several nongovernmental organizations and a local government
entity supported a reduction in the NMOC emissions threshold. One state
agency provided examples of existing landfills controlling emissions in
its state with estimated NMOC emission rates as low as 8.1 Mg/yr.
In contrast, several commenters were concerned with the financial
and technical implications of lowering the threshold, including whether
landfills were financially prepared to install controls at an earlier
time, or whether landfills would lose potential carbon credit revenue
from voluntary projects. Another state agency expressed concerns that
landfills in arid areas would have difficulty continuously operating a
flare at landfills with lower quality gas that emit between 40 and 50
Mg/yr.
Table 1 of this document shows the emission reductions and costs
for control options, when using a 7 percent discount rate, in year 2025
at new and modified landfills. At the baseline size and emissions
thresholds (i.e., 50 Mg/yr NMOC), 112 of the 140 new or modified
landfills are expected to control emissions in 2025. At an emission
threshold of 40 Mg/yr NMOC and a design capacity threshold of 2.5
million Mg and 2.5 million m\3\, as proposed in the NSPS proposal, the
incremental number of new (or modified) landfills estimated to require
a GCCS in 2025 went from three to 11, for a total of 123 landfills with
controls. An emission threshold level of 34 Mg/yr NMOC, which was
presented as an option for consideration in the NSPS proposal, results
in an estimated 15 additional new or modified landfills requiring
controls in year 2025, for a total of 127 landfills with controls.
The incremental emission reductions for an NMOC emission rate of 40
Mg/yr would be 300 Mg/yr NMOC and 44,400 Mg/yr methane (1.1 million
metric tons of CO2 equivalent (mtCO2e)) beyond
the baseline. The incremental emission reductions for an NMOC emission
rate of 34 Mg/yr NMOC would be 300 Mg/yr NMOC and 51,400 Mg/yr methane
(1.3 million mtCO2e) beyond the baseline. These incremental
emission reductions represent a 2.4- and 2.8-percent reduction in
emissions beyond the baseline. The cost effectiveness between an NMOC
emission rate of 34 Mg/yr and 40 Mg/yr is comparable, but by lowering
the NMOC emissions threshold to 34 Mg/yr, this action achieves
additional reductions of 50 Mg/yr NMOC \2\ and 7,000 Mg/yr methane
(175,000 mt/yr CO2e) in 2025. These pollutants are
associated with substantial health effects, climate effects, and other
welfare effects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The unrounded annual NMOC reductions in Table 1 of this
preamble are 330 Mg/yr NMOC for option 2.5 million Mg design
capacity threshold and 40 Mg/yr NMOC threshold; and 280 Mg/yr NMOC
for option 2.5 million Mg design capacity/34 Mg/yr NMOC threshold.
Thus, the difference between the NMOC reductions for these two
options is 50 Mg/yr NMOC.
Table 1--Emission Reductions and Costs for Control Options in Year 2025 at New and Modified Landfills (2012$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Number of Number of landfills Annual Net Annual Annual Annual CO2e NMOC cost Methane cost CO2e cost
Option landfills landfills reporting Cost NMOC methane reductions effectiveness effectiveness effectiveness
affected controlling but not (million Reductions reductions (million mt/ ($/Mg) ($/Mg) ($/mt)
in 2025 controlling $2012) \a\ (Mg/yr) (Mg/yr) yr)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline:
Baseline (2.5 design capacity/50 Mg/yr NMOC)........ 140 112 28 61.4 11,640 1,834,000 45.9 5,270 33 1.3
Incremental values vs. the Baseline:
Option (2.5 design capacity/40 Mg/yr NMOC).......... 0 11 -11 7.4 300 44,400 1.1 26,100 166 6.6
Option (2.5 design capacity/34 Mg/yr NMOC).......... 0 15 -15 8.5 300 51,400 1.3 26,100 166 6.6
Option (2.0 design capacity/34 Mg/yr NMOC).......... 7 19 -12 10.2 400 62,500 1.6 25,600 163 6.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Based on the current reported design capacity of landfills, independent of time horizon used in analysis shown in the four cost-effectiveness summary tables. For some modified landfills,
landfills may report in early years under the Emission Guidelines and then also report under the NSPS after modification commenced (or year 2016, whatever is later).
The only categories of benefits monetized for this supplemental
proposal are methane-related climate impacts and minor secondary
CO2-related climate effects. In particular, we estimated the
global social benefits of methane emissions using estimates of the
social cost of methane (SC-CH4), a metric that estimates the
monetary value of impacts associated with marginal changes in methane
emissions in a given year.
A similar metric, the social cost of CO2 (SC-
CO2), estimates the monetary value of impacts associated
with
[[Page 52165]]
marginal changes in CO2 emissions in a given year.\3\ The
SC-CO2 estimates were developed over many years by an
interagency working group, using the best science available, and with
input from the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The SC-CO2 Technical Support Document presents
the SC-CO2 estimates as well as a detailed discussion of
the underlying methodology. Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0495,
Technical Support Document: Technical Update of the Social Cost of
Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866,
Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Carbon, with
participation by Council of Economic Advisers, Council on
Environmental Quality, Department of Agriculture, Department of
Commerce, Department of Energy, Department of Transportation,
Environmental Protection Agency, National Economic Council, Office
of Energy and Climate Change, Office of Management and Budget,
Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Department of Treasury
(May 2013, Revised November 2013). Available at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/inforeg/technical-update-social-cost-of-carbon-for-regulator-impact-analysis.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SC-CH4 estimates used in this analysis were
developed by Marten et al. (2014) and are discussed in greater detail
in section 4.2 of the Regulatory Impacts Analysis (RIA), which is in
the MSW Landfills NSPS docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0215. The four SC-
CH4 estimates are: $700, $1,500, $1,900, and $4,000 per
metric ton of methane emissions in the year 2025 (2012$). The first
three values are based on the average SC-CH4 from the three
integrated assessment models, at discount rates of 5, 3, and 2.5
percent, respectively. Estimates of the SC-CH4 for several
discount rates are included because the literature shows that the SC-
CH4 is sensitive to assumptions about the discount rate, and
because no consensus exists on the appropriate rate to use in an
intergenerational context (where costs and benefits are incurred by
different generations). The fourth value is the 95th percentile of the
SC-CH4 across all three models at a 3 percent discount rate.
It is included to represent higher-than-expected impacts from
temperature change further out in the tails of the SC-CH4
distribution.
The methodology used to calculate methane climate benefits is
discussed in detail in Section 4.2 of the RIA. Applying the approach
discussed in the RIA to the methane reductions estimated for this
supplemental proposal, the 2025 methane benefits of this supplemental
proposal vary by discount rate and range from $36 million (2012$) to
$210 million (2012$); the mean SC-CH4 at the 3 percent
discount rate results in an estimate of $78 million (2012$) in 2025 for
the proposed 34 Mg/yr emission threshold (see Table 2 of this
preamble). Monetizing the minor secondary CO2 emissions
impacts with the SC-CO2 estimates, also described in Section
4.2 of the RIA, yields disbenefits of $0.03 million (2012$) in 2025.
Table 2--Estimated Global Benefits of CH4 Reductions in 2025 \a\
[In millions, 2012$]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discount rate and statistic
CO2e -------------------------------------------------------------------
Methane reductions (million mt) Reductions 3% (95th
(million mt) 5% (average) 3% (average) 2.5% (average) percentile)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.051.............................................................. 1.3 $36 $78 $100 $210
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The SC-CH4 values are dollar-year and emissions-year specific. SC-CH4 values represent only a partial accounting of climate impacts. See Section 4.2
of the RIA for a complete discussion about the methodology.
Consistent with the Methane Strategy that was developed as part of
the President's Climate Action Plan, the EPA considered control options
to achieve additional reductions of methane and NMOC for new landfills.
The Climate Action Plan directed the EPA and five other federal
agencies to develop a comprehensive interagency strategy to reduce
methane emissions. Specifically, the federal agencies were instructed
to focus on ``assessing current emissions data, addressing data gaps,
identifying technologies and best practices for reducing emissions and
identifying existing authorities and incentive-based opportunities to
reduce methane emissions.'' With respect to landfills, the Methane
Strategy directs the agency to build upon progress to date through
updates to the EPA's rules for reducing emissions from new, modified,
and reconstructed landfills. Based on the Climate Action Plan and
Methane Strategy, the revised analysis described above, and
consideration of comments received on the proposed NSPS and ANPRM, the
EPA is proposing to lower the NMOC emission rate threshold to 34 Mg/yr
for new (new, modified, and reconstructed) sources subject to proposed
40 CFR part 60, subpart XXX. The EPA is not proposing changes to the
design capacity thresholds.
The EPA believes a level of 34 Mg/yr NMOC is achievable for new and
modified landfills. Greenfield and modified landfill owners or
operators are expected to employ the latest technology and practices to
minimize emissions and will have the time to consider the latest
technology and practices as they plan the construction of a new
landfill or construction of a new cell of a modified landfill. Because
the emission threshold level of 34 Mg/yr is more stringent than the
level the EPA proposed on July 17, 2014, and the impacts associated
with this proposed level of control have a different basis than those
outlined in the original proposal, the EPA is soliciting comments on
the revised analysis of the proposed NSPS in this supplemental
proposal. The EPA is also soliciting comments and data that would help
identify landfills that are expected to modify, as defined in the
proposed NSPS, during the next 5 years (2014-2018). Comments on an NMOC
emission threshold of 34 Mg/yr and comments or data on landfills
modifying in the next 5 years should be submitted to Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2003-0215. The EPA is not otherwise reopening proposed 40 CFR
part 60, subpart XXX for additional comment.
C. Public hearing
Please contact Ms. Aimee St. Clair at (919) 541-1063 or at
[email protected] to register to speak at the hearing. The last day
to pre-register to speak at the hearing will be September 8, 2015.
Requests to speak will be taken the day of the hearing at the hearing
registration desk, although preferences on speaking times may not be
able to be fulfilled. If you require the service of a translator or
special accommodations such as audio description, please let us know at
the time of registration.
If a hearing is held, it will provide interested parties the
opportunity to present data, views or arguments concerning the proposed
action. The
[[Page 52166]]
EPA will make every effort to accommodate all speakers who arrive and
register. Because this hearing, if held, will be at a U.S. government
facility, individuals planning to attend the hearing should be prepared
to show valid picture identification to the security staff in order to
gain access to the meeting room. Please note that the REAL ID Act,
passed by Congress in 2005, established new requirements for entering
federal facilities. If your driver's license is issued by Alaska,
American Samoa, Arizona, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts,
Minnesota, Montana, New York, Oklahoma, or the state of Washington, you
must present an additional form of identification to enter the federal
building. Acceptable alternative forms of identification include:
Federal employee badges, passports, enhanced driver's licenses and
military identification cards. In addition, you will need to obtain a
property pass for any personal belongings you bring with you. Upon
leaving the building, you will be required to return this property pass
to the security desk. No large signs will be allowed in the building,
cameras may only be used outside of the building and demonstrations
will not be allowed on federal property for security reasons.
The EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations,
but will not respond to the presentations at that time. Written
statements and supporting information submitted during the comment
period will be considered with the same weight as oral comments and
supporting information presented at the public hearing. Commenters
should notify Ms. St. Clair if they will need specific equipment, or if
there are other special needs related to providing comments at the
hearing. Verbatim transcripts of the hearing and written statements
will be included in the docket for the rulemaking. The EPA will make
every effort to follow the schedule as closely as possible on the day
of the hearing; however, please plan for the hearing to run either
ahead of schedule or behind schedule. A public hearing will not be held
unless requested. Please contact Ms. Aimee St. Clair at (919) 541-1063
or at [email protected] to request or register to speak at the
hearing or to inquire as to whether a hearing will be held.
II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statues and Executive Orders can
be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action supplements a prior proposed action that was determined
to be an economically significant regulatory action that was submitted
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Any changes
made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the
docket. The EPA prepared an analysis of the potential costs and
benefits associated with this action. This analysis, ``Regulatory
Impact Analysis for the Proposed Revisions to the Emission Guidelines
for Existing Sources and Supplemental Proposed New Source Performance
Standards in the Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Sector'' is available
in the docket.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection requirements in this supplemental
proposal have been submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA. The
Information Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared for
this supplemental proposal has been assigned EPA ICR number 2498.02.
You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is
briefly summarized here.
The information required to be collected is necessary to identify
the regulated entities subject to the proposed NSPS and to ensure their
compliance with the proposed NSPS and this supplemental proposal. The
recordkeeping and reporting requirements are mandatory and are being
established under authority of CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 7414). All
information other than emissions data submitted as part of a report to
the agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be
safeguarded according to CAA section 114(c) and the EPA's implementing
regulations at 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
The information collection requirements in the proposed NSPS (79 FR
41828, July 17, 2014) were submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA.
The ICR document that the EPA prepared was assigned EPA ICR number
2498.01. Since the NSPS review was proposed on July 17, 2014, the EPA
updated the number of existing landfills likely to modify after July
17, 2014, and, thus, become subject to proposed 40 CFR part 60, subpart
XXX, as discussed in this preamble. The supplemental proposal to lower
the emission threshold for new and modified sources affects the burden
estimates the EPA presented in EPA ICR number 2498.01. As a result, the
EPA updated the EPA ICR number 2498.01 and re-submitted it to OMB for
approval as EPA ICR 2498.02 to reflect the estimated number of
respondents and a lower NMOC emission rate. A copy of the ICR is in
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0215, and it is briefly summarized here.
Respondents/affected entities: MSW landfills that commence
construction, reconstruction, or modification after July 17, 2014.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 60,
subpart XXX).
Estimated number of respondents: 144 MSW landfills that commence
construction, reconstruction, or modification after July 17, 2014.
Frequency of response: Initially, occasionally, and annually.
Total estimated burden: 101,031 Hours (per year) for the responding
facilities and 2,790 hours (per year) for the agency. These are
estimates for the average annual burden for the first 3 years after the
rule is final. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: $6,724,350 (per year), which includes
annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs, for the
responding facilities and $177,680 (per year) for the agency. These are
estimates for the average annual cost for the first 3 years after the
rule is final.
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 the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
Submit your comments on the agency's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden to the EPA using the docket identified at
the beginning of this rule. You may also send your ICR-related comments
to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to
[email protected], Attention: Desk Officer for the EPA.
Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30
and 60 days after receipt, OMB must receive comments no later than
September 28, 2015. The EPA will respond to any ICR-related comments in
the final rules.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. The
small entities subject to the requirements of the
[[Page 52167]]
supplemental proposal may include private small businesses and small
governmental jurisdictions that own or operate landfills. Although it
is unknown how many new landfills will be owned or operated by small
entities, recent trends in the waste industry have been towards
consolidated ownership among larger companies. The EPA has determined
that approximately 10 percent of the existing landfills subject to
similar regulations (40 CFR part 60, subparts WWW and Cc or the
corresponding state or federal plan) are small entities. It was
determined that the July 2014 proposed NSPS subpart would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Given the changes in the number of landfills anticipated to become
subject to the new proposed NSPS, the potential impact on small
entities has been reanalyzed. The EPA has determined that, with a size
threshold of 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m\3\ and an NMOC emission
rate threshold of 34 Mg/yr, approximately two small entities may
experience an impact of greater than 1 percent of revenues. Details of
the analysis are presented in ``Regulatory Impact Analysis for the
Proposed Revisions to the Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources and
Supplemental Proposed New Source Performance Standards in the Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills Sector,'' located in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2003-0215.
Although not required by the RFA to convene a Small Business
Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel because the EPA has now determined that
the proposed NSPS would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the EPA originally convened a
panel to obtain advice and recommendations from small entity
representatives potentially subject to this rule's requirements. A copy
of the Summary of Small Entity Outreach is included in Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0215.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million
or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538. This supplemental
NSPS proposal applies to landfills that commenced construction,
reconstruction, or modification after July 17, 2014. Impacts resulting
from the proposed NSPS are far below the applicable threshold. Thus,
the proposed NSPS is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or
205 of the UMRA. However, in developing the proposed NSPS, the EPA
consulted with small governments pursuant to a plan established under
section 203 of the UMRA to address impacts of regulatory requirements
in the rule that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The EPA held meetings as discussed in section II.E of this
preamble under Federalism consultations.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
The EPA has concluded that the supplemental proposal for the NSPS
does not have Federalism implications. The proposed NSPS 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. The supplemental proposal will not
have impacts of $25 million or more in any one year. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to the supplemental proposal.
Although section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the
supplemental NSPS proposal, the EPA consulted with state and local
officials and representatives of state and local governments early in
the process of developing the proposed rules for MSW landfills (both
the NSPS and Emission Guidelines) to permit them to have meaningful and
timely input into its development.
The EPA conducted a Federalism Consultation Outreach Meeting on
September 10, 2013. Due to interest in that meeting, additional
outreach meetings were held on November 7, 2013, and November 14, 2013.
Participants included the National Governors' Association, the National
Conference of State Legislatures, the Council of State Governments, the
National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National
Association of Counties, the International City/County Management
Association, the National Association of Towns and Townships, the
County Executives of America, the Environmental Council of States,
National Association of Clean Air Agencies, Association of State and
Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials, environmental agency
representatives from 43 states, and approximately 60 representatives
from city and county governments. The comment period for the outreach
meetings related to the NSPS proposal was extended to allow sufficient
time for interested parties to review briefing materials and provide
comments. Concerns raised during the consultations include:
implementation concerns associated with shortening of gas collection
system installation and/or expansion timeframes, concerns regarding
significant lowering of the design capacity or emission thresholds, the
need for clarifications associated with wellhead operating parameters
and the need for consistent, clear and rigorous surface monitoring
requirements.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
The supplemental proposal does not have tribal implications, as
specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Based on methodology used to predict future landfills as outlined in
the docketed memorandum ``Summary of Landfill Dataset Used in the Cost
and Emission Reduction Analysis of Landfills Regulations. 2014,''
future tribal landfills are not anticipated to be large enough to
become subject to the proposed NSPS or this supplemental proposal.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. The EPA
specifically solicits comment on this action from tribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. The supplemental NSPS proposal is
not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an
environmental health risk or safety risk. We also note that the methane
and NMOC reductions expected from the proposed NSPS will have positive
health effects, including for children.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Further, we have concluded that the
proposed NSPS and supplemental NSPS proposal are not likely to have any
adverse energy effects because the energy demanded to operate these
control systems will be offset by additional energy supply from LFG
energy projects.
[[Page 52168]]
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This supplemental NSPS proposal does not involve technical
standards, however, the NSPS proposed on July 17, 2014 involves
technical standards. For the proposed NSPS, the EPA has proposed to use
EPA Methods 2E, 3, 3A, 3C, 21, 25, and 25C of 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A. While the EPA identified nine voluntary consensus standards (VCS) as
being potentially applicable (ANSI/ASME PTC 19-10-1981 Part 10, ASTM
D3154-00 (2006), ASME B133.9-1994 (2001), ISO 10396:1993 (2007), ISO
12039:2001, ASTM D5835-95 (2007), ASTM D6522-00 (2005), CAN/CSA Z223.2-
M86 (1999), ISO 14965:2000(E)), the agency decided not to use these
methods. The EPA determined that the nine candidate VCS identified for
measuring emissions of pollutants or their surrogates subject to
emission standards in the rule would not be practical due to lack of
equivalency, documentation, validation data, and other important
technical and policy considerations. The EPA's review, including review
comments for these nine methods, is documented in the memorandum,
``Voluntary Consensus Standard Results for Standards of Performance for
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills 40 CFR part 60, subpart XXX'' in the
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0215.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by the proposed NSPS and this supplemental proposal will not have
potential disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority, low-income, or indigenous
populations because the proposed NSPS and this supplemental proposal
would reduce emissions of LFG, which contains both NMOC and methane.
These avoided emissions will improve air quality and reduce public
health and welfare effects associated with exposure to LFG emissions.
Regarding the NSPS proposal and this supplemental proposal, the EPA has
concluded that it is not practicable to determine whether there would
be disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority, low income, or indigenous populations from the
proposed NSPS and supplemental proposal because it is unknown where new
or modified facilities will be located. The demographic analysis
results and the details concerning their development are presented in
the April 22, 2014 document titled, ``2014 Environmental Justice
Screening Report for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills,'' a copy of which
is available in the docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0215).
Dated: August 14, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-20897 Filed 8-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P