United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
EPA-453R/96-004
February 1999
® EPA Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, Volume 1:
Summary of the Requirements for
the New Source Performance Standards
and Emission Guidelines for
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
FINAL
-------
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, Volume 1:
Summary of the Requirements for the New
Source Performance Standards and Emission Guidelines
for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
(EPA-453R/96-004)
FINAL
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
February 1999
-------
ABSTRACT
This volume is one of several documents designed to assist States, EPA regional offices,
and municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill owners and operators in implementing the New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and Emission Guidelines (EG) for MSW landfills. Full
references to all related documents are provided. Landfills that commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction after May 30,1991 are subject to the Federal NSPS (40 CFR 60
Subpart WWW). The EG (40 CFR Part 60 Subpart Cc) apply to existing landfills that
commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction before May 30, 1991, and that have
accepted waste at any time since November 8, 1987, or have additional capacity for future waste
deposition. The requirements of the NSPS and EG are similar. Enclosed is a summary of the
NSPS and EG and the control, monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Explanations are included to help implementing agencies determine applicability, ensure
compliance, collect and review reports, and conduct inspections. The appendices include tools
for ensuring compliance, such as test methods, checklists, and calculation procedures.
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Emission Standards Division of the Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, EPA, and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or
commercial products is not intended to constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Copies of this report are available through the Library Services Office (MD-35),
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, or from National
Technical Information Services, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.
iv
-------
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, Volume 1
Summary of the Requirements for the New
Source Performance Standards and Emission Guidelines
for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
(EPA-453R/96-004)
Available at:
(1) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center
Room M-1500 Waterside Mall, Ground Floor
Phone: 202-260-7548
Docket Number: A-88-09
Item number: IV-J-69
(2) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Regional Office Libraries (Regions I-X)
(see Appendix D for addresses)
(3) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPA Technology Transfer Network Website (TTN Web)
Office of Air Policy and Guidance (OARPG) at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg
The file is located under:
Actions Sorted by CAA Title
Title in
v
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT 1-1
1.2 REGULATORY BACKGROUND 1-2
1.3 BACKGROUND ON LANDFILL GAS 1-2
1.4 RELATED DOCUMENTS 1-4
1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THIS DOCUMENT 1-5
2.0 OVERVIEW OF THE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES 2-1
2.1 NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (40 CFR 60, SUBPART
WWW) 2-1
2.1.1 Applicability Determinations 2-1
2.1.2 Regulatory Standards 2-7
2.1.3 Demonstrating Compliance 2-18
2.2 EMISSION GUIDELINES (40 CFR PART 60, SUBPART Cc) 2-42
2.2.1 Applicability Criteria for "Existing" Landfills 2-43
2.2.2 Flexibility in Establishing Control Requirements for State-Implemented
Emission Standards 2-43
2.2.3 State Plan Development for Implementing the Requirements
of the EG 2-43
2.2.4 Compliance Schedule for a State-Implemented Emission
Standard 2-44
3.0 IMPLEMENTATION AND COMPLIANCE 3-1
3.1 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS 3-1
3.2 STATE PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR EG AND ACTIVITIES TO
IMPLEMENT THEIR PLAN 3-18
4.0 INSPECTION PROCEDURES 4-1
4.1 PREPARING FOR THE INSPECTION 4-1
4.2 INSPECTION OF RECORDS AND EQUIPMENT 4-3
vi
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1-1 Contents of the Appendices 1-6
2-1 Overview Topics for the MSW Landfill NSPS 2-2
2-2 Organization of the NSPS, EG, and Test Methods 2-3
2-3 Summary of Monitoring Requirements for MSW Landfills 2-20
2-4 Summary of Recordkeeping Requirements for MSW Landfills 2-27
2-5 Summary of Compliance Reporting Requirements for MSW Landfills 2-34
3-1 Applicability of the NSPS and EG to MSW Landfills 3-7
3-2 Schedule for MSW Landfill Compliance with the Emission Guidelines 3-21
vii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
2-1 Landfill NSPS and EG Applicability Based on Size and Construction and
Modification History 2-5
2-2 Flow Chart for Determining Control Requirements 2-10
2-3 General Milestones for the Compliance and Schedule
for an Example Landfill 2-17
2-4 Flow Chart of Surface Monitoring Requirements 2-22
2-5 Example Traverses for Monitoring Methane Concentrations 2-24
3-1 NSPS Reporting Sequence for an Example Landfill 3-5
3-2 Example Initial NMOC Emission Rate Report 3-9
3-3 Sample Letter to Report Landfill Closure 3-11
3-4 Sample Letter to Report Control Equipment Removal 3-12
3-5 Landfill Report Tracking Log 3-15
3-6 Example Tracking Spreadsheet 3-16
viii
-------
APPENDICES
Appendix Page
A EG (Subpart Cc), NSPS (Subpart WWW), Amendments to Subparts Cc
and WWW, and Appendix A-Reference Methods (Method 2E, Method 3C,
Method 25C) A-l
B Applicable Test Method not Attached to the Regulations (Method 21) B-l
C Part 60, Subpart A (General Provisions) C-l
D MSW Landfill Contacts D-l
E Collection System Design Plans E-l
F Report Checklist F-l
G On-Site Inspection Checklists G-l
H Example Report Forms H-l
I Tier Calculation Details and Equations 1-1
J Computer Model for Landfill Air Emissions Estimation J-l
K Landfill Report Log K-l
ix
-------
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Act
Clean Air Act (of 1990)
AFS
Aerometric Emissions Information Retrieval System Facility Subsystem
BDT
Best Demonstrated Technology
BID
Background Information Document
CERCLA
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FID
Flame Ionization Detector
LFG
Landfill Gas
m3
Cubic meters
Mg
Megagram (2204 lb)
MSW
Municipal Solid Waste
MWC
Municipal Waste Combustor
NAAQS
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NMOC
Non-methane Organic Compounds
NSPS
New Source Performance Standard
NSR
New Source Review
OVA
Organic vapor analyzer
PCP
Pollution Control Project
RCRA
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SIP
State Implementation Plan
TTN Web
EPA Technology Transfer Network Website
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to the implementing agency
on the steps necessary to implement the Emission Guidelines (EG) and New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) for municipal solid waste landfills. This is the first of two guidance
documents designed to assist States, EPA regional offices, and Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
landfill owners and operators in implementing the EG and NSPS. The NSPS regulate emissions
from new landfills and the EG regulate emissions from existing landfills. This enabling
document supplements the EG and NSPS, explains landfills control, monitoring, recordkeeping
and reporting requirements, and assists States in determining compliance. Included are
discussions on activities to implement the NSPS and EG, how to identify new landfills, ensure
compliance, and collect and review reports. This document also includes a discussion on the
procedures to prepare for and conduct on-site inspections to ensure compliance. The appendices
contain tools for determining compliance with the rules.
States must develop State Plans as part of the implementation process for the EG.
The required content of State Plans and the adoption and submittal schedule are discussed in
detail in "Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, Volume 2: Summary of the Requirements for
Section 111(d) State Plans for Implementing the Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Emission
Guidelines," (EPA-456/R-96-005) (MSW Landfills, Volume 2). The description and location of
MSW Landfills, Volume 2 and other helpful documents is provided in Section 1.4, Related
Documents.
1-1
-------
1.2 REGULATORY BACKGROUND
The NSPS implement section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act (Act) is the basis for
regulations issued for categories of new emission sources which "... cause, or contribute
significantly to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or
welfare." The responsibility of implementing the NSPS lies with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). However, the EPA has the ability to delegate authority to the State.
The EG implement section 111(d) of the Act. The EG require a State to submit a plan that
establishes emission standards for existing sources when NSPS have been promulgated for a
designated pollutant, such as landfill gas (LFG). The EPA publishes EG to establish minimum
requirements that States can use in establishing their emission standards. States have
responsibility for implementing the EG and are required to submit an implementation plan to the
EPA.
The NSPS and EG were proposed in the Federal Register on May 30, 1991 (58 FR
24468). On June 21, 1993, EPA published a notice in the Federal Register (58 FR 33791)
providing information on additional data used in developing the final NSPS and EG for MSW
landfills. The final standards and guidelines were published in the Federal Register on March 12,
1996 (61 FR 9905). Amendments to the final standards and guidelines appeared as a direct final
notice in the Federal Register on June 16, 1998, (63 FR 32743). The final rule, including the
direct final amendments, is contained in Appendix A. The amendments correct errors and clarify
regulatory text regarding primarily applicability and design capacity. The direct final is effective
as of August 17, 1998.
1.3 BACKGROUND ON LANDFILL GAS
How Is Landfill Gas Formed?
Landfill gas is generated by bacterial decomposition of organic materials in solid
waste. General practice for landfills is to provide a daily cover of soil over the refuse. Therefore,
refuse is insulated from the atmosphere and decomposition occurs anaerobically (without
oxygen). However, air is always present initially and, in some circumstances, may never be fully
expelled by anaerobic gases.
1-2
-------
What Is Contained in Landfill Gas and How Does it Affect the Public?
The composition of LFG is approximately 50 percent methane, 50 percent carbon
dioxide, and less than 1 percent of many different "nonmethane" organic gases, described as
NMOC. The NMOC originate from organic chemicals present in municipal waste that has been
placed in a landfill and from products of refuse decomposition. Municipal wastes may include
waste items such as paints, solvents, pesticides, and adhesives which contain numerous organic
compounds. These organic compounds are stripped from the refuse by the generation of methane
and carbon dioxide from decomposing refuse.
Evidence from EPA and State studies indicates that LFG has adverse effects on
both public health and welfare. These adverse effects include:
c
(1) groundlevel ozone formation,
(2) cancer and noncancer health effects,
(3) odor nuisance,
(4) methane migration (fire hazard) potential, and
(5) global warming from methane emissions.
How Are Landfills Different From Other Stationary Sources?
The primary difference between an MSW landfill and a typical stationary source
is that a landfill may continue to generate and emit a significant quantity of emissions for more
than 10 years after the facility has closed or has ceased to accept waste. A typical stationary
source (e.g., a utility boiler) generates emissions only while it is in operation.
What Are Current Methods for Controlling Landfill Gas?
Control of LFG emissions requires both an effective gas collection system and a
control device. Landfill gas collection systems can be categorized as one of two basic types:
active and passive gas collection systems. Active systems use mechanical blowers or
compressors to create a vacuum that draws LFG through deposited refuse and into gas collection
wells. Passive systems rely on the natural LFG pressure within the landfill that creates a positive
pressure gradient so LFG flows from the landfill into the gas collection wells. The rule provides
minimum criteria for an active gas collection system. The rule includes provisions for using
1-3
-------
alternative designs for a gas collection system (active or passive), as long as the alternative
designs are demonstrated to be equivalent.
Once LFG enters a collection well, via either an active or passive collection
system, the gas is directed to a control device through a network of piping. Landfill gas may be
controlled by recovering the gas as a fuel source or by destroying the organic content of the gas.
Since methane comprises nearly 50 percent of LFG, the gas can be processed and sold as a fuel.
Generally, the goal is to process LFG to a purity level equivalent to that of pipeline natural gas.
Control methods that destroy the organic content of LFG include flares,
gas turbines, internal combustion engines, and boilers. The rule requires injecting LFG into the
combustion zone of these combustion devices to ensure the complete destruction of the organic
content. Gas turbines, internal combustion engines, and boilers provide the opportunity for
energy recovery, while flares do not. Energy recovery often provides an economic incentive
since steam or power generated by these devices can be used on site or sold.
1.4 RELATED DOCUMENTS
A number of related documents and resources are available that may prove useful
to States, EPA regional offices, and landfill owners and operators. Documents posted on the
TTN Web may be accessed by computer as described on page iv. The user can download an
electronic copy from the EPA Technology Transfer Network Website (TTN Web). Otherwise,
printed copies of the documents are available as indicated.
• "Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, Volume 2: Summary of the
Requirements for Section 111(d) State Plans for Implementing the
Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Emission Guidelines," EPA-456R/96-005
(MSW Landfills, Volume 2) has been posted on the TTN Web, and
explains the State Plan development and approval process. MSW
Landfills, Volume 2 outlines and explains the required content of State
Plans, outlines the timeline and responsibilities for developing and
submitting State Plans, and answers general questions about how to
prepare State Plans. The document is also available in the docket (see
address on page iv).
• "Municipal Solid Waste Landfill New Source Performance Standards and
Emission Guidelines—Issues and Answers," is posted on the TTN Web
1-4
-------
and contains a periodically updated summary of answers to questions EPA
has recently been asked about the MSW Landfills NSPS and Emission
Guidelines.
• "Air Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Landfills — Background
Information for Final Standards and Guidelines," EPA-453/R-94-021
contains summaries of public comments received on the landfills NSPS
and Emission Guidelines, EPA's responses, and the estimated impacts of
these regulations. This document may be obtained from the TTN Web, the
U.S. EPA Library (MD-33), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone
(919) 541-2777, or from the docket (see addresses on page iv).
• EPA's Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP). To cost-effectively
reduce methane emissions from landfills, the EPA encourages the
development of environmentally and economically beneficial landfill gas-
to-energy projects through the LMOP. The LMOP works with States,
utilities, and the landfill gas-to-energy industry to facilitate the
development of successful projects. One of the key ways the LMOP does
this is by publishing technical information on how to develop a gas-to-
energy project including current technology, cost, and financing options,
and regulatory considerations. Appendix D includes information on how
to contact LMOP.
• "Landfill Gas Emissions Model" Version 2.0 , and User's Manual,
February 1998. The computer model can be used to calculate annual
emission rates as to determine applicability of the NSPS or Emission
Guidelines or for State emission inventory or other purposes. The user's
guide and electronic files can be purchased from the National Technical
Information Services, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161,
telephone: (703) 487-4650, or accessed on the TTN Web at
http://www.epa.gOv/ttn/catc/products.html#software.
1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THIS DOCUMENT
This document is organized into four sections and eleven appendices. Section 2
presents a brief overview of the regulations to provide the implementing agency with a basic
understanding of the requirements of the EG and NSPS. Section 3 provides guidance on
activities to implement and ensure compliance with the EG and NSPS. Section 4 provides a
discussion on procedures to prepare for and conduct on-site inspections to ensure compliance.
The appendices include copies of the applicable regulations and tools for determining
compliance. Table 1-1 summarizes the contents of these appendices.
1-5
-------
TABLE 1-1. CONTENTS OF THE APPENDICES
Appendix
Contents
A
Subparts Cc, WWW, and amendments, and accompanying reference
methods promulgated with the rule
B
One additional test method referred to by the regulations
C
40 CFR Part 60, Subpart A (General Provisions), which applies to all
NSPS
D
MSW Landfill Contacts
E
Collection system design plans
F
Reporting checklists for use by the implementing agency to determine
whether all applicable data is reported by the landfill
G
On-site inspection checklist for use by the implementing agency to
determine compliance
H
Blank reporting forms that fulfill the reporting requirements and that can
be submitted by the landfills
I
Tiered NMOC emission calculation procedures
J
Information on an EPA computer model that can be used to estimate
landfill emissions
K
Spreadsheet to track reports from landfills
1-6
-------
2.0 OVERVIEW OF THE STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES
This section provides an overview of requirements for the NSPS and EG for
MSW landfills. Requirements for the NSPS are discussed in section 2.1. Requirements for the
EG are discussed in section 2.2. The requirements of these two standards are parallel so the
majority of items discussed for the NSPS are generally applicable to the EG, except where noted.
2.1 NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (40 CFR 60,
SUBPART WWW)
The requirements for these NSPS are summarized under a series of topics as
shown in Table 2-1. These topics organize the requirements in a linear and progressive order,
thereby providing more clarity and reduced repetition. The summary also includes references for
locating each requirement in the published rule. The published rule is organized by headings
similar to those shown in Table 2-2.
2.1.1 Applicability Determinations
How Is a "New" Landfill Defined?
The NSPS applies to "new" landfills. A "new" landfill is defined as a landfill that
commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction on or after May 30, 1991. The
implementing agency will determine whether changes to a landfill's design or operation meet the
definitions of modification or reconstruction discussed below. The EG applies to "existing"
landfills. An "existing" landfill is a landfill that is not a "new" landfill.
2-1
-------
TABLE 2-1. OVERVIEW TOPICS FOR THE MSW LANDFILL NSPS
2.1.1 APPLICABILITY DETERMINATIONS
How Is a "New" Landfill Defined?
What Is Landfill Size Exemption?
How Is the Design Capacity Determined?
What Portions of a Landfill Are Subject to the Rule?
Will Remedial Actions Affect Applicability?
How Does New Source Review Affect Landfills?
2.1.2 REGULATORY STANDARDS
How Is the Need to Control Landfills Determined?
How Are NMOC Emissions Calculated?
What Is the Required Gas Collection Technology?
What Are the Operational Requirements for the Gas Collection System?
What Is the Required Gas Control Technology?
What Is the Compliance Schedule for Installing Controls?
When Can Gas Collection and Control Systems Be Removed?
2.1.3 DEMONSTRATING COMPLIANCE
What Must Be Monitored?
What Recordkeeping Must Be Kept?
What Must Be Reported?
2-2
-------
TABLE 2-2. ORGANIZATION OF THE NSPS, EG, AND TEST METHODS
Part 60, Subpart WWW - Standards of Performance for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
§ 60.750
Applicability, Designation of Affected Facility, and Delegation of Authority
§ 60.751
Definitions
§ 60.752
Standards for Air Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
§ 60.753
Operational Standards for Collection and Control Systems
§ 60.754
Test Methods and Procedures
§ 60.755
Compliance Provisions
§ 60.756
Monitoring of Operations
§ 60.757
Reporting Requirements
§ 60.758
Recordkeeping Requirements
§ 60.759
Specifications for Active Collection Systems
Part 60, Subpart Cc - Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Municipal Solid
Waste Landfills
§ 60.30c
Scope
§ 60.31c
Definitions
§ 60.32c
Designated Facilities
§ 60.33c
Emission Guidelines for Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Emissions
§ 60.34c
Test Methods and Procedures
§ 60.35c
Reporting and Recordkeeping Guidelines
§ 60.36c
Compliance Times
Part 60, Appendix A - Reference Methods (the following methods have been added)
Method 2E Determination of Landfill Gas Production Flow Rate
Method 3C Determination of Carbon Dioxide, Methane, Nitrogen, and Oxygen from
Stationary Sources
Method 25C Determination of Nonmethane Organic Compounds (NMOC) in Landfill
Gases
2-3
-------
An existing landfill that commenced construction before May 30, 1991, but began accepting
waste after May 1991 would be subject to the EG rather than the NSPS. Figure 2-1 illustrates
whether a landfill is subject to the EG or NSPS based on its construction and modification
history.
If an existing landfill has been or is "modified" on or after May 30, 1991, it will
be subject to the provisions of the NSPS. The definition of "modification" specific to landfills is
included in the landfill NSPS (§ 60.751) and is based on the landfill's design capacity. A
modification is an increase in the permitted design capacity caused by an increase in the
horizontal or vertical dimensions of the landfill. Such a modification makes the landfill subject
to the NSPS. Modification does not occur until the owner or operator commences construction
on the horizontal or vertical expansion. Existing landfills that make an operational change (for
example, increasing the moisture content of the waste, increasing the physical compaction on the
surface, changing the cover material or thickness of daily cover, and changing bailing or
compaction practices), but do not increase the horizontal or vertical dimensions of the landfill
continue to be subject to the EG rather than the NSPS.
Reconstructions are unlikely for landfills. As specified in the NSPS General
Provisions (§ 60.15), reconstructions are "the replacement of components of an existing facility
[landfill] to such and extent that: the fixed capital cost of the new components exceeds
50 percent of the fixed capital cost of a comparable entirely new facility [landfill]..." The
Agency knows of no situation where this would occur at a landfill.
What Is the Landfill Size Exemption?
Each new landfill with a design capacity below 2.5 million megagrams (Mg) or
2.5 million cubic meters (m3) is exempt from most of the requirements in this rule. A small
landfill with a capacity below the exemption level is required only to submit an Initial Design
Capacity Report to the implementing agency [§ 60.75.2(a)], The report documents the current
design capacity of the landfill (see section 2.1.3 Demonstrating Compliance, Initial Design
Capacity Report).
If the design capacity of a small landfill is ever increased to a revised capacity
equal to or greater than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3, the landfill is no longer exempt from
the compliance requirements of the rule. The EG and the NSPS require the landfill to report
2-4
-------
Landfills Size and Construction/modification History
Outcome
Scenario
Number
May 30,1991
(Proposal Date)
March 12, 1996
(Promulgation Date)
Subject to NSPS or EG?
(Reason Code)
1
(^Small3^.
2
^ -v
C55>
3
c2E£>
4
5
6
7
(^Large^)
8
(^Large^)
9
(^Large^)
10
11
Modified to
Become Large
Sma
Modified to
Become Larger
(^Large^)-
EG Design Capacity Report Only (2)
Subject to NSPS (1)c
Modified to
Become Large
Subject to NSPS (1^
-1*4 NSPS Design Capacity Report Only (1)
Modified to
Become Large
Subject to NSPS(1)
Small3
NSPS Design Capacity Report Only (1)
Subject to EG (2)°
Subject to NSPS (1)c
Subject to
EG (2)°
Modified to
Become Larger
Subject to NSPS (1)c
Subject to NSPS(1)C
Large"
Subject to NSPS
Code for Reason landfill is Subject to NSPS
(1) Commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction on or after May 30,1991
Code for Reason Landfil is Subject (o Emission Guidelines
(2) Landfills that commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction before May 30,1991, are subject to the EG
'Small means design capacity <25 million Mg or 2 5 million rrf
¦Largo means design capacity a 2 5 million Mg and 2 5 million mp
'"Subject to* means the landfill must submit annual emission reports and must irstal controls If emissions are 2 50 Mgtyf
F)ga«2-! Landfill NSPS or EG Applicability B&sedoraSite and Construction and Mocifi cation H istory
n <**
-------
any increase in design capacity that results in a capacity above the design capacity cutoff (see
section 2.1.3 Demonstrating Compliance, amended Design Capacity Report).
How Is the Design Capacity Determined?
The Initial Design Capacity Report is used to determine the design capacity of the
landfill. Most landfills have permits from a State, local, or tribal agency that indicate the design
capacity of the landfill. If there are multiple permits, the most recent permit is used to determine
design capacity. A permit may express design capacity on a volumetric basis or a mass basis.
The owner or operator may choose to convert the design capacity from volume to mass or from
mass to volume, using a site-specific density, in order to demonstrate that the design capacity is
less than the 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m3 design capacity cutoff level. If the density
changes, the design capacity changes. Therefore, the site-specific density must be recalculated
annually. If a landfill does not have a permit specifying design capacity, the design capacity must
be calculated. The various calculations and the contents of an Initial Design Capacity Report are
discussed in section 2.1.3 Demonstrating Compliance.
What Portions of a Landfill Are Subject to the Rule?
When the rule applies to a landfill, it applies to the "entire landfill." An entire
landfill is defined as the total landfill property designated for solid waste disposal irrespective of
subdividing geographical landmarks such as access roads or disposal cell boundaries, and under
common ownership or control. The total landfill property includes all areas actively receiving
refuse, all closed disposal cells, and all areas that may be designated to receive refuse in the
future.
Will Remedial Actions Affect Applicability?
Remedial actions generally will not trigger NSPS for a landfill. Specifically,
CERCLA remedial actions, RCRA correction actions, and State remedial actions are not
considered construction, modification, or reconstruction and would not subject a landfill to the
NSPS.
2-6
-------
How Does New Source Review Affect Landfills?
In addition to the NSPS, landfills may be subject to the New Source Review
(NSR) requirements of the Act. The NSR program requires the preconstruction review of major
new sources and major modifications. The review includes a control technology review and an
analysis of the air quality impacts of the new or modified source. New landfills that are major
sources and existing landfills that make modifications that result in significant emissions
increases are subject to major NSR requirements. For example, a landfill may install a
combustion device to control NMOC, but simultaneously increase secondary emissions.
However, there is an exemption of NSR that may be available to an existing landfill that would
otherwise trigger NSR. This Pollution Control Project (PCP) exclusion was established to allow
States to exempt from major NSR PCPs that are, on balance, "environmentally beneficial."
Landfills that apply controls to comply with the EG may qualify for the PCP exclusion. EPA has
issued guidance on whether such projects as adding combustion controls at a landfill qualify for
the PCP exclusion. On a case-by-case basis, States may use the EPA guidance to determine
whether projects such as the addition of combustion controls at landfills qualify for the PCP
exemption. NSR and the PCP exclusion are discussed in detail in MSW Landfills, Volume 2.
2.1.2 Regulatory Standards
The provisions of the NSPS apply to all "new" landfills with a maximum design
capacity equal to or greater than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3. The provisions include
criteria for determining landfill control requirements, design and operating specifications for
control equipment, compliance schedules, and criteria for removal of controls. The provisions
also include a series of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements, which are
discussed in section 2.1.3.
How Is the Need to Control Landfills Determined?
Control requirements for a landfill are determined by calculating the NMOC
emission rate from the landfill. The NMOC emission rate has been selected as a surrogate for
LFG emissions. Each landfill that is at least 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3 in design
2-7
-------
capacity must perform an initial NMOC emissions rate calculation until the landfill has installed
a gas collection and control system according to specifications in the rule.
If the landfill NMOC emission rate is determined to be equal to or greater than
50 Mg/yr, the landfill owner or operator is required to install a gas collection and control device
to reduce the landfill NMOC emissions [§ 60.752(b)(2)], If the landfill NMOC emission rate is
determined to be less than 50 Mg/yr, then the landfill only needs to calculate and report its
NMOC emission rate periodically. An NMOC Emission Rate Report is submitted each year until
such time as the recalculated NMOC emission rate is equal to or greater than 50 Mg/yr or the
landfill ceases to accept waste [§ 60.752(b)(1)].
The NMOC emission rate is calculated periodically because landfill emissions
change over time. These factors are described in greater detail in the background information
document (BID) published at proposal and entitled "Air Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills - Background Information for Proposed Standards and Guidelines" (EPA-450/3-90-
011a).
How Are NMOC Emissions Calculated?
The rule includes detailed procedures for calculating NMOC emissions from
landfills (§ 60.754). The procedure consists of a three-tiered approach, with Tier 1 being the
simplest. All "tier" calculations provide an estimate of NMOC emissions, as a function of site-
specific information such as age of landfill and waste acceptance rate and three variables:
• Methane generation rate constant, (k);
• Refuse methane generation potential, (L0); and
• NMOC concentration in LFG (CnmOC)-
Tier 1 calculations use default values for k, L0, and C^MOC' ar>d they tend to
overstate NMOC emission rates. An alternative default methane generation rate constant (k) of
0.02 per year is provided for Tier 1 calculations for landfills in geographical areas with an annual
average precipitation of less than 25 inches. The average annual precipitation must be measured
by the nearest representative meteorological site. (Landfills located in geographical areas with
low precipitation experience slower decomposition of their waste than landfills located in
2-8
-------
geographical areas with moderate to high rainfall.) For details on tier equations and calculation
procedures, see appendix I.
If Tier 1 calculations indicate emissions equal to or greater than 50 Mg/yr, a
landfill owner or operator has two compliance options. The first option requires the landfill
owner or operator to initiate control of NMOC emissions from the landfill by submitting a design
plan for a gas collection and control system. The second option requires the landfill owner or
operator to recalculate the NMOC emission rate using Tier 2 or Tier 3 procedures. These
additional tier procedures determine site-specific data through testing. However, a landfill owner
or operator may elect to skip any or all of the additional tier procedures and install landfill
controls at any time after the NMOC emission rate has been calculated to exceed the emission
limit.
Tier 2 calculations are based on site-specific measured NMOC concentrations and
yield a more accurate estimate of the NMOC emission rate. The NMOC concentrations are
determined by performing EPA Method 25C or Method 18. Tier 2 measurements require the
waste to be 2 years old. If the first waste deposited is not 2 years old at the time Tier 2
calculations are required to be done, the landfill owner or operator may wait until the waste is
2 years old. If Tier 2 calculations result in NMOC emissions equal to or greater than 50 Mg/yr,
then Tier 3 calculations may be performed.
Tier 3 calculations are based on both site-specific NMOC concentrations and a
site-specific methane generation rate constant (k). Tier 3 calculations yield the most accurate
determination of NMOC emission rate. The NMOC concentrations are determined by following
the Tier 2 procedures. The methane generation rate (k) is determined by performing EPA
Method 2E.
It is unlikely that a site-specific Tier 3 evaluation will lower the annual NMOC
emission estimate below the 50 Mg/yr threshold unless the Tier 2 calculation is only slightly
higher than the threshold. Dry, arid regions may show a more significant lowering of emissions
at Tier 3 than wet regions.
Figure 2-2 presents a flow chart showing the steps for determining NMOC
emissions from a landfill, and for determining whether the landfill must be controlled.
Additional information on tier equations and calculation procedures is included in appendix I.
2-9
-------
Is the
Design Capacity
>2,500,000 Mg
and
3
No Further Action
Necessary Unless
There Is an Increase
In Design Capacity
of Landfill
Initial Design
Capacity Report
60.757(a)(l)-(2)
>2.500,000m
?
Calculate NMOC
Emission Rate
60.754(a)(1)
Recalculate at
Specified Intervals
Submit Emission
Rate Report
60.757(b)
Is the
Landfill
Closed
?
Submit Collection
and Control System
Design Plan per
60.752(b)(2) and 60.759
NMOC Emission
TIER 2
Determine NMOC
Concentration via
Sampling
Install
System
Design Plan Approved
by implementing Agency
Recalculate NMOC
Emission Rate
Using TIER 2 NMOC
Concentration
60.754(a)(3)
Submit
Performance
Test
60.8
Redetermine NMOC
Concentration per HER 2
Every 5 Years
Submit TIER 2 Revised
Emission Rate Report
60.757(c)(1)
Recalculate crt
Specified intervals
NMOC Emission
TIER 3
Determine Site-Specific |
Methane Generation Rate
Recalculate NMOC Emission
Rate Using TIER 2 NMOC
Concentration and TIER 3
Methane Generation Rate
60.754[a)(4)
Redetermine NMOC
Concentration per TIER 2
Every 5 Years
Submit TIER 3 Revised
Emission Rate Report
60.757(c)(2)
Recalculate crt
Specified Intervals
NMOC Emission
Figure 2-2. Flow Chart for Determining Control Requirements
2-10
-------
What Is the Required Gas Collection Technology?
The rule requires collection and control of landfill emissions to the level deemed
"best demonstrated technology" (BDT). The BDT for collecting landfill emissions consists of a
well-designed and well-operated gas collection system to be installed in a landfill to collect LFG
effectively from all disposal areas requiring control. The disposal areas requiring control can be
active, closed, or at final grade with no further waste to be deposited. Active areas requiring
control are areas where the first refuse deposited is five years or older. These areas must be
controlled with the installation of a gas collection system, even though waste is still being
actively deposited. After the initial installation of the collection system, owners and operators
may need to expand the collection system as active areas in which the first waste deposited
reaches the age of five years. Closed areas or areas that are at final grade must be controlled with
the installation of a gas collection system if the first refuse deposited there is two years old or
older [60.752(b)(2)(ii)(A)(2)].
Gas collection systems may rely on active or passive techniques for extracting
LFG from landfill areas requiring control [§ 60.752(b)(2)(ii)(A) or (B)]. Active gas collectors
(e.g., active extraction wells) depend on mechanical blowers or compressors to create a negative
pressure gradient in the landfill. The negative pressure causes LFG to be drawn into the gas
collection system. Passive gas collectors rely on the natural LFG pressure within the landfill
which creates a positive pressure gradient so LFG flows from the landfill into the gas collection
system.
The regulation allows use of a wide variety of collection systems. Because of the
many site-specific factors involved with landfill gas system design, alternative systems may be
necessary. System designs could include vertical wells, combination horizontal and vertical
collection systems, or horizontal trenches only; leachate collection systems; and passive systems.
The rule requires a site-specific Collection and Control System Design Plan to be
prepared by a professional engineer and submitted to the regulatory agency for approval. For an
active system, the plan must show that the collection system is designed to:
(1) Handle the maximum expected gas flow rate over the expected lifespan of
collection system equipment,
2-11
-------
(2) Collect gas from each area or cell in which solid waste has been placed for
5 years if the cell is active and 2 years if it is closed or at final grade,
(3) Collect gas at a sufficient extraction rate (A sufficient extraction rate is a
rate adequate to maintain a negative pressure at all wellheads in the
collection system without causing air infiltration.), and
(4) Minimize off-site migration of subsurface gas.
Passive systems must satisfy criteria (1), (2), and (4) above and must have liners on the bottom
and all sides of the areas in which gas is collected [§ 60.752(b)(2)(ii)(B)(2)]. Gas collected by
either an active or a passive system must be routed to a control device.
To aid in selecting a design that will meet the above BDT control requirements,
the rule provides design criteria for installing active collection systems (§ 60.759). These design
criteria are presented in appendix E. The design plan must either show that the collection system
conforms to the design criteria in § 60.759 or include a demonstration that an alternative design
is sufficient.
Alternative designs could include alternative vertical collection systems,
horizontal trench active collection systems, or passive collection systems. Section 4.1 of the
proposal BE) (EPA-450/3-90-01 la) provides a discussion on collection systems including active
vertical and horizontal collection systems and passive collection systems. Appendix E also
provides examples of alternative collection system designs that were installed and operating prior
to the regulations.
States reviewing design plans may approve or disapprove the plans, or ask the
landfill owner or operator to provide additional information.
What Are the Operational Requirements for the Gas Collection System?
The rule provides operational standards for collection and control systems; test
procedures; compliance provisions; and monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting provisions for
landfill gas collection and control systems in § 60.753 through § 60.758. However, the design
plan required in § 60.752(b)(2) may include alternatives to any of these provisions. In cases
where an alternative design is used in place of the active collection system specifications in
2-12
-------
§ 60.759, it may be appropriate to use alternative operating and compliance provisions that are
consistent with the site-specific design.
This section briefly describes the operational requirements that are used to ensure
that the collection system is performing in accordance with its design and that the four design
criteria listed in the previous section are met on a continuing basis. Additional details on
monitoring and compliance determination provisions are provided in section 2.1.3.
To ensure that the collection system is designed to handle the maximum expected
gas generation rate, § 60.755(a) provides procedures for calculating the gas generation flow rate.
Landfill gas is effectively collected from the landfill when gas collectors are
operated at a sufficient gas extraction rate. To demonstrate that the gas extraction rate for an
active gas collection system is sufficient, a negative pressure must be maintained at each
wellhead [§ 60.753(b) and § 60.755(a)(3)] except as noted in § 60.753(b). Gas collection
systems that operate at a sufficient gas extraction rate minimize the potential of off-site,
migration of subsurface LFG [§ 60.752(b)(2)(ii)].
An excessive gas extraction rate may cause air infiltration into the landfill through
its surface and sides. Under the rule, the nitrogen gas concentration in the collected LFG must be
maintained below 20 percent (or the oxygen concentration maintained below 5 percent) and the
temperature of the collected LFG must be below 55 °C (131 °F) to prevent excess air infiltration
[§ 60.753(c) and § 60.755(a)(5)]. For a specific site, the owner or operator may establish a
higher temperature, or a higher nitrogen or oxygen level for particular wells, with approval from
the State.
An inadequate gas extraction rate may cause LFG to escape through the landfill
surface. Under the rule, the gas extraction rate is considered adequate when the methane
concentration is less than 500 parts per million above background at the surface of the landfill.
To determine if this level is exceeded, surface testing is conducted around the perimeter of the
collection area, along a pattern that traverses the landfill at 30 meter intervals, and where visual
observations indicate elevated concentrations of landfill gas (e.g., distressed vegetation, cracks or
seeps in the cover). The owner or operator may establish an alternative traversing pattern that
ensures equivalent coverage [§ 60.753(d) and § 60.755(c)],
Collection system parameters (pressure, nitrogen concentration, oxygen
concentration, temperature, surface methane concentration) must be monitored periodically to
2-13
-------
ensure that the system is effectively extracting LFG from the landfill. If the monitoring results
indicate problems, the gas collection system must be adjusted, as necessary, to maintain peak
performance [§ 60.755(a)(3), (a)(5), and (d)(4)]. In some cases, upgrades to the collection
system or installation of additional collection devices may be required to correct the problem.
Again, it should be noted that a Collection and Control System Design Plan can
request alternatives to the pressure, temperature, nitrogen concentration, oxygen concentration, or
surface methane monitoring and compliance provisions for landfill gas collection systems. The
plan must provide a justification for the alternatives, and the State agency may approve or
disapprove the proposed alternatives.
Collected LFG is vented through a network of piping to a BDT control device
[§ 60.752(b)(2)(iii)]. The control device is operated at all times when collected LFG is routed
into the control system [§ 60.753(f)] except during times of startup, shut down, or malfunction.
This exception is allowed as long as the operational disruption for the collection system is 5 days
or less [§ 60.755(e)]. In the event the collection system or control device becomes inoperable,
the gas mover system must be shut down. All valves leading to atmospheric venting of LFG in
the gas collection and control system must also be closed [§ 60.753(e)].
What Is the Required Gas Control Technology?
The BDT for controlling landfill emissions is routing collected LFG to a control
device capable of reducing NMOC emissions by 98 weight-percent or reducing emissions to
20 parts per million by volume dry (ppmvd) as hexane. The efficiency or emission reduction
achieved by the control technology must be demonstrated. Acceptable control devices for
landfill emissions are open flares and enclosed combustion devices.
The emission reduction performance of an open flare can be demonstrated by
using a flare that meets certain design and operating parameters [§ 60.752(b)(2)(iii)(A)]. These
design and operating parameters have been specified in 40 CFR § 60.18 to ensure open flares
achieve at least 98 percent destruction efficiency. Measurement of percent reduction or outlet
concentration is not feasible for open flares. Flares meeting the specifications in § 60.18 are
presumed to achieve 98 percent control, and a performance test is not required. However,
§ 60.18 does require a visible emission determination.
2-14
-------
For enclosed combustion devices or other control devices, the landfill owner or
operator must demonstrate either the 98 weight-percent reduction or reduction of the outlet
NMOC concentration to 20 ppmvd as hexane at 3 percent oxygen by performance testing
[§ 60.752(b)(2)(iii)(B)]. The performance test must be in accordance with Method 25C or
Method 18 of appendix A [§ 60.754(d)], Examples of enclosed combustion devices that have the
potential to meet the 98 percent destruction efficiency or 20 ppmvd level include energy recovery
systems (internal combustion [IC] engines, gas turbines, steam generating boilers), enclosed
flares, and thermal incinerators.
Enclosed combustion devices, including IC engines, gas turbines, and steam
generating boilers, provide the opportunity for energy recovery. Therefore, these enclosed
combustion devices may offer economic incentives since the energy or power generated by these
devices may be used on-site or sold.
Another control option is to collect and process LFG for subsequent sale or use as
a fuel source [§ 60.752(b)(2)(iii)(C)]. Generally, contaminates such as carbon dioxide and water
are removed from LFG in sufficient quantities to achieve a purity level equal to that of pipeline
gas. However, any emissions occurring from atmospheric vents on a gas collection and
processing system must be routed to a BDT control device.
The control device is operated at all times when collected LFG is routed into the
control system [§ 60.753(f)] except during times of startup, shut down, or malfunction. This
exception is allowed as long as the operational disruption for the control device is 1 hour or less
[§ 60.755(e)], In the event that the collection or control system becomes inoperable, the gas
mover system is shut down. All valves leading to atmospheric venting of LFG in the gas
collection and control system must also be closed [§ 60.753(e)].
The rule [§ 60.752(b)(2)] includes provisions that allow an owner or operator to
use alternative designs for a gas control system. However, the owner or operator must be able to
demonstrate that an alternative system is able to achieve an equivalent level of control and
emission reduction. The owner or operator may also request approval to use alternatives to the
control system monitoring, test methods and procedures, and compliance provisions in
§§ 60.753, 60.754, and 60.755, respectively.
2-15
-------
What Is the Compliance Schedule for Installing Controls?
Within 30 months after a landfill's NMOC emission rate is first reported to be
equal to or greater than 50 Mg/yr, the provisions of this rule require installation and startup of a
gas collection and control system at the landfill. This interval allows sufficient time for a landfill
owner or operator to submit plans for a control system design and install the control system.
Within 180 days after startup of a gas collection and control system, the landfill owner or
operator must conduct performance testing on the control system to document compliance with
the rule. General milestones for the compliance schedule are presented in Figure 2-3 for an
example landfill. Construction of this example landfill commenced on March 12, 1993.
Therefore, it is defined as a new landfill since construction commenced after the proposal date.
Also, it is assumed that the example landfill capacity is greater than the minimum size limit and
that the emission rate is greater than the emission rate cutoff.
Within 1 year after a landfill's NMOC emission rate is calculated to be equal to or
greater than 50 Mg/yr, the landfill owner or operator must submit a Collection and Control
System Design Plan prepared by a professional engineer. This design plan must meet the design
requirements specified in § 60.752(b)(2)(ii) and include any alternatives to the operational
standards, test methods, procedures, compliance measures, monitoring provisions, or
recordkeeping and reporting provisions. The landfill may install an active collection and control
system design as specified by the rule (§ 60.759) or elect to install a collection and control
system of alternative but equivalent design.
Within 30 months after submitting an NMOC emission rate report showing that
emissions equal or exceed 50 Mg/yr NMOC, the gas collection and control system must be ready
for start-up operations. If a design plan is submitted by 1 year after the annual report showing
emissions greater than or equal to 50 Mg/yr, this leaves 18 months for approval of the design
plan and installation of collection and control systems. The implementing agency is responsible
for approving design plans. Approval time for a system design plan is estimated at 6 months.
For example, the implementing agency conducts a preliminary review of the system design and
submits its comments to the landfill in approximately 2 months. The landfill owner or operator
responds to the comments from the preliminary review within 2 months. The implementing
agency completes its final review of landfill responses to the agency's preliminary review
2-16
-------
Milestone
Example Achievement
Date Compliance Schedule8
Design Capacity Report
I
NMOC Emission
Rate Report
I
June 10, 1996b
June 10, 1996b
Collection and Control
System
Design Plan
June 10, 1997
J
Installation of Collection and
Control System Completed
(up and running, i.e., on-line)
I
Initial Performance Test of
Collection and Control
System to Document
Compliance
December 10, 1998
June 28, 1999
Within 90 days after
promulgation1"
Within 90 days after
promulgation1", and then
annually
Within 1 year after
reporting NMOC
emissions > 50 Mg/yr
Within 30 months after
reporting NMOC
emissions > 50 Mg/yr
Within 180 days after the
initial startup of the control
system
"Promulgation date is March 12, 1996. The time frames specified in this example are based on the dates in § 60.757 of
Subpart WWW.
b Ninety (90) days after promulgation is the due date for landfills constructed, reconstructed, or modified on or after
May 30, 1991, but before March 12, 1996. For landfills constructed on or after March 12, 1996, the due date is 90 days after
construction, reconstruction, or modification.
Figure 2-3. General Milestones for the NSPS Compliance Schedule for an
Example Landfill
2-17
-------
comments within another 2 months. Therefore, approximately 12 months remain for installing
the control system at the landfill.
Within 180 days of the gas collection and control system start-up, the initial
performance test of the control system must be conducted and the results must be submitted to
the implementing agency. The performance test results document the control system's
compliance with the rule.
When Can Gas Collection and Control Systems Be Removed?
The standards allow capping or removal of gas collection and control devices only
when all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(1) The landfill is closed as defined in § 60.751.
(2) The landfill owner or operator notifies the implementing agency by
submitting a Landfill Closure Report [§ 60.752(b)(2)(v)(A)]. A Landfill
Closure Report is described later in section 2.1.3.
(3) The gas collection and control system has been operating continuously for
at least 15 years [§ 60.752(b)(2)(v)(B)].
(4) The landfill NMOC emission rate has been calculated to be less than
50 Mg/yr on three successive test dates. The test dates should be no closer
than 90 days apart and no farther than 180 days apart
[§ 60.752(b)(2)(v)(C)].
2.1.3 Demonstrating Compliance
What Must Be Monitored?
Several operating parameters of a controlled landfill must be monitored to ensure
compliance with the standards. These monitoring parameters verify the performance status of the
gas collection system and control device or gas treatment system. Table 2-3 presents a summary
of monitoring requirements for the gas collection and control system. As previously noted, the
owner or operator can request approval, in the Collection and Control System Design Plan, to
monitor alternative parameters.
2-18
-------
Monitoring Gas Collection Systems
For an active gas collection system that meets design criteria published in
§ 60.759, the gauge pressure, nitrogen or oxygen concentration, and temperature of LFG within
each extraction wellhead must be monitored once a month. Methane concentrations at the
landfill surface must be monitored quarterly. These parameters indicate whether the gas
extraction rates for the extraction wells are adequate. When the methane surface concentration
monitoring for a closed landfill shows no exceedances for three consecutive quarters, then the
landfill owner or operator may "skip" to annual monitoring. If an exceedance is detected,
monitoring resumes on a quarterly schedule until no exceedances are observed for three
consecutive quarters. Also, surface methane monitoring must be performed during typical
meteorological conditions, so monitoring may need to be postponed to allow for typical
conditions to be present. Figure 2-4 provides a flow chart of the surface monitoring
requirements.
If an exceedance is detected, corrective action must be taken by performing cover
maintenance or adjusting the collection system operating parameters. The location of the
exceedance(s) must be rechecked for surface methane concentration within 10 days. If there are
three exceedances at a location within a quarterly period then a new well or collection device
must be installed within 120 days of the initial exceedance. An alternate remedy and timeline
may be proposed to the Administrator. It should be noted that an exceedance of the 500 ppm
surface methane concentration level is not a violation of the rule as long as the proper correction
procedures, as depicted in Figure 2-4, are carried out.
Each extraction well installed in an active collection system must include a
sampling port and a temperature measuring device or access port for temperature measurements.
The sampling port allows easy access for gauge pressure and nitrogen concentration
measurements. An extraction well with an adequate gas extraction rate will maintain a negative
gauge pressure in the wellhead. A negative pressure indicates that a negative pressure gradient
exists within the landfill and LFG is being extracted.
2-19
-------
TABLE 2-3, SUMMARY OF MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FOR MSW LANDFILLS
Equipment
Monitoring Action
Schedule
Reference
Gas Collection
System
Monitor gauge pressure within each gas extraction well,
A negative value indicates a well is operating with a sufficient gas extraction
rate.
Monthly
§60 756(a)(1)
Monitor nitrogen concentration using Method 3C or oxygen concentration using
Method 3 A.
Monthly
160.756(a)(2)
Nitrogen concentration values <20 percent or oxygen concentration values < 5
percent indicate well extraction rates are not causing excessive air infiltration
into the landfill.
Monitor LFG temperature in extraction well; should be <55°C (131°F), unless
otherwise demonstrated that a higher temperature is appropriate.
Monthly
§60.756(a)(3)
An elevated LFG temperature is an indicator of subsurface fires and aerobic
conditions within the landfill.
Monitor methane concentration at the landfill surface.
Quarterly
§60.755(c)
Values <500 ppm above background indicate well extraction rates are sufficient
to minimize the amount of LFG seeping out of the landfill.
OR
Skip Method"
and
160.756(f)
For an alternative gas collection system design, the owner or operator must
submit appropriate monitoring requirements to the implementing agency for
approval.
To Be Determined
§60.756(e)
Gas Control
System
Record gas flow from collection system to the enclosed combustion device
(unless bypass line valves are secured in a closed position with car-seal or lock-
and-key type configuration).
At least once every
15 minutes
OR
Monthly inspections
of bypass line seals
§60.756(b)(2)
This requirement identifies periods when gas flow has been diverted from the
control device.
-------
TABLE 2-3. SUMMARY OF MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FOR MSW LANDFILLS (CONTINUED)
Equipment
Monitoring Action
Schedule
Reference
Gas Control
System
(Continued)
Record gas flow from collection system to open flare (unless bypass line valves
are secured in a closed position with car-seal or lock-and-key type
configuration).
At least once every
15 minutes
OR
Monthly inspections
of bypass line seals
§60.756(c)(2)
This requirement identifies periods when gas flow has been diverted from the
control device.
Monitor combustion temperature of the enclosed combustion device with a
temperature monitoring device equipped with a continuous recorder.
(Temperature monitoring is not required for a boiler or process heater
>44 megawatts)
Continuous
§60,756(b)(l)
This requirement identifies operational and performance status of control
device.
Monitor the continuous presence of a pilot flame or the flare flame for an open
flare.
Continuous
§60.756(c)(l)
This requirement confirms operational status of control device.
For an alternative control device, the owner or operator must submit appropriate
monitoring requirements to the implementing agency for approval.
To Be Determined
160.756(d)
aWhen monitoring of methane concentration for a closed landfill shows no exceedances for three consecutive quarterly monitoring periods,
then monitoring can be "skipped" to annual monitoring. Any exceedance of the 500 ppm methane level returns the landfill to quarterly
monitoring.
-------
Visually monitor cover integrity
and repair as needed on a
monthly basis
[§ 60.755(c)(5)!
Monitor surface methane concentrations along
perimeter and along a pattern that traverses the
landfill at 30-meter intervals (or an approved
stte-specific pattern), on a quarterly basis.
[§ 60.755(c)(1)]
Switch to or
continue with
annual monitoring
consecutive quarterly
monitoring period with
[560.756(f)]
Any readings
> 500 ppm above
background?
In annual
monitoring
cycle?
Closed
landfill?
Mark locatlon(s) and record as monitored
exceedance(s) and perform cover mqintenqnce
or adjust vqcuum of adjacent wells qnd remonitor
locotion(s) of exceedance(s) within 10 davs.
[5 60.755(c)(4)]
Any readings
>. 500 ppm above
background?
Remonitor location(s)
of exceedance(s)
one month from
initial exceedance.
[§ 60.755(c)(4)]
1
Ves
r
Yes
Take odditionql corrective
action and remonitor location(s)
of exceedance(s) within 10 days.
[5 60.755(c)(4)]
1
r
Any readings
> 500 ppm above
background?
Any readings
> 500 ppm above
background?
Remonitor location(s)
of exceedance(s)
one month from
initial exceedance.
[S 60.755(c)(4)]
Any readings
>. 500 ppm above
background?
Install new we!! or other control
device within 120 davs of
initial exceedance.. An alternative
remedy and timeframe may be
submitted to the Administrator
for approval.
[5 60.755(c)(4)]
Figure 2-4. Flow Chart of Surface Monitoring Requirements [§60.755(c) and §60.756(f)]
2-22
-------
If a positive pressure is measured, the owner or operator must initiate corrective
action within 5 calendar days. If negative pressure cannot be achieved without excess air
infiltration within 15 calendar days of the first measurement, the gas collection must be expanded
to correct the exceedance within 120 days. An alternative timeline for correcting the exceedance
may be submitted to the Administrator for approval. Exceptions to the negative pressure
requirement are listed in § 60.753(b).
Collected LFG must have a nitrogen concentration less than 20 percent or an
oxygen level less than 5 percent, and a maximum temperature of 55°C (131°F). Nitrogen
concentration levels are measured following the procedures in EPA Method 3C. Oxygen
concentration levels are measured following the procedures in EPA Method 3A. Nitrogen
concentration rates < 20 percent or oxygen concentration values < 5 percent indicate well
extraction rates are not causing ambient air infiltration into a landfill through its surface and
sides. Increased LFG temperatures indicate that subsurface fires or aerobic conditions exist
within the landfill. The maximum allowable LFG temperature is 55°C (131°F), unless a landfill
owner or operator can demonstrate adequately that a higher temperature is appropriate and does
not hinder the anaerobic decomposition process. If a well exceeds the temperature, nitrogen
concentration, or oxygen concentration, the owner or operator must initiate corrective action
within 5 calendar days. If the exceedance cannot be corrected within 15 calendar days of the first
measurement, the gas collection system must be expanded to correct the exceedance within
120 calendar days. An alternative timeline for correcting the exceedance may be submitted to the
Administrator for approval.
After the installation of extraction wells, the landfill surface must be monitored
for methane concentrations less than 500 ppm above background levels. Methane concentrations
are measured within 5 to 10 cm (2 to 4 in) of the landfill surface using a portable organic vapor
analyzer (OVA), flame ionization detector (FID), or other similar monitoring device
[§ 60.755(d)]. Methane concentrations are measured following the procedures in EPA
Method 21, except that "methane" replaces all references to "volatile organic compounds" (VOC)
and the calibration gas is 500 ppm methane in air [§ 60.755(d)], Methane surface concentrations
are monitored around the perimeter of the collection area and along a pattern that traverses the
landfill at 30 meter intervals (see Figure 2-5) and where visual observations indicate elevated
concentrations of landfill gas (e.g., distressed vegetation, cracks or seeps in the cover). The
2-23
-------
Perimeter
Sample every 30 m
along the path and
along the perimeter
Figure 2-5. Example Traverses for Monitoring Methane Concentrations
2-24
-------
owner or operator may establish an alternative traversing pattern that ensures equivalent
coverage. Methane surface concentrations indicate whether gas extraction rates are sufficient to
minimize the amount of LFG escaping through the landfill cover.
Monitoring Gas Control Systems
For gas control systems using an open flare or an enclosed combustion device, a
device that records flow to or bypass of the control device is required. The presence of gas flow
to the control device from the collection system is recorded at least once every 15 minutes or the
bypass lines must be secured in the closed position using a car-seal or lock-and-key type
configuration. This recording frequency is needed to identify periods when the gas flow has
been diverted from the control device or periods of no flow from the collection system
[§ 60.756(b)(2) and § 60.756(c)(2)].
Combustion device operating parameters must be monitored continuously. For
open flares, a heat sensing device such as an ultraviolet beam sensor or thermocouple, located at
the flare pilot light or flare flame, is used to indicate the continuous presence of a flame
[§ 60.756(c)(1)]. For enclosed combustion devices, a temperature measuring device equipped
with a continuous recorder is used to monitor the combustion temperature so that an adequate
temperature is maintained [§ 60.756(b)(1)], Note that § 60.756(b)(1) excludes boilers
> 44 Megawatts from being required to install a temperature monitor and recorder.
Gas collection and control systems based on design criteria other than those
specified in the rule are allowed. For alternative systems, the landfill owner or operator must
provide information describing the system design, the operation of the system, operating
parameters that would indicate proper performance, and appropriate monitoring procedures
[§ 60.756(d) and (e)]. The implementing agency will review the submitted information and
decide whether to approve it, request additional information, or specify additional monitoring
procedures [§ 60.756(d) and (e)].
2-25
-------
What Recordkeeping Must Be Kept?
The landfill owner or operator must keep up-to-date, readily accessible records to
document that controlled landfill operations comply with the requirements of this standard.
These records must be maintained in electronic or hard-copy format for at least 5 years, unless
otherwise specified. This subsection describes the recordkeeping requirements of this rule.
Table 2-4 is a summary of these requirements.
Records must be maintained to document three major operations at a controlled
landfill. These operations include:
(1) Design of the landfill and control system;
(2) Gas collection and control system monitoring data; and
(3) Performance test data of the gas collection and control system.
A discussion of the recordkeeping requirements for each of these operations is provided below.
As previously noted, a Collection and Control System Design Plan may request alternatives to
the recordkeeping and reporting requirements. If alternative collection system designs are used,
it may be necessary to specify alternative monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting procedures
that are more appropriate for the site-specific design.
A landfill owner or operator has the option of calculating design capacity on either
a mass or volume basis. If the design capacity is converted from mass to volume or from volume
to mass to demonstrate that design capacity is < 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m3, then the
landfill owner or operator must keep readily accessible records of the annual recalculation on
site. The records must include the annual recalculation of site-specific density, design capacity,
and the supporting documentation.
Landfill and Control System Design Records
A number of records must be kept to document the general design and operation
of the landfill. These records include current landfill design capacity, current amount of refuse-
in-place, and year-by-year waste acceptance rates [§ 60.758(a)], Records must be available to
2-26
-------
TABLE 2-4. SUMMARY OF RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FOR MSW LANDFILLS
Operation
Recordkeeping Item
Reference
Landfill Design Capacity
If design capacity was converted from mass to volume or volume to
mass to demonstrate that design capacity is < 2.5 million Mg or
2.5 million m^, records of annual recalculation of site-specific density,
design capacity, and supporting documentation
§60.758(0
Landfill and
Control System
Design
If > 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m\ current maximum design
capacity, current amount of refuse-in-place, and year-by-year refuse
accumulation rates.
Plot map showing each existing and planned well in the gas collection
system. Provide unique identifying labels for each well.
Installation date and location of all newly installed wells per §60.755(b).
Description, location, amount, and placement date of all nondegradable
refuse including asbestos and demolition refuse placed in landfill areas
which are excluded from LFG collection and control.
§60.758(a)
§60.758(d)
§60.758(d)(l)
§60.758(d)(2)
Monitored Operating Parameters for
Gas Collection and Control Systems
(1) Gauge pressure in each extraction well.
(2) Nitrogen or oxygen concentration in extracted LFG.
(3) Temperature of extracted LFG.
(4) Methane concentrations along landfill surface.
(5) Gas flow from collection system to the BDT control device (or
seal bypass lines and inspect seals).
(6) Combustion temperature of an enclosed combustion device or
the continuous presence of a pilot flame for an open flare.
(7) Operating parameters for alternative collection and control
system designs, which are specified by the landfill and approved
by the implementing agency.
§60.756(a)(l)
§60.756(a)(2)
§60.756(a)(3)
§60.756(0
§60.756(b)(2)(i) and (ii)
§60.756(c)
§60.756(e)
-------
TABLE 2-4. SUMMARY OF RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FOR MSW LANDFILLS (CONTINUED)
Operation
Recordkeeping Item
Reference
Collection and Control System
Design and Measurements From
Initial Performance Test
Maximum expected gas generation flow rate
Density of wells, horizontal collectors, surface collectors, or other gas
extraction devices.
§60.758(b)(l)(i)
§60.758(b)(l)(ii)
For enclosed combustion devices (except for boilers or process heaters
with a heat input >44 Megawatts [150 million British thermal units per
hour]):
(1) Average combustion temperature measured at least every 15
minutes and averaged over the performance test duration.
(2) Percent reduction of NMOCs by the control device.
§60.758(b)(2)(i)
§60.758(b)(2)(ii)
For boilers/process heaters (of any size):
Describe location where LFG is introduced into the boiler flame
§60.758(b)(3)
zone.
For open flares:
§60.758(b)(4)
(1) Type of flare (steam-, air-, or non-assisted),
(2) All visible emission readings,
(3) Heat content determination,
(4) Gas flow rate or bypass measurements,
(5) Exit velocity determinations,
(6) Continuous pilot flame or flare flame monitoring, and
(7) All periods when pilot flame or flare flame is absent.
-------
TABLE 2-4. SUMMARY OF RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FOR MSW LANDFILLS (CONTINUED)
Operation
Recordkeeping Item
Reference
Gas Control System:
Periods When
Operating Parameters
Exceeded Limits
Set by Most Recent
Performance Test
For enclosed combustion devices (except
for boilers/process heaters with a heat input >44 Megawatts [150 million
British themal units per hour]):
Records of all 3-hour periods in which the average combustion
temperature was more than 28°C (50°F) below the average
combustion temperature measured during the most recent
performance test.
§60.758(c)(l)(i)
For boilers/process heaters with a heat input >44 Megawatts
(150 million British themal units per):
§60.758(c)(3)
Document all periods of operation by recording parameters,
such as steam use, fuel use, or other specified parameters
required by other regulatory agencies.
For boilers/process heaters:
§60.758(c)(l)(ii)
Document any changes to the location where collected LFG is
introduced in the boiler flame zone.
For an open flare:
Gas Control System:
Periods When
Operating Parameters Exceeded
Limits
Set by Most Recent Performance Test
(Continued)
Record all pilot flame or flare flame monitoring data and all
periods when pilot flame or flare flame was absent.
Records of continuous flow to the control device or the indication of
bypass flow or records of monthly inspections of car-seals or lock-and-
key configurations used to seal bypass lines.
§60.758(c)(4)
§60.758(c)(2)
-------
TABLE 2-4. SUMMARY OF RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FOR MSW LANDFILLS (CONTINUED)
Operation
Recordkeeping Item
Reference
Gas Collection and Control System:
Record all values which exceed the operational standards specified in
§60.758(e)
§60.753. Also include the operating value from the next monitoring
Exceedances of operational
period and the location of each exceedance:
standards
(1)
New well installation,
(2)
Pressure in each extraction well,
(3)
Nitrogen concentration or oxygen concentration in extracted
LFG,
(4)
Temperature of extracted LFG,
(5)
Methane concentrations along landfill surface,
(6)
Collected LFG is routed to control device at all times, note
periods when the collection system and/or control device were
not operational.
Keep up-to-date, readily accessible records of these exceedences for at
least 5 years.
-------
support any area exclusions. All areas storing nondegradable refuse such as asbestos and
demolition refuse that are excluded from collection must be identified on a location map
[§ 60.758(d)(2)]. In addition, a description of the nondegradable refuse must be recorded along
with the amount and date of placement in the landfill [§ 60.758(d)(2)].
A landfill owner or operator has the option of calculating design capacity on either
a mass or volume basis. If the design capacity is converted from mass to volume or from volume
to mass to demonstrate that design capacity is < 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m\ the landfill
owner or operator must keep readily accessible records of the annual recalculation on site. The
records must include the annual recalculation of site-specific density, design capacity, and the
supporting documentation [§ 60.758(f)],
A plot map is needed to document that LFG is being collected from all gas-
producing areas in a landfill. This map must show each existing and planned extraction well in
the gas collection system and must provide a unique identifying label for each well [§ 60.758(d)].
In addition, the installation date and location of all newly installed wells per § 60.755(b) must be
indicated and documented [§ 60.758(d)(1)].
Gas Collection and Control System Monitoring Data Records
All monitoring data gathered during the operation of a gas collection and control
system, as per § 60.756, must be recorded [§ 60.758(c)], These data include:
(1) Gauge pressure, nitrogen concentration or oxygen concentration, and
temperature of LFG within each wellhead;
(2) Methane surface concentrations;
(3) Gas flow to or bypass of the control device (or monthly inspections of
seals on bypass lines);
(4) Adequate combustion conditions (e.g., combustion temperature, presence
of flare flame or pilot flame) for the control device; and
(5) Any other data specified by the implementing agency.
2-31
-------
Records must also be kept of periods when the monitored control device operating
parameter (e.g., temperature) exceeds the established boundaries (see Table 2-4 for details).
If any of the monitored readings for gauge pressure, nitrogen or oxygen
concentration, temperature of LFG in wellheads, or methane concentration exceed the
operational standards established in § 60.753, then the location and value of the reading must be
documented as such an occurrence [§ 60.758(e)]. For each exceedance, the reading from the
subsequent monitoring period must also be recorded regardless of whether the subsequent value
is an exceedance [§ 60.758(e)],
Initial Performance Test Records
Measurements gathered during the initial performance test of the gas collection
and control system must be maintained by the landfill owner or operator for the life of the control
equipment [§ 60.758(b)]. Further, measurements gathered during tests or monitoring must be
kept for a minimum of 5 years. Measurements recorded from the gas collection system during
the initial performance test include the maximum expected gas generation flow rate and the
density of wells, horizontal collectors, surface collectors, or other gas extraction devices
[§ 60.758(b)(1)],
Measurements recorded from the gas control system during the initial
performance test depend on the type of control device used. For enclosed combustion devices,
the average combustion temperature must be recorded at least every 15 minutes and averaged
over the performance test duration [§ 60.758(b)(2)(i)]. The percent reduction of NMOC's
achieved by the control device must also be recorded [§ 60.758(b)(2)(ii)]. Temperature
monitoring is not required for boilers and process heaters with design heat input capacities
greater than 44 Megawatts (150 million British thermal units per hour). For boilers and process
heaters (of any size), a description of the location where LFG is introduced into the boiler flame
zone must be recorded [§ 60.758(b)(3)], For open flares, operating parameters that must be
recorded are listed in Table 2-4 [§ 60.758(b)(4)], If any of the monitored control device readings
exceed limits set by the most recent performance test, then the period when these readings were
observed must be documented. These periods are described in Table 2-4.
2-32
-------
What Must Be Reported?
The landfill owner or operator must submit a series of reports to the implementing
agency to demonstrate compliance with this standard. These reports are based on information
maintained by the landfill's recordkeeping efforts. The reporting sequence begins with the Initial
Design Capacity Report and concludes with the Landfill Closure and Control Equipment
Removal Reports. This subsection identifies and describes each report that is required by this
rule and the schedule for each report submittal. The required reports and submittal schedules are
listed in Table 2-5.
Initial Design Capacity Report
Each landfill owner or operator must submit a report that documents the landfill
maximum design capacity. This report establishes whether a landfill is subject to the control
requirements of this standard or is excluded because of the landfill design capacity exemption.
The Initial Design Capacity Report will also fulfill the requirements of the notification of the date
construction is commenced as required by the NSPS General Provisions [§ 60.7(a)(1)], The
report must be submitted no later than:
(1) June 10, 1996, for landfills that commenced construction, modification, or
reconstruction on or after May 30, 1991 but before March 12, 1996, or
(2) 90 days after the date of commenced construction, modification, or
reconstruction for landfills that commence construction, modification, or
reconstruction on or after March 12, 1996.
An Initial Design Capacity Report must include:
(1) A map or plot of the landfill that provides the location and size of the
landfill, and identifies all areas where solid waste may be landfilled
according to the permit issued by the State, local, or Tribal agency
responsible for regulating the landfill; and
(2) The maximum design capacity of the landfill.
2-33
-------
TABLE 2-5. SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR MSW LANDFILLS
Report or Action
Schedule
Reference
Initial Design
Capacity Report
Submit report no later than:
(1) June 10, 1996 for landfills that commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction on or after May 30, 1991, but
before March ] 2, 1996 or
(2) 90 days after the date the landfill commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction for landfills that commence
construction, modification, or reconstruction on or after March
12, 1996.
§60.757(a)(1)
§60.757(a)(2)
Amended Design
Capacity Report
If design capacity is increased to a value that equals or exceeds
2.5 million Mg, the landfill must submit an Amended Design
Capacity Report. Submit report within 90 days of an increase in the
maximum design capacity of the landfill to or above the
2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m^ size exemption.
§60.757(a)(3)
Annual QR Five-Year1
NMOC Emission Rate Report (Tier 1)
Submit initial report no later than;
(1) June 10, 1996 for landfills that commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction on or after May 30, 1991, but
before March 12, 1996 or
(2) 90 days after the date the landfill commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction for landfills that commence
construction, modification, or reconstruction on or after
March 12, 1996.
May submit with Initial Design Capacity Report,
Repeat either once a year OR once every 5 years.
§60.757(b)
Revised
NMOC Emission Rate Report (Tier 2)
If Tier 1 analysis results in NMOC emissions >50 Mg/yr, a revised
NMOC emission rate report using data gathered from Tier 2 analysis
can be submitted within 180 days of the initial calculated exceedance.
§60.757(c)(l)
-------
TABLE 2-5. SUMMARY OF COMPLIANCE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR MSW LANDFILLS (CONTINUED)
Report or Action
Schedule
Reference
Revised
NMOC Emission Rate Report
(Tier 3)
If Tier 2 analysis results in NMOC emissions .>50 Mg/yr. a revised
NMOC Emission Rate Report using data gathered from Tier 3
analysis can be submitted within 1 year of the initial calculated
exceedance.
§60.757(c)(2)
Collection and Control System Design
Plan
Within 1 year after submitting NMOC Emission Rate Report with a
value >50 Mg/yr.
§60.757(c)
Emission Control
System Start-up
Plans must gain Agency approval prior to installation.
Control system based on approved design will startup within
30 months after submitting NMOC Emission Rate Report with a
value >50 Mg/yr.
§60.752(b)(2)(ii)
Initial Control System Performance Test
Report
Submit report within 180 days of emission collection and control
system start-up per §60.8. Results can be included in the initial
Annual Report.
§60.757(g)
Annual Compliance Report
Submit initial report within 180 days of emission collection and
control system start-up.
Report once every 12 months.
§60.757(f)
Landfill Closure Report
When landfill is no longer accepting refuse and the landfill is
considered closed. Submit report within 30 days of refuse acceptance
cessation.
§60.757(d)
Control Equipment
Removal Report
Submit report within 30 days prior to removal or cessation of control
system operations. Controls can be removed after meeting all of
these criteria:
(1) Landfill Closure Report has been submitted,
(2) Control system was operated for at least 15 years, and
(3) Three consecutive NMOC Emission Rate Reports with values
<50 Me/vr achieved.
§60.757(e)
a The owner or operator may elect to submit an estimate of the NMOC emission rate for the next 5 years in lieu of the annual report if the
estimated NMOC emission rate is <50 Mg/yr in each of the 5 years.
-------
If the maximum design capacity of the landfill is documented in a State or local
construction or RCRA permit, a copy of the permit specifying the maximum design capacity may
be submitted as part of this report [§ 60.757(a)(2)(H)]. The design capacity is determined by the
most recent permit issued by the State, local, or tribal agency responsible for regulating the
landfill, plus any in-place waste not accounted for in the most recent permit. If the landfill
design capacity is not specified in a permit, then the capacity must be calculated using good
engineering practices. All calculations, assumptions, and relevant parameters used in estimating
the landfill design capacity must be included in the report for review by the implementing
agency. The maximum design capacity of a landfill can be determined from the total area
available for refuse disposal. Alternative information that could be used to determine design
capacity includes operating parameters such as depth of refuse placement, refuse acceptance
rates, and refuse compaction practices.
In order to demonstrate that the landfill design capacity is less than the 2.5 million
Mg or 2.5 million m3 design capacity cutoff, a landfill with a volumetric permit may choose to
calculate design capacity on a mass basis (or vise versa) based on a site-specific density. The
initial design capacity report must provide supporting documentation. If such a conversion is
made, records must also be kept of the annual recalculation of the site-specific density and design
capacity with supporting documentation.
For example, a landfill may have a permitted design capacity greater than
2.5 million m3 by volume; but the landfill may have documented calculations showing that, based
on the actual waste density, the design capacity is less than 2.5 million Mg by weight. Because
the design capacity is less than 2.5 million Mg, the landfill is below the design capacity cutoff. If
such a landfill changes it compaction practices such that the density of the waste placed in the
landfill increases, the design capacity could become greater than 2.5 million Mg, and the landfill
would then need to submit an Amended Design Capacity Report.
Amended Design Capacity
The NSPS requires the landfill to report any increase in design capacity that
results in a capacity above the design capacity cutoff [§ 60.757(a)(3)]. For example, if a landfill
changes its compaction practices such that the density of the waste placed in the landfill
increases, the design capacity could become equal to or greater than 2.5 million Mg, and the
2-36
-------
landfill would then need to submit an Amended Design Capacity Report. As another example, if
the permitted volume (vertical and/or horizontal dimensions of the landfill) increased such that
the design capacity becomes > 2.5 million Mg, an Amended Design Capacity Report would be
needed.
The Amended Design Capacity Report must adequately describe the nature of the
landfill design capacity increase. The Amended Design Capacity Report must be submitted to
the implementing agency within 90 days of an increase in the maximum design capacity of the
landfill equal to or above the size exemption of 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3. If the revised
design capacity is equal to or over the size exemption, the landfill must estimate emissions and
must install controls if emissions are greater than or equal to 50 Mg/yr.
NMOC Emission Rate Report
Landfills with a maximum design capacity equal to or greater than 2.5 million Mg
and 2.5 million m3 of refuse must submit annual calculations of the NMOC emission rate
[§ 60.757(b)], The report must include an annual estimate of NMOC emissions from the landfill
using the tier equations and calculation procedures from § 60.754. These equations and
calculation procedures are included in appendix I. An example NMOC Emission Rate Report is
included in appendix H.
If the estimated NMOC emissions from a landfill are less than 50 Mg/yr (55
tons/yr) in each of 5 consecutive years, the landfill owner or operator may elect to submit a 5-
year estimate of NMOC emissions from the landfill instead of an Annual Report
[§ 60.757(b)(l)(ii)]. For each of the next 5 years, the landfill NMOC emission rate is estimated
following the same procedures used for the annual estimates. A 5-year NMOC Emission Rate
Report is based on the current amount of refuse in the landfill and the estimated waste acceptance
rate for each of the 5 years covered by the report. If an actual waste acceptance rate exceeds the
estimated waste acceptance rate used in a 5-year report, a revised 5-year report must be submitted
to the implementing agency. The revised 5-year estimate must begin with the year in which the
actual waste acceptance rate exceeded the estimated waste acceptance rate. All data,
calculations, and measurements used to prepare the 5-year report must be submitted for review
by the implementing agency.
2-37
-------
The initial Annual NMOC Emission Rate Report must be submitted:
(1) by June 10, 1996 for landfills that commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction
on or after May 30, 1991, but before March 12, 1996; or (2) within 90 days after the date the
landfill commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction for landfills that commence
these activities on or after March 12, 1996. Subsequent NMOC Emission Rate Reports must be
submitted annually or until criteria are met to allow a 5-year NMOC Emission Rate Report. The
Initial NMOC Emission Rate Report may be submitted with the Initial Design Capacity Report.
Collection and Control System Design Plan
Each landfill owner or operator that reports an NMOC emission rate equal to or
greater than 50 Mg/yr must take one of the following actions:
(1) Submit a design plan for a gas collection and control system; or
(2) Recalculate the NMOC emission rate estimate using Tier 2 and Tier 3
calculating procedures.
If a landfill owner or operator elects to submit a design plan, the plan must be
submitted to the implementing agency within 1 year after a landfill first reports an NMOC
emission rate equal to or greater than 50 Mg/yr (55 tons/yr). A landfill owner or operator can
install either a gas collection and control system that meets the design criteria in § 60.759 of the
standard, or an alternative design.
Each landfill owner or operator is required to submit design plans to the
implementing agency for approval. The gas collection and control system must be installed and
ready for startup within 30 months after a landfill's NMOC emission rate is first reported to be
equal or greater than 50 Mg/yr.
The implementing agency must approve the design of a gas collection and control
system prior to installation. The review and comment interval for approving a design plan is
expected to take approximately 6 months from the date the plan is submitted, leaving
approximately 12 months for installing the alternative gas collection and control system.
The second option for a landfill with a Tier 1 NMOC emission rate equal to or
greater than 50 Mg/yr (55 tons/yr) is to recalculate the NMOC emission rate. This calculation is
2-38
-------
made after determining site-specific landfill characteristics through Tier 2 and Tier 3 sampling
and analysis. If a landfill owner or operator recalculates an NMOC emission rate less than
50 Mg/yr (55 tons/yr) using a site-specific NMOC concentration determined from the Tier 2
procedures, the annual reporting of the NMOC emission rate resumes using the site-specific
NMOC concentrations. The recalculated Tier 2 NMOC Emission Rate Report must be submitted
to the implementing agency within 180 days after calculating the initial NMOC emission rate
exceedance [§ 60.757(c)(1)], Subsequent annual reports must be submitted on the anniversary of
the original Tier 1 Annual NMOC Emission Rate Report. The site-specific NMOC
concentration is reverified through testing once every 5 years. Subsequent reports using the site-
specific NMOC concentration continue until the NMOC emission rate cut-off is exceeded.
A landfill owner or operator may also elect to recalculate the NMOC emission
rate after determining a site-specific methane gas generation rate through Tier 3 sampling and
analysis. If a landfill owner or operator recalculates an NMOC emission rate less than 50 Mg/yr
(55 tons/yr) using a methane gas generation rate determined from Tier 3 procedures, then the
annual reporting of the NMOC emission rate resumes using the site-specific value. The
recalculated NMOC Emission Rate Report, based on the Tier 3 sampling and analysis, must be
submitted to the implementing agency within 1 year after calculating the initial NMOC emission
rate exceedance [§ 60.757(c)(2)], Subsequent reports using the site-specific NMOC
concentration continue until the NMOC emission rate cut-off is exceeded. If using site-specific
factors results in a landfill recalculating its NMOC emission rate as being equal to or greater than
50 Mg/yr, a notification of intent to install a collection system and control device or a Collection
and Control System Design Plan Report must be submitted to the implementing agency within
1 year after first reporting an NMOC emission rate exceeding the cut-off.
Closure Report
The owner or operator of a controlled landfill that is preparing to permanently
close the landfill must submit a closure report to the implementing agency within 30 days of
waste acceptance cessation [§ 60.757(d)], The report acknowledges that the landfill will no
longer accept or dispose of refuse in the landfill unless a notification of modification is filed
according to the procedures in § 60.7(a)(4). The implementing agency may request additional
2-39
-------
information to verify permanent closure of the landfill has taken place. An example of a Closure
Report is included in appendix H.
Equipment Removal Report
An equipment removal report must be submitted to the implementing agency
within 30 days prior to the removal or cessation of operation of a gas collection and control
system [(§ 60.757(e)]. The report must include the following:
(1) A copy of the Landfill Closure Report;
(2) A copy of the Initial Performance Test Report, to demonstrate that the gas
collection and control system has controlled emissions from the landfill for
at least 15 years; and
(3) Copies of three successive NMOC Emission Rate Reports which
document the NMOC emission rate (prior to the control device) as less
than 50 Mg/yr. The test dates should be no closer than 90 days apart and
no farther than 180 days apart.
Annual Compliance Report
The initial Annual Report for a gas collection and control system must be
submitted to the implementing agency within 180 days after installation and start-up of the
system [§ 60.757(f) and (g)]. The initial report is required to include the Initial Performance Test
Report for the gas control system and the following information:
(1) Value and length of time for exceedances of monitored parameters under
§ 60.756. This would include reporting of monthly measurements of
nitrogen or oxygen concentration and temperature within a well that
exceed 20 percent nitrogen or 5 percent oxygen or 55 °C (131 °F), and
methane concentrations in excess of 500 ppm above background.
Reportable exceedances for control device operating parameters include
3-hour periods when combustor temperatures are outside the ranges
established in the most recent performance tests, and periods when the
pilot flame to a flare or the flare flame is absent;
(2) Description and duration of all periods when the gas stream from the
collection system was diverted from the control device through a bypass
line or had no flow;
2-40
-------
(3) Description and duration of all periods when the gas control device was
not operational for more than 1 hour and length of time the control device
was not operational;
(4) All periods when the gas collection system was not operational in excess
of 5 days;
(5) Each location where the landfill surface exceeded a methane concentration
of 500 ppm, and the methane concentration measured at each location for
which an exceedance was recorded in the previous month; and
(6) Date and location of all newly installed wells or collection system
expansions.
Initial Performance Test Report
The landfill owner or operator is required to submit a performance test report (as
specified in § 60.8) for the gas collection and control system. This report must be submitted to
the implementing agency within 180 days after installation and start-up of the control system.
The report must include the following information:
(1) A diagram of gas collection system showing collection system positioning
including all wells, horizontal collectors, surface collectors, or other gas
extraction devices; landfill areas excluded from control; and proposed sites
for future collection system expansion.
(2) Data upon which the sufficient density of gas extraction devices and gas
mover sizing are based.
(3) Documentation on the presence of asbestos or nondegradable material in
areas where extraction wells have been excluded.
(4) Calculations and the sum of LFG gas generation rates for areas where
extraction wells have been excluded.
(5) Provisions for increasing gas mover capacity if future gas generation rates
exceed current equipment limits.
(6) Documentation to demonstrate the control of off-site gas migration.
2-41
-------
2.2
EMISSION GUIDELINES (40 CFR PART 60, SUBPART Cc)
This section summarizes the EG applicability, regulatory requirements, and
compliance schedule. The requirements of the EG parallel the requirements of the NSPS. The
similarities between the EG and the NSPS are as follows:
(1) The same design capacity 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3) and
NMOC emission rate 50 Mg/yr) levels are used to determine control
requirements.
(2) The same emission controls (installing a gas collection and control system
that achieves a 98 percent reduction of NMOC emissions) are required.
(3) The same operating limits exist for the landfill and emission control
system.
(4) The same monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements exist.
(5) The same time intervals are allowed for completing compliance
requirements.
(6) The same testing and calculating procedures (tier calculating procedures,
Method 2E, Method 3C or 3A, and Method 25C or 18) are used.
Since the majority of requirements specified in the EG are identical to those requirements
specified by the NSPS, only the differences in EG requirements are discussed in this section.
The main differences between the EG and the NSPS are as follows:
(1) Applicability criteria are for "existing" landfills;
(2) There is flexibility in establishing the control requirements for a State-
implemented emission standard;
(3) States need to develop a plan to implement the requirements of the EG;
and
(4) There are different landfill compliance schedules for a State-implemented
emission standard.
2-42
-------
Each of these differences are discussed below.
2.2.1 Applicability Criteria for "Existing" Landfills
The EG apply to all MSW landfills that satisfy the two conditions listed below:
(1) The construction, modification, or reconstruction of the landfill began
before the proposal date of May 30, 1991, and
(2) The landfill received waste on or after November 8, 1987 or has additional
design capacity that may be filled in the future.
These landfills are defined as existing landfills. The EG do not apply to landfills that closed
prior to November 8, 1987. (See Section 2.1.1 for a discussion of modification and Figure 2-1
for an illustration of whether a landfill is subject to the NSPS or EG based on its construction and
modification history.)
2.2.2 Flexibility in Establishing Control Requirements for State-Implemented
Emission Standards
State emission standards and compliance times must generally be as stringent as
the EG. However, the EG offer some flexibility in that States may develop more stringent
standards to address State and local concerns. In certain case-by-case situations, less stringent
control is allowed. Flexibility in establishing a State emission standard is discussed further in
MSW Landfills. Volume 2.
2.2.3 State Plan Development for Implementing the Requirements of the EG
State agencies must develop a plan for implementing the EG. The procedure for
developing and submitting implementation plans for EG was established in 40 CFR Subpart B,
Adoption and Submittal of State Plans for Designated Facilities.
The State Plan for controlling landfill emissions must be submitted to the EPA
Administrator for review within 9 months after the promulgation date of the EG for MSW
landfills [§ 60.23(a)], The Administrator will approve or disapprove each State Plan (or portion
thereof) within 4 months after the receipt date of the plan. If an adequate State Plan has not been
2-43
-------
submitted or approved by the Administrator within 6 months after the receipt date of the plan, the
Administrator is authorized to promulgate a Federal Plan for the State [§ 60.27(d)]. The
requirements for developing a State Plan to implement EG are discussed in detail in MSW
Landfills, Volume 2.
2.2.4 Compliance Schedule for a State-Implemented Emission Standard
The compliance schedule and reporting requirements for the EG are similar to the
NSPS except for the date to begin reporting. The State Plan will specify the date rather than
beginning 90 days from the EG promulgation date. State Plans are required to include the same
types of reporting and compliance steps as the NSPS. For example, a State Plan will include a
specific date for the Initial Design Capacity Report and the NMOC Emission Rate Report. To be
consistent with the EG, the date for the Design Capacity Report and the initial Annual NMOC
Emission Rate Report should be within 90 days after the effective date of State Plan approval. If
the report shows ^ 50 Mg/yr NMOC, the landfill must comply within 30 months, the same
interval as the NSPS. See section 3.2 of this document and MSW Landfills, Volume 2.
2-44
-------
3.0 IMPLEMENTATION AND COMPLIANCE
Three required actions will be triggered by promulgation of the MSW landfill
rule:
(1) Delegated authorities, which in most cases are the States, must implement
and ensure compliance with the NSPS;
(2) States must develop a plan for implementing requirements of the EG; and
(3) States must implement and ensure compliance with requirements of the
EG.
This section provides a discussion of these actions.
3.1 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS
New landfills are subject to the NSPS proposed under the authority of
section 111(b) of the Act. The responsibility for implementing the NSPS lies with the EPA, but
States may become the delegated authority. Under section 111(c)(1) of the Act, States may
develop and submit to the Administrator a procedure for implementing and enforcing standards
of performance for new sources. If the Administrator finds the State procedure to be adequate,
the State is delegated the authority to implement and enforce the standards.
Implementing the NSPS
States can obtain the authority to implement NSPS by requesting delegation from
the Administrator and writing an implementation and enforcement plan per section 111(c) of the
Act. States that have been delegated authority are listed in 40 CFR § 60.4. As of 1995,
3-1
-------
49 States, the District of Columbia, and three territories have received delegated authority to
implement some or all NSPS.
The first activity for States with delegated authority is submission of an
implementation and enforcement plan. Guidance on preparing NSPS implementation and
enforcement plans is not provided in this document since this procedure is a familiar process for
States.
How to Identify New MSW Landfills
A new landfill is a landfill that commenced construction, reconstruction, or
modification on or after May 30, 1991 (see section 2.1.1 for how to make applicability
determinations). States will need to develop and implement a strategy for identifying new
landfills. Since State air agencies typically do not have an inventory of MSW landfills, it will be
important to communicate with the State agency responsible for solid waste regulation.
States should have information on landfills located in their jurisdiction due to
requirements of two federal statutes. States were required to develop solid waste management
implementation plans under 40 CFR 256. Also, MSW landfill criteria were established under
RCRA in 40 CFR 258. These criteria are applicable to all landfills that have received waste
since October 9, 1991, except for those landfills that stopped receiving waste before
October 9, 1993. In addition, solid waste agencies are required by RCRA to collect landfill
design and construction information. Arrangements should be made to review State RCRA files
on MSW landfills. From a review of these files, it should be possible to identify all of the new
landfills.
The State air agency also needs to institute a mechanism for being notified when a
new landfill is being planned. Since the need for a solid waste disposal permit is more obvious
to landfill owners or operators, coordination with State personnel responsible for RCRA
permitting of MSW landfills may be the most effective mechanism.
NSPS Title V Permitting
Title V of the Act requires sources affected by NSPS and/or EG to obtain a
Title V operating permit under Part 70 and 71, unless the Administrator exempts a source
category or part of a source category from permit requirements. (In States with approved Part 70
3-2
-------
operating permit programs, sources will apply to the State for Part 70 permits; in States without
Part 70 operating permit programs, EPA will implement the Federal operating permits program
under Part 71.) Landfills that have design capacities greater than the design capacity cutoff
(z 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3) are required to obtain Title V permits.
Landfills below the design capacity cutoff are not subject to the requirement to
obtain a Part 70 or 71 (Title V) operating permit, unless the landfill is a major source or is subject
for some other reason. "Major source" is defined in Part 70 and is based on emissions. In
general, if a landfill emits more than 100 tons per year of any regulated criteria pollutant (e.g.,
VOC, NOx) or more than 25 tons per year total hazardous air pollutants, it is a major source. If a
landfill is located in a nonattainment area, the major source thresholds for criteria pollutants (e.g.,
VOC, NOx) are lower. Landfills would also be subject to operating permit requirements if they
are subject to another NSPS or NESHAP. If landfills below the design capacity cutoff are major
sources or are subject for some other reason, they must obtain a permit under the same deadlines
and requirements that apply to any other major source. If a landfill's design capacity is modified
to be equal to or greater than the design capacity cutoff, the landfill will become subject to
Title V, regardless of whether the landfill is a major source or not.
Landfills must apply for a Title V permit within 1 year of becoming subject to
Title V. If a landfill was already subject to Title V prior to the NSPS or EG (e.g., because it was
a major source), an application would already have been submitted. For landfills with design
capacities > 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million that become subject to Title V permitting as a
result of the NSPS or EG, the direct-final amendment notice (63 FR 32743, June 16, 1998)
clarifies the date they become subject. Existing landfills become subject 90 days after the
effective date of EPA's approval of the State plan. New landfills become subject 90 days after
promulgation of the NSPS or 90 days after the date they commenced construction, modification,
or reconstruction. By these dates the Design Capacity Report would be submitted and it would
be clear whether or not the landfill exceeds the design capacity criteria. The permit application
would be due within 1 year of these dates.
When a landfill is closed, and either never needed a control system to comply with
the NSPS or EG, or meets the conditions for control system removal specified in the NSPS, a
Part 70 or 71 operating permit is no longer required by the NSPS or EG if the landfill is not
otherwise subject to the requirements of either Part 70 or 71. However, the landfill may still be
3-3
-------
subject to Part 70 or 71 for some other reason and, thereby, be required to have an operating
permit.
Ensuring Compliance with the NSPS
Reports are the primary method for ensuring compliance with the NSPS. These
reports begin with the Initial Design Capacity Report and conclude with the Landfill Closure and
Control Equipment Removal Reports. This section provides a discussion on techniques States
can use to do the following:
(1) ensure the proper reports are received;
(2) track receipt of the incoming reports; and
(3) ensure that each report includes accurate and complete
information.
The reporting requirements and submittal schedules are detailed in section 2.
Figure 3-1 illustrates the reporting sequence for an example landfill. This example landfill is
defined as "new" because construction commenced on March 12, 1993. Landfills constructed or
modified on or after the proposal date (May 30, 1991) and prior to March 12, 1996 must submit a
Design Capacity Report by June 10, 1996. In this example, the design capacity is greater than the
minimum size exemption limit of 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3 and the NMOC emission
rate is equal to or greater than the emission rate cutoff of 50 Mg/yr. The example landfill
stopped accepting waste on December 1, 2005.
Collecting Reports
The State may want to consider establishing an outreach program to facilitate
receipt of the Initial Design Capacity Reports from each landfill. One objective of the outreach
program would be to send example report forms for the landfills to complete and return. This
3-4
-------
Report
Latest Submittal Date
Compliance Schedule
Landfill Closure Report
Installation of Collection and
Control System Completed
Design Plan for Collection and
Control System
Design Capacity Report
Control Equipment
Removal Report
Revised Emission Rate Report
Based on TIER 2 Estimate
(NMOC = 50 Mg/yr)
Annual Report
(and Control System Initial
Performance Test Report)
NMOC Emission Rate Report
Based on TIER 1 Estimate
(NMOC = 50 Mg/yr)
June 10, 1996
June 10, 1996
December 7, 1996
June 10, 1997
December 10, 1998
June 8, 1999
December 31, 2005
December 10, 2013
Within 90 days after promulgation*
Within 90 days after promulgation
Within 180 days year after landfill
estimates of NMOC emissions
a 50 Mg/yr
Within 1 year after estimating
NMOC emissions a 50 Mg/yr
Within 30 months after reporting
NMOC emissions a 50 Mg/yr
Within every 180 days after
installing control system
Within 30 days after the landfill
stops accepting MSW
30 days prior to shutting down and
removing, and a! least 15 years after
installing controls
'Promulgation date is March 12, 1996.
Figure 3-1. NSPS Reporting Sequence for an Example Landfifl
3-5
-------
would facilitate receiving the required information in a standard format. Example forms that
could be used are included in appendix H.
The first report required by the NSPS is the Design Capacity Report. All landfills
subject to the NSPS are required to submit this report. An example Design Capacity Report
which includes all of these requirements is included in appendix H. Landfills with a design
capacity below the minimum size exemption of 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m3 are not subject
to any other requirements of the regulations. (Except, if the landfill converted design capacity
from mass to volume or from volume to mass to demonstrate that capacity is below 2.5 million
Mg or 2.5 million m\ they are required to recalculate site-specific density and design capacity
annually, as explained in section 2.1.3.) Also, if the design capacity is changed such that it is
2: 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3 (e.g., resulting from an increase in volume or a change in
density), an Amended Design Capacity Report must be filed. Landfills with design capacities
equal to or greater than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3 must comply with the requirements of
the NSPS. Table 3-1 shows the applicability of the NSPS and EG to MSW landfills. Figure 2-1
also illustrates applicability.
3-6
-------
TABLE 3-1. APPLICABILITY OF THE NSPS AND EG TO MSW LANDFILLS
Landfill Maximum
Design Capacity
Constructed, reconstructed, or
modified after 5/30/91
Constructed, reconstructed, or
modified before 5/30/91.
Accepted waste after 11/8/87 or
has additional capacity
< 2.5 million Mg or
<2.5 million m
Must report design capacity.
No further requirements.*
Must report design capacity. No
further requirements.*
> 2.5 million M^ and
^ 2.5 million m~
Must comply with the
requirements of the NSPS.
Must comply with the
requirements of the EG.
*Except, if the landfill converted design capacity from mass to volume or from volume
to mass to demonstrate that capacity is below 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m^, they
are required to recalculate site-specific density and design capacity annually, as
explained in section 2.1.3.
3-7
-------
The NMOC Emission Rate Report is due within the same time period as the
Initial Design Capacity Report. An example letter that could serve as an Initial NMOC Emission
Rate Report is shown in Figure 3-2. Landfills must estimate annual emissions according to the
Tier method discussed in section 2. After submitting the initial NMOC Emission Rate Report,
annual reporting is generally required. However, the NMOC emission rate may be reported on a
5-year basis if the estimated NMOC emissions are less than 50 Mg/yr in each of five consecutive
years.
If the landfill's NMOC emission rate is 50 Mg/yr or more, the landfill must submit
a Collection and Control System Design Plan prepared by a professional engineer. The design
plan should either: (1) show that the planned collection and control system conforms to the
criteria in § 60.759 for active collection systems, or (2) demonstrate that an alternative design is
sufficient and addresses the criteria in § 60.752(b)(2). Appendix E provides guidance in
reviewing both Collection and Control System Design Plans that conform to § 60.759 and
alternative design plans. Also included are several case studies of collection systems.
3-8
-------
State Air Agency Director
State Air Agency
Air Agency Address
Air Agency's Town, State, and Zip Code
RE: Initial NMOC Emission Rate Report as required by the MSW Landfill NSPS
Dear State Air Agency Director:
Facility A is currently regulated according to the MSW Landfill NSPS. Under the
requirements of the regulations, Landfill A must submit an estimate of the NMOC
emissions. The estimated NMOC emission rate is Mg/yr. This estimate was
calculated based on the Tier 1 procedures in the regulations. A copy of the calculations
is enclosed
Sincerely,
Landfill A Owner or operator
enclosure
Figure 3-2. Example Initial NMOC Emission Rate Report
-------
One of the last reports a landfill is required to submit is the Landfill Closure
Report. The purpose of this report is to inform the State that the landfill has stopped accepting
MSW. Figure 3-3 shows a sample letter that could serve as a Landfill Closure Report. The most
important element of the letter is a statement that the landfill stopped accepting MSW on a
certain day. Other information that may be helpful to the State is a reiteration of the design
capacity, the initial date of waste acceptance, and the mass or volume of MSW in the landfill.
The landfill should note whether there is remaining capacity. A sample Control Equipment
Removal Report is provided in Figure 3-4. This report applies only to controlled landfills and
will be the last report the State receives from a controlled landfill. This sample report form
includes a statement that the landfill intends to remove, or cease operation of, the collection and
control system. The regulations list three criteria that must be met before the landfill may stop
operating the controls and remove them. Submittal of the Closure Report satisfies the first
criteria. The letter should include statements certifying that the remaining criteria have been met.
These criteria include:
(1) the control system has been in operation for at least 15 years; and
(2) three consecutive NMOC Emission Rate Test Reports with values less
than 50 Mg/yr (prior to the control device) have been submitted.
As discussed in section 2, Annual Reports are also required for controlled
landfills. Because the context of these reports will vary depending on the type of control and
whether there have been monitoring parameter exceedances during the time period, a sample
report form has not been provided.
Tracking Reports
As discussed above, providing standard report forms to landfill owners/operators
can facilitate receiving the proper information in a consistent format. Another responsibility of
the State is tracking receipt of reports so the status of each landfill can be readily determined.
The State needs to be able to determine which reports have been received and what reports are
expected.
3-10
-------
State Air Agency Director
State Air Agency
Air Agency Address
Air Agency's Town, State, and Zip Code
RE: Landfill Closure Report as required by the MSW
Landfill NSPS
Dear State Air Agency Director:
Facility A is currently regulated according to the MSW
Landfill NSPS. Under the requirements of the regulations,
Landfill A must submit a Landfill Closure Report within
30 days of ceasing to accept MSW. The last day of waste
acceptance was March 20. 2009 and the landfill was
closed on April 5. 2009. The closure is intended to be
permanent.
The design capacity of the landfill is 2.750.000 Mg. The
estimated quantity of refuse-in-place is 2.750.000 Mg.
Therefore, there is no additional capacity.
Also note that Landfill A is not being controlled.
Sincerely,
Landfill A Owner or operator
Figure 3-3. Sample Letter to Report Landfill Closure
3-11
-------
State Air Agency Director
State Air Agency
Air Agency Address
Air Agency's Town, State, and Zip Code
RE: Control Equipment Removal Report as required
by the MSW Landfill NSPS
Dear State Air Agency Director-
Facility A is currently regulated according to the MSW
Landfill NSPS. Under the requirements of the regulations,
Landfill A must submit a Control Equipment Removal
Report 30 days prior to ceasing to operate and removal of
landfill gas collection and control equipment. Operation of
the collection and control system is scheduled to cease on
November 30. 2015.
The control system has been in operation since August 12.
1999. Therefore the minimum 15 year operating
requirement has been fulfilled. As required by 60.757(e), a
dated copy of the initial performance test report is
enclosed to document the date of initial installation of the
system. Also enclosed per 60.757(e), are dated copies of
the three most recent NMOC Emission Rate Reports
demonstrating that the landfill is no longer emitting more
than 50 Mg/yr of NMOC.
Note that a Landfill Closure Report was submitted on
August 20. 2013. The last day of waste acceptance was
July 20. 2013 and the landfill was closed Julv2l. 2013
Sincerely,
Landfill A Owner or operator
enclosures
Figure 3-4. Sample Letter to Report Control Equipment Removal
3-12
-------
Numerous reports may be required from each landfill. Therefore, it would be
convenient to create separate files for each landfill. A suggested tool for tracking the incoming
reports is to maintain a landfill report tracking log in each landfill's file. As reports are received,
they could be noted in this log. This log would provide a summary of the reports received from
each landfill. Therefore, any authorized person could immediately determine the status of a
landfill by reviewing the log instead of searching through the entire file. For example, an
inspector could prepare for a site visit using the log. This would eliminate the need for
time-consuming file searches.
An example log is included in appendix K. An illustration of this log is also
provided in Figure 3-5. This log provides a means of tracking incoming reports from landfills
and indicating the next report expected from the landfill.
One of the first steps in using this log is to indicate the date the landfill becomes
affected by the NSPS. This date should be indicated in the space noted as the "Trigger-Date."
Once the trigger date has been established, the regulator can compute the due date for the next
required reports. The log in appendix K provides a summary of the specified submittal times.
When a report is received, the regulator should note the postmark date since it is the recognized
date of receipt in the rule. In the example log, the "Due Date" and "Date Postmarked" are
side-by-side so that it is clearly evident whether the report was received on time.
The example log also includes a column to note whether the report is acceptable.
The report must include all of the information required by the NSPS. If the report is not
acceptable, the regulator needs to inform the landfill of the inadequate report and make
arrangements for the report to be resubmitted.
The last column in the example log provides space to indicate the next report
expected from the landfill. This column provides the criteria for determining the nature of the
next report. This allows the regulator to enter the due date for the next expected report. In some
cases, the landfill may have an option, such as whether to install controls or refine the emission
estimate. In such a case, the regulator may "pencil-in" the due date for possible reports.
Figure 3-5 does not include all possible reports since some reports must be
submitted annually. The complete example report log included in appendix K has two
attachments. Attachment A is used for tracking the NMOC Emission Rate Reports. These
reports must be submitted annually, except when projected emissions are less than 50 Mg in each
3-13
-------
of five consecutive years. In this case, the Emission Rate Report may be submitted once every
5 years. Attachment B is used for tracking the Annual Reports. These reports must be submitted
every 12 months after a collection and control system is installed. All landfills with capacities
greater than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3 must submit either the NMOC Emission Rate
Reports or the Annual Reports.
The State should also consider maintaining a report tracking database or
spreadsheet to track all of the incoming reports. There may be as many as 100 or more landfills
in any State. All of the landfills that are subject to either the NSPS or the EG must submit an
Initial Design Capacity Report. However, a relatively small percentage of these landfills will
have design capacities of 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3 or more and will therefore be
required to submit additional reports. Depending on the number of landfills in a State and the
size of the landfills, the State may incur a significant administrative burden in processing the
numerous reports from these landfills.
A suggested method of tracking the reports received from all landfills is to create
a database or spreadsheet containing all the affected landfills and the due dates of expected
reports. This would provide a summary of the reports expected from all of the landfills in the
State's jurisdiction. An illustrative example of such a tracking spreadsheet is shown in
Figure 3-6.
The first priority in tracking reports is to determine if all reports due by a certain
date have been submitted. Therefore, the first column of the tracking spreadsheet is the report,
due date. The other columns include the date postmarked, report name, facility name, contact
person, and contact phone number. Using a database or spreadsheet format allows the
information to be sorted by any of the column headings, such as the report due date, report name,
or facility.
The first step in creating such a spreadsheet is to enter the facility name, contact
person, and contact phone number in the appropriate columns for all of the new landfills. This
information could be obtained from the individual landfill files. Therefore, the first step is to
enter "Initial Design Capacity Report" in the "Report" column, since all landfills must submit this
report.
3-14
-------
Trigger Date
/ /
FACILITY NAME'
CONTACT PERSON:
LANDFILL REPORT LOG
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
#
Report
Due
Date
Date
Postmarked
Acceptable
(yes or no)
Comments
Actions if Report Is Acceptable
1
Initial Design Capacity
Report
It capacity Is 2 2,5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3, go to #2.
If capacity is < 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m\ no further
action is required unless capacity is increased.
2
Initial NMOC
Emission Rate Report
If NMOC emission rate Is 2 50 Mg, go to #3 or #4.
If NMOC emission rate Is < 50 Mg, go to Attachment A
(NMOC Emission Rate Report tracking form).
3
Collection and Control
System Desiqn Plan
Go to Attachment B (Annual Report tracking form).
4
Revised NMOC
Emission Rate Report
(Tier 2)
If NMOC emission rate is 2 50 Mg, go to #3 or #5.
If NMOC emission rate is < 50 Mg, go to Attachment A
(NMOC Emission Rate Report tracking form).
5
Revised NMOC
Emission Rate Report
(Tier 3)
If NMOC emission rate is ;> 50 Mg, go to #3.
If NMOC emission rate is < 50 Mg, go to Attachment A
(NMOC Emission Rate Report tracking form).
6
Landfill Closure
Report
7
Control Equipment
Removal Report
a
Amended Design
Capacity Report
If the amended design capacity is * 2.5 million Mg and
2.5 million m! resulting from an increase in volume or a
change in density, go to #2.
If capacity Is < 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m3, this report Is
not required. No further action is required unless capacity is
Increased.
Figure 3-5. Landfill Report Tracking Log
-------
REPORT TRACKING SPREADSHEET3
Date Report
Expected
Date
Postmarked
Report
Facility
Facility
Contact
Person
Contact Phone
Number
1/27/99
Initial Control System
Performance Test and
Annual Report
Landfill A
J.A. Owner
(999) 444-2222
1/27/99
Annual Report
Landfill B
R.Q. Operator
(222) 999-3333
1/28/99
Revised Emission Rate
Report (Tier 3)
Landfill C
B.J. Valadez
(444) 111-1111
1/28/99
Initial Design
Capacity Report
Landfill D
J.R. Smith
(333) 666-2121
1/29/99
Collection and Control System
Design Plan
Landfill E
L.M. Austin
(888) 454-3131
1/29/99
Emission Rate Report
(Tier 1)
Landfill F
S.T. Barnes
(777) 123-0123
aThis table shows all of the reports due from landfills during the period of January 27 through January 29, 1999.
Figure 3-6. Example Tracking Spreadsheet
-------
The next compliance action can be obtained from the individual landfill report
log. After determining the next required report, a new row must be created to indicate the report
name and due date.
A convenient method for using the tracking spreadsheet would be to print a list of
all the expected reports due that week. This could be accomplished by sorting the spreadsheet by
the "Date Report Expected" column and printing all of the spreadsheet records for that week. As
the reports are received, the regulator could note receipt by filling in the "Date Postmarked"
column. At the end of the week, the regulator could then determine if any reports were not
received. The example spreadsheet contains the contact person and telephone number for each
landfill. This will facilitate follow-up on any delinquent or insufficient reports.
Reviewing Reports
After reports are received, the regulator needs to determine whether each report
contains all the required information. Appendix F includes checklists for each report required by
the NSPS. These reports include:
(1) Initial Design Capacity;
(2) Amended Design Capacity;
(3) Annual or 5-year NMOC Emission Rate;
(4) Revised NMOC Emission Rate (Tier 2);
(5) Revised NMOC Emission Rate (Tier 3);
(6) Collection and Control System Design Plan;
(7) Initial Control System Performance Test;
(8) Annual Reports;
(9) Landfill Closure; and
(10) Control Equipment Removal.
The regulator should complete the appropriate checklist for each report as the
reports are received. The checklists provide a standard means of ensuring that all requirements
of each report are met. In general, the questions in the checklists begin by asking whether the
report was submitted within the required timeframe. The questions then follow the requirements
in the regulations.
It is likely that some landfills will submit emission estimates or other calculations
which do not adhere to those prescribed in the regulations. In such cases, it is the responsibility
3-17
-------
of the regulator to verify whether the procedures used by the landfill are acceptable. Because the
rule specifies that NMOC emissions must be estimated using the Tier methodology, it is not
acceptable for owners or operators to deviate from this methodology. The rule is not as specific
regarding design capacity calculations, so the regulator will need to determine whether the
landfill procedures are acceptable based on sound engineering practices.
3.2 STATE PLAN DEVELOPMENT FOR EG AND ACTIVITIES TO
IMPLEMENT THEIR PLAN
Each State with existing landfills is required to submit a plan to the Administrator
for implementing and enforcing the EG. State Plan development is discussed in detail in MSW
Landfills, Volume 2. Volume 2 outlines how to develop a State Plan and describes the contents
of State Plans. In addition, Volume 2 discusses the submittal and approval process and schedule,
the flexibility allowed in State Plans, the relationship of State Plans to SIPs, compliance times,
provisions for requirements other than those in the EG, and progress reports in plan enforcement.
Volume 2 can be found on the EPA TTN Web as described on page iv of this volume.
This section provides an overview of the actions States must take to implement
their plan and ensure that affected landfills are in compliance. For the purposes of this
document, it is assumed that States will adopt the requirements of the EG completely.
Compliance of a landfill with a State's plan includes determining which landfills are affected and
ensuring that monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements are fulfilled. Compliance
with the monitoring and recordkeeping requirements are determined through on-site inspections.
Inspections are discussed in section 4.0. The primary means for States to determine whether
landfills are complying with the EG is collection and review of reports. The reporting
requirements for EG are the same as the NSPS except for the reporting schedule times.
Activities to Implement the EG
Implementing EG is similar to implementing the NSPS; States will first need to
identify landfills subject to EG. Only landfills defined as "existing" are affected. Air agencies
may be able to obtain information on these landfills from their solid waste counterparts since air
agencies typically have limited, if any, information on MSW landfills.
3-18
-------
The 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments to RCRA required States to
establish a permit program or other system of prior approval to ensure that facilities receiving
household hazardous waste or small quantity generator hazardous waste are in compliance with
40 CFR Part 257. This permit program was to be established by November 8, 1987. This permit
program is one available resource for States to use in locating landfills that are subject to the EG.
Another source of information may be county and municipal governments.
One special consideration for identifying all of the existing landfills is that some
may be closed. Identifying and locating owners or operators of closed landfills may be difficult;
only landfills that have accepted MSW since November 8, 1987 are subject to the EG.
Therefore, these landfills may have RCRA permits. Once a closed landfill has been identified,
the State will need to identify and locate the owner or operator or responsible party.
After all the landfills subject to the EG are identified, the State must determine
which will be affected by the EG. An Initial Design Capacity Report is required of all affected
landfills. Landfills with design capacities less than the exemption level of 2.5 million Mg or
2.5 million m3 have no further requirements unless the design capacity is increased above the
exemption level. Table 3-1 in section 3.1 of this document illustrates applicability of the EG to
MSW landfills. As shown in this table, existing landfills with design capacities above the
minimum size exemption must comply with the requirements of the EG. The requirements of
the EG are the same as for the NSPS. Therefore, the flow chart of the compliance actions
presented in Figure 2-2 for the NSPS is also applicable to the requirements of the EG, except that
the actions would be initiated on the date of State Plan approval or on a date specified by the
State instead of on the promulgation date of the NSPS.
EG Title V Permitting
The Title V permitting requirements for landfills subject to the EG are the same as
the Title V requirements for the NSPS. These requirements are discussed in section 3.1, NSPS
Title V Permitting.
Ensuring Compliance with the EG
Receipt of the required reports is one method of ensuring compliance with the EG.
Owners and operators of landfills must submit several different reports, according to the
3-19
-------
requirements in the EG. Table 3-2 shows the schedule for an example landfill. It is assumed that
the capacity is greater than the minimum size limit and the emission rate cutoff. The table
illustrates the sequence of reports the State should receive from the landfill.
The compliance reporting schedule for existing landfills generally follows the
reporting requirements of the NSPS, except that rather than beginning reporting (Design
Capacity Report and the Initial NMOC emission rate report) 90 days after the NSPS
promulgation date, reporting begins with a set date in the State Plan. For consistency with
Subparts Cc and WWW, these first two reports could be due 90 days after the effective date of
the State standard or other enforceable mechanism. The same information required by the NSPS
is required by the EG.
The same methods for ensuring compliance with the NSPS can be used for the
EG. The following paragraphs provide a discussion on methods of facilitating the submittal and
tracking of reports. These are the same methods previously discussed for ensuring compliance
with the NSPS. Refer to the section on ensuring compliance with the NSPS for a more detailed
discussion on these methods.
Providing standard reports for the landfills will facilitate receiving reports. The
outreach program discussed in section 3.1 to assist in ensuring compliance with the NSPS can be
used for all landfills affected by the NSPS and the EG. This outreach program would consist of
providing standard report forms that the landfill owner or operator could complete and return to
the State. Example report forms are provided in appendix H. These forms can be used by either
existing landfills complying with the requirements of the EG and State Plan or new landfills
complying with the NSPS.
A convenient method of tracking reports for each landfill is to maintain a log in
the individual landfill files. An example of this type of form, referred to in section 3.1 as a
Landfill Report Log. is included in appendix K. This log provides a means of noting each report,
indicating the next expected report, and noting whether the report was acceptable. Refer to the
section on ensuring compliance with the NSPS section for a detailed discussion on using this log.
3-20
-------
Table 3-2. Schedule for MSW Landfill Compliance with
the Emission Guidelines
Report
Compliance Schedule
Design Capacity Report
A set date in State Plan. For consistency with Subparts Cc and
WWW, 90 days after the effective date of the state emission
standard or other enforceable mechanism
Initial NMOC Emission Rate Report
A set date in State Plan. For consistency with Subparts Cc and
WWW, 90 days after the effective date of the state emission
standard or other enforceable mechanism
Collection and Control System Design Plan
A set date in State Plan. For consistency with Subparts Cc
and WWW, the collection and control system design plan
must be submitted within 1 year after the date of the landfill's
submittal of the first Annual Emission Rate Report that shows
that NMOC emissions first equal or exceed 50 Mg/yr of
NMOC
Complete construction and installation of gas
collection and control system
A set date in State Plan. For consistency with Subpart Cc,
installation of a collection and control system capable of
achieving compliance with the Emission Guidelines must be
accomplished within 30 months after a landfill's emission rate
first equals or exceeds 50 Mg/yr of NMOC.'
First Annual Compliance Report and initial
performance test for MSW landfill control
system
As scheduled in State Plan and for consistency with the NSPS
general provisions, no later than 180 days after installation of
the collection and control system
'On a case-by-case basis, the state may provide for a longer compliance schedule only if the state demonstrates
in the Section 111(d) State Plan that the criteria in § 60.24(f) of Subpart B are met, and the EPA approves the
compliance schedule.
3-21
-------
The State should also consider using a database or spreadsheet in order to track
reports received from all of the landfills in its jurisdiction. This tracking spreadsheet would
enable the regulator to determine whether any landfills were delinquent in meeting the reporting
requirements. The spreadsheet format discussed in the section 3.1 on ensuring compliance with
the NSPS can also be used to track reports from landfills affected by EG. This spreadsheet can
be used to indicate which reports have been received and which are expected by sorting the
spreadsheet entries by the report due date. An illustration of this type of spreadsheet, referred to
earlier as a Report Tracking Spreadsheet, was provided in Figure 3-6.
A convenient method for using this spreadsheet would be to print all of the reports
due each week. This could be accomplished by sorting the spreadsheet by report due date and
printing a hard copy of the reports due for a given week. This method would allow the regulator
to post the hard copy and note each report as it is received. At the end of the period, the updated
information could be entered and the next action expected by the landfill determined.
Reviewing Reports
The reports submitted under the requirements of the EG should be reviewed in the
same manner as those submitted under the NSPS. Appendix F includes checklists to assist in
reviewing the reports. These checklists provide a standard means for ensuring that all of the
required information is included in the reports. In addition, some landfills may estimate
emissions or perform calculations using procedures other than those prescribed in the regulations.
In cases where the rule specifies a calculation methodology (i.e., the tier method for calculating
NMOC emissions), it is not acceptable for landfill owners/operators to deviate from the rule. In
cases where the rule is not specific (i.e., design capacity calculations), the regulator needs to
verify that the procedures are acceptable based on sound engineering practices.
3-22
-------
4.0 INSPECTION PROCEDURES
Inspections are an important part of the overall regulatory compliance program.
Through inspections; regulatory authorities are able to verify compliance with the required
monitoring and recordkeeping procedures and visually inspect control systems. This section
provides guidance on how to prepare for and conduct inspections at MSW landfills affected by
the NSPS and EG.
Since the requirements of the NSPS and EG are the same except for compliance
schedules, the same procedures can be used for inspecting landfills affected by the NSPS or the
EG. The guidance presented in this section applies to landfills affected by either regulation.
Therefore, this section does not distinguish between landfills affected by the NSPS or EG.
This section presents guidelines for conducting an on-site compliance inspection.
Section 4.1 provides guidance on how to prepare for the inspection. Section 4.2 presents the
steps for conducting a compliance inspection, and references the corresponding on-site
inspection checklists located in appendix G.
4.1 PREPARING FOR THE INSPECTION
Preparing for the inspection includes (1) the search and review of relevant files,
(2) notification of landfill management concerning the upcoming inspection, and (3) obtaining
necessary equipment and materials for the inspection. These preparation activities are discussed
below.
Search and Review Files
Prior to conducting an inspection, the inspector should become familiar with the
regulations; search the EPA, State, or local agency files; and review all relevant information
related to the landfill targeted for inspection. The regulations require that landfills submit reports
4-1
-------
to the States, or the implementing agency. These reports should indicate whether the landfill is
subject to the regulations. The required reports begin with the Design Capacity and NMOC
Emission Rate Reports. Familiarity with the most recent compliance history of the landfill is
useful in planning the inspection. Example report forms are included in appendix H.
These required reports should provide a compliance history for the subject
landfill. From the reports, the inspector can determine what type of records must be kept by the
landfill and what type of collection and control systems are required. It may also be helpful for
the inspector to review the on-site checklists (provided in appendix G) in order to systematically
review the file. If prior inspections of the landfill have been made, a review of the files will help
the inspector prioritize areas of concern for the upcoming inspection.
Notify the Landfill
Since the primary means of determining compliance is the review of landfill
records, the inspector should notify the landfill management prior to the inspection. This will
allow landfill personnel time to gather and organize all relevant records and have them available
for review. Landfill management should also provide a map and/or diagrams of the landfill to
the inspector for use in planning spot checks of equipment and verifying the records.
Inspector's Materials and Equipment
The inspector needs to have suitable materials and equipment to perform an
inspection. Materials such as pens, pencils, and writing tablets are obvious since results of the
inspection need to be recorded. The primary means of recording an inspection is by completing
previously prepared checklists. Checklists provide a standard approach and format for
conducting and recording an inspection. Checklists for recording, monitoring, and control
equipment are included in appendix G. Copies of these checklists should be made for each
inspection.
In addition, the inspector may want to monitor surface methane concentrations
during the inspection. In this case, an organic vapor analyzer (OVA), flame ionization detector
(FID), or other portable monitor meeting the specifications provided in § 60.755(d) will be
needed to monitor the methane emissions.
4-2
-------
Also, the inspector may request permission from the landfill owner or operator to
take photographs. Photographs can provide a large amount of information concerning the
physical layout of the landfill and equipment. In addition, details of the equipment may be
difficult to represent adequately in the checklists, but will be clear in photographs.
4.2 INSPECTION OF RECORDS AND EQUIPMENT
The inspection consists of three components: (1) review of landfill records,
(2) visual inspection of the collection and control equipment, and (3) visual inspection of the
monitoring equipment. All three of these components are discussed below.
Reviewing Records
During the visit, inspectors should verify that all records are maintained by the
landfill and are accurate. The compliance recordkeeping checklist provided in appendix G is
designed to assist in ensuring that all necessary records are kept on site and are up-to-date. This
checklist is appropriate for landfills that are required to install collection and control systems
(i.e., those with an emission rate at or above 50 Mg/yr). It is expected that agencies will target
these landfills for inspections rather than those landfills that are below the emission rate cutoff.
The recordkeeping checklist is organized into six sections. The first section notes
the general requirements for maintaining records. For example, records must be kept for at least
5 years and the records must be on site and accessible. The second section concerns the control
equipment compliance determination. The landfill is required to demonstrate that the control
equipment is in compliance. Records of compliance tests or other approved methods of
demonstrating control equipment compliance must be maintained. The equipment operating
parameters and exceedances are covered in the third section. This section assists the inspector in
determining whether records of the operating parameters are maintained. The fourth section
assists the inspector in verifying that records of the location and identification of the collection
system wells are maintained. The checklist in the fifth section assists the inspector in verifying
that, if the collection system does not collect LFG from areas that do not warrant controls or from
areas that contain asbestos, appropriate records are maintained. Collection and control
exceedances are noted in the sixth section.
4-3
-------
Inspecting Collection and Control Equipment
Visual inspections enable the inspector to assess the condition of the collection
and control equipment. Inspectors should note if there are discrepancies between the landfill
records and visual inspections. Collection and control equipment should be checked for obvious
leaks and lack of maintenance. A collection and control checklist is provided in appendix G to
assist the inspector in determining whether the criteria for active collection systems in § 60.759
are being met. A site-specific collection system design plan must be approved. Visual
observations of the collection system may be compared to the design plan in addition to or
instead of the checklist.
During the visual inspection of the landfill equipment, the inspector may also
choose to conduct monitoring to verify compliance. Surface methane emissions may be
monitored to provide an indication of the performance; monitoring may be conducted in a
manner similar to that described in the regulations or randomly as a spot check. The regulations
state that methane emission monitoring shall be conducted along the perimeter of the collection
area and along a path that traverses the landfill at 30-meter intervals, and where visual
observations indicate elevated concentrations of landfill gas (e.g., distressed vegetation, cracks or
seeps in the cover). Measurements are to be made in accordance with section 4.3.1 of Reference
Method 21. When monitoring methane emissions, it is important that the probe inlet be placed
within 5-10 centimeters of the ground. A complete description of Method 21 is given in
appendix B. An OVA, FID, or other portable monitor meeting the specifications provided in
§ 60.755(d) will be needed to conduct the Method 21 procedures. Any reading of 500 parts per
million or more above background levels at any location is considered an exceedance of the
operational standards, and corrective action is required. However, an exceedance of 500 parts
per million is not a violation if required corrective actions are taken. As required by the
regulations, monitoring shall be performed during typical meteorological conditions.
Inspecting Monitoring Equipment
The inspector should verify that required monitoring equipment is installed on the
collection and control equipment. A monitoring checklist is provided in appendix G to assist
inspectors in determining whether the monitoring requirements in § 60.756 are being met.
4-4
-------
APPENDIX A
EMISSION GUIDELINES (SUBPART Cc) AND NEW SOURCE
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (SUBPART WWW), AMENDMENTS
TO SUBPARTS Cc AND WWW AND APPENDIX A - REFERENCE
METHODS (METHOD 2E, METHOD 3C, AND METHOD 25C)
A1 Subparts Cc and WWW of 40 CFR Part 60 can be found as published in the Federal
Register on March 12, 1996 (61 FR 9905) or on the internet at
http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/EPA-AIRyi996/March
A2 Amendments to Subparts Cc and WWW appeared as a direct final notice in the Federal
Register on June 16, 1998 (63 FR 32743) and can also be found on the internet at
http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/1998/June
-------
APPENDIX A1
Subparts Cc and WWW of 40 CFR Part 60 can be found as published in the Federal
Register on March 12, 1996 (61 FR 9905) or on the internet at
http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/1996/March
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9905
§ 706.2 Certifications of the Secretary of
the Navy under Executive Order 11964 and
33 U.S.C. 1605.
Table Five
Vessel
No.
Masthead
lights not
over all
other
lights and
obstruc-
tions,
annex I,
sec. 2(f)
Forward
masthead
light not
in forward
quarter of
ship,
annex I,
sec. 3(a)
After
masthead
light less
than 1/2
ship's
length aft
of for-
ward
masthead
light,
annex I,
sec. 3(a)
Percentage
horizontal
separation
attained
USS PAUL HAMILTON DDG 60
20.4
Dated: February 25, 1996
R R. Pixa,
Captain. JAGC, V S. Navy, Deputy Assistant
Judge Advocate General (Admiralty).
[FR Doc. 96-5837 Filed 3-11-96, 8.45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40CFR Parts 51, 52, and 60
[AD-FRL-5437-8]
RIN 2060-AC42
Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources and Guidelines for
Control of Existing Sources: Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA)
ACTION: Final rule and guideline
SUMMARY: This action adds subparts
WWW and Cc to 40 CFR part 60 by
promulgating standards of performance
lor new municipal solid waste landfills
and emission guidelines for existing
municipal solid waste landfills. This
action also adds the source category
"municipal solid waste landfills' to the
priority list in 40 CFR Part 60, § 60.16,
(or regulation under section 111 of the
Clean Air Act These standards and
emission guidelines implement section
i 11 of the Clean Air Act and are based
on the Administrator's determination
that municipal solid waste landfills
cause, or contribute significantly to, air
pollution that may reasonably be
anticipated to endanger public health or
welfare. The emissions of concern are
non-methane organic compounds
(NMOC) and methane. NMOC include
volatile organic compounds (VOC),
hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), and
odorous compounds. VOC emissions
contribute to ozone formation which
can result in adverse effects to human
health and vegetation. Ozone can
penetrate into different regions of the
respiratory tract and be absorbed
through the respiratory system. The
health effects of exposure to HAPs can
include cancer, respiratory irritation,
and damage to the nervous system.
Methane emissions contribute to global
climate change and can result in fires or
explosions when they accumulate in
structures on or off the landfill site. The
intended effect of the standards and
guidelines is to require certain
municipal solid waste landfills to
control emissions to the level achievable
by the best demonstrated system of
continuous emission reduction,
considering costs, nonair quality health,
and environmental and energy impacts.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective on March 12,
1996.
ADDRESSES: Background Information
Document The background information
document for the promulgated
standards may be obtained from the U.S.
EPA Library (MD-35), Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 2771 1. telephone
number (919) 541-2777. Please refer to
"Air Emissions from Municipal Solid
Waste Landfills—Background
Information for Final Standards and
Emission Guidelines," EPA-453/R-94-
021 The Background Information
Document contains: (1) A summary of
all the public comments made on the
proposed standards and the Notice of
Data Availability as well as the
Administrator's response to these
comments, (2) a summary of the changes
made to the standards since proposal,
and (3) the final Environmental Impact
Statement, which summarizes the
impacts of the standards.
Docket. Docket No. A-88-09,
containing supporting information used
in developing the promulgated
standards, is available for public
inspection and copying between 8:00
a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except for Federal holidays at
the following address: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Air
and Radiation Docket and Information
Center (MC-6102), 401 M Street SW..
Washington, DC 20460 [phone: (202)
260-7548] The docket is located at the
above address in Room M-1500,
Waterside Mall (ground floor). A
reasonable fee may be charged for
copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information on the regulation of
municipal solid waste landfills, contact
Ms. Martha Smith, Waste and Chemical
Processes Group, Emission Standards
Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 2771 1, telephone
number (919) 541-2421
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, judicial review of the actions
taken by this notice is available only by
the filing of a petition for review in the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit within 60 days of
today's publication of this rule. Under
section 307(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act,
the requirements that are the subject of
today's notice may not be challenged
-------
9906 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
later in civil or criminal proceedings
brought by the EPA to enforce these
requirements.
The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in the
introductory text (preamble) to the final
standards,
I. Acronyms, Abbreviations, and
Measurement Units
A. Acronyms
B. Abbreviations and Measurement Units
C. Conversion Factors and Commonly Used
Units
II. Background
III. Summary of Considerations in
Developing the Standards and Emission
Guidelines
A. Purpose of the Regulation
B. Technical Basis of the Regulation
C. Stakeholders and Public Involvement
IV. Summary of the Standards, Emission
Guidelines, and Methods
V Impacts of the Standards and Emission
Guidelines
A. Environmental Impacts
B, Cost and Economic Impacts
VI Significant Changes to the Proposed
Standards and Emission Guidelines
A. Design Capacity Exemption
B. Emission Rate Cutoff
C. Collection System Design Specifications
D. Timing for Well Placement
E. Operational Standards
F. Surface Emission Monitoring
G Model Default Values
VII. Permitting
A New Source Review Permits
B Operating Permits
VIII. Administrative Requirements
A Docket
B Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Executive Order 12866
D. Executive Order 12875
E Unfunded Mandate Reform Act
F Regulatory Flexibiliry Act
G Miscellaneous
1. Acronyms, Abbreviations, and
Measurement Units
The follow ing definitions, acronyms,
and measurement units are provided to
clarify the preamble to the final rule.
A. Acronyms
BDT—best demonstrated technology
BID—background information
document
CAA—Clean Air Act
CERCLA—Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
EG—emission guideline(s)
EPA—Environmental Protection Agency
FR—Federal Register
HAP—hazardous air pollutant
LFG—landfill gas
MSW— municipal solid waste
NMOC—nonmethane organic
compounds
NPV—net present value
NSPS—new source performance
standards
NSR—new source review
OMB—Office of Management and
Budget
PSD—prevention of significant
deterioration
RCRA—Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act
VOC—volatile organic compound(s)
B. Abbreviations and Measurement
Units
J/scm—joules per standard cubic meter
m—meter
Mg—megagram
mm—millimeter
ppm—parts per million
ppmv—parts per million by volume
tpy—tons per year
yr—year
C. Conversion Factors and Commonly
Used Units
1 meter = 3,2808 feet
1 megagram =* 1.1023 tons = 2204.6
pounds
1 cubic meter = 35.288 cubic feet =
1.3069 cubic yards
1 cubic meter = 0.0008101 acre-feet
Degrees Celsius = (degrees Fahrenheit -
32)/1.8
II, Background
The United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) originally-
considered regulating MSW landfill
emissions under a RCRA subtitle D
rulemaking. However, the Administrator
decided to regulate MSW landfill
emissions under the authority of the
CAA, and announced the decision in
the Federal Register on August 30, 1988
(53 FR 33314), The EPA decided to
propose regulation of new MSW
landfills under section 111 (b) of the
CAA and to propose EG for existing
MSW landfills under section 111 (d).
The EPA published a proposal of this
NSPS and EG in the Federal Register on
May 30, 1991 (56 FR 24468)
Following the receipt of new data and
changes in the modeling techniques, the
EPA published a Notice of Data
Availability in the Federal Register on
June 21, 1993 (56 FR 33790).
Under the authority of section
111 (b)(1)(A) of the CAA, today's notice
adds the source category MSW landfills
to the priority list in 40 CFR 60.16
because, in the judgement of the
Administrator, it contributes
significantly to air pollution which may
reasonably be anticipated to endanger
public health and welfare. Further
rationale for this finding is contained in
section 1.1.1 of the promulgation BID
(EPA-453/R-94-021).
Today's notice promulgates the final
NSPS and EG for MSW landfills. The
promulgation BID "Air Emissions from
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills—
Background Information for Final
Standards and Guidelines" (EPA 453/R-
94-021) summarizes all public
comments on the proposed NSPS and
EG and the EPA responses. For further
discussion of stakeholder and public
involvement in the development of the
rules see section UI.C. of this preamble.
Recent information suggests that
mercury might be emitted from
landfills. The EPA is still looking at ihe
possibility and will take action as
appropriate in the future under the
landfill national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants.
III. Summary of Considerations in
Developing the Standards and Emission
Guidelines
A. Purpose of the Regulation
Landfill gas emissions contain
methane, carbon dioxide, and more than
100 different NMOC, such as vinyl
chloride, toluene, and benzene. Studies
indicate that MSW landfill gas
emissions can at certain levels have
adverse effects on both public health
and welfare. The EPA presented
concerns with the health and welfare
effects of landfill gases in the preamble
to the proposed regulations (56 FR
24468).
Briefly, specific health and welfare
effects from LFG emissions are as
follows: NMOC contribute to ozone
formation; some NMOC are known or
suspected carcinogens, or cause other
noncancer health effects; NMOC can
cause an odor nuisance; methane
emissions present a well-documented
danger of fire and explosion on-site and
off-site, and contribute to global climate
change as a major greenhouse gas.
Toda\ s rules will serve to significantly
reduce these potential problems
associated with LFG emissions.
B. Technical Basis of the Regulation
Today's regulations are based on
extensive data analysis and
consideration of several alternatives
Prior to proposal, the EPA developed an
extensive data base, using survey
information from approximately 1,200
landfills, along with emissions
information from literature. State and
local agencies, and industry test reports.
The preamble to the proposed
regulations presented a detailed
discussion of the data used to develop
the rule and the regulatory alternatives
considered (56 FR 24476).
After proposal, the EPA continued to
gather new information and received
new data through public comments. The
EPA published this new information in
a Notice of Data Availability on June 21,
1993 (56 FR 33790). In addition to
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 I Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9907
public comments, the EPA held
consultations with industry under the
authority of Executive Order 12875 (See
section VIII of this document for a
detailed discussion of the Executive
Order).
Based on the new information, the
EPA re-assessed the impacts of the
alternatives and made changes to the
final regulation. The most significant
changes to the regulation are
summarized in section VI of this
preamble. Detailed rationales for these
changes as well as more minor changes
are provided in the final BID (EPA 453/
R-94-02I).
In keeping with the EPA's common
sense initiative, several of the changes
were made to streamline the rule and to
provide flexibility. Examples of this
streamlining and increased flexibility
include focusing control on the largest
landfills, removing the gas collection
system prescriptive design
specifications, and more reasonable
timing for the installation of collection
wells. All of these changes are discussed
further in section VI of this preamble.
C. Stakeholders and Public Involvement
Prior to proposal, in accordance with
section 117 of the CAA, the EPA had
consultations with appropriate advisory
committees, independent experts.
Federal departments and agencies. In
addition, numerous discussions were
held with industry representatives and
trade associations.
After proposal, the EPA provided
interested persons the opportunity to
comment at a public hearing and
through a written comment period.
Comment letters were received from 60
conimenters including industry
representatives, governmental entities,
environmental groups, and private
citizens. A public hearing v. as held in
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
on July 2. 1991. This hearing was open
to the public and five persons presented
oral testimom on the proposed NSPS
and EG.
On June 21, 1993, a supplemental
notice of data availability to the May 30.
1991 proposal appeared in the Federal
Register {58 FR 33790) The notice
announced the availability of additional
data and information on changes in the
EPA's modelling methodology being
used in the development of the final
NSPS and EG for MSW landfills. Public
comments were requested on the new
data and comment letters were received
from seven commenters.
Since the Notice of Data Availability,
the EPA has held several consultations
with State, local, and industry
representatives in accordance with the
October 26, 1993 Executive Order 12875
on Enhancing the Intergovernmental
Partnership.
Major concerns expressed by
participants in the consultations were
identified by the EPA. These concerns
included: the design capacity exemption
level, collection system design and
monitoring flexibility, and timing of
well placement. These concerns and
Others raised at proposal and clarified in
the consultations were addressed by
revising the rule as described in section
VI of this preamble.
IV. Summary of the Standards,
Emission Guidelines, and Methods
The affected facility under the NSPS
is each new MSW landfill. MSW
landfills are also subject to the
requirements of RCRA (40 CFR 257 and
258). A new MSW landfill is a landfill
for which construction, modification, or
reconstruction commences on or after
the proposal date of May 30, 1991 or
that began accepting waste on or after
that date.
The EG require control for certain
existing MSW landfills. An existing
MSW landfill is a landfill for which
construction commenced prior to May
30, 1991. An existing MSW landfill may
be active, i.e., currently accepting waste,
or have additional capacity available to
accept waste, or may be closed, i.e., no
longer accepting waste nor having
available capacity for future waste
deposition. The designated facility
under the EG is each existing MSW
landfill that has accepted waste since
November 8, 1987.
The final rules (both the NSPS and
EG) require affected and designated
MSW landfills having design capacities
below 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million
cubic meters to file a design capacity
report. Affected and designated MSW
landfills having design capacities
greater than or equal to 2 5 million Mg
or 2.5 million cubic meters are subject
to the additional provisions of the
standards or EG
The final standards and EG for MSW
landfill emissions require the periodic
calculation of the annual NMOC
emission rate at each affected or
designated facility with a maximum
design capacity greater than or equal to
2,5 million Mg or 2.5 million cubic
meters. Those that emit more than 50
Mg/yr are required to install controls.
The final rules provide a tier system
for calculating whether the NMOC
emission rate is less than or greater than
50 Mg/yr, using a first order
decomposition rate equation. The tier
system does not need to be used to
model the emission rate if an owner or
operator has or intends to install
controls that would achieve compliance
Chapter 1 of the promulgation BID (EPA
453/R-94-021) presents a complete
discussion of the components of the tier
system.
The BDT for both the NSPS and the
EG requires the reduction of MSW
landfill emissions from new and
existing MSW landfills emitting 50 Mg/
yr of NMOC or more with: (1) A well-
designed and well-operated gas
collection system and (2) a control
device capable of reducing NMOC in the
collected gas by 98 weight-percent.
A well-designed and well-operated
collection system would, at a minimum:
(1) Be capable of handling the maximum
expected gas generation rate; (2) have a
design capable of monitoring and
adjusting the operation of the system;
and (3) be able to collect gas effectively
from all areas of the landfill that warrant
control. Over time, new areas of the
landfill will require control, so
collection systems should be designed
to allow expansion by the addition of
further collection system components to
collect gas, or separate collections
systems will need to be installed as the
new areas require control.
The BDT control device is a
combustion device capable of reducing
NMOC emissions by 98 weight-percent.
While energy recovery is strongly
recommended, the cost analysis is based
on open flares because they are
applicable to all affected and designated
facilities regulated by the standards and
EG. If an owner or operator uses an
enclosed combustor, the device must
demonstrate either 98-percent NMOC
reduction or an outlet NMOC
concentration of 20 ppmv or less.
Alternatively, the collected gas may be
treated for subsequent sale or use,
provided that all emissions from an)
atmospheric vent from the treatment
system are routed to a control dev ice
meeting either specification above.
The standards and EG require that
three conditions be met prior to capping
or removal of the collection and control
system, (1) The landfill must be
permanently closed under the
requirements of 40 CFR 258.60, (2) the
collection and control system must have
been in continuous operation a
minimum of 15 years; and (3) the
annual NMOC emission rate routed to
the control device must be less than the
emission rate cutoff on three successive
dates, between 90 and 180 days apart,
based upon the site-specific landfill gas
flow rate and average NMOC
concentration
Section VI.E. of this preamble
describes a new section of the NSPS,
§60,753, "Operational Standards for
Collection and Control Systems." The
EG also refer to this section. The
-------
9908 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
provisions in this section include: (1)
Collection of gas from each area, cell or
group of cells in which non-asbestos
degradable solid waste has been placed
for a period of 5 years or more for active
areas or 2 years or more for closed areas;
(2) operation of the collection system
with each wellhead under negative
pressure, with a nitrogen level less than
or equal to 20 percent (revised from 1
percent in the proposal, based on public
comments) or an oxygen level less than
or equal to 5 percent (a new provision);
(3) operation with a landfill gas
temperature less than 55 °C (a new
provision) at each well transporting the
collected gases to a treatment or control
device designed and operated in
compliance with § 60.752(b) (2)(iii) of
the NSPS and operated at all times
when the collected gas is vented to it;
and (4) a requirement that the collection
system be operated to limit the surface
methane concentration to 500 ppm or
less over the landfill as determined
according to a specified monitoring
pattern.
Owners and operators must determine
compliance with the standards for the
collection systems and control devices
according to § 60.755. Changes made to
the final compliance determination and
monitoring procedures as a result of
comments are discussed in detail in the
BID (EPA 453/R-94-021). The §§60.757
and 60.758 of the NSPS and § 60.35(c)
of the EG contain recordkeeping and
reporting requirements. Changes have
been made to the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements to allov\ for
consistency with the final compliance
requirements.
V. Impacts of the Standards and
Emission Guidelines
A. Environmental Impacts of
Promulgated Action
The estimated environmental impacts
have changed somewhat from those
presented in the preamble to the
proposed regulations as a result of
changes in the final rules and changes
in the estimation methodology. These
changes were made in response to
public comments. Additional data were
also incorporated and are described in
the supplemental Notice of Data
Availability (56 FR 33790). The analysis
of environmental impacts presented in
this document, along with the proposal
and promulgation BID's, and
memoranda in the docket constitute the
Environmental Impact Statement for the
final standards and guidelines.
For most NSPS, emission reductions
and costs are expressed in annual terms.
In the case of the NSPS and EG for
landfills, the final regulations require
controls at a given landfill only after the
increasing NMOC emission rate reaches
the level of the regulatory cutoff. The
controls are applied when the emissions
exceed the threshold, and they must
remain in place until the emissions drop
below the cutoff. However, this process
could take as long as 50 to 100 hundred
years for some landfills. During the
control period, costs and emission
reductions will vary from year to year.
Therefore, the annualized numbers for
any impact will change from year to
year. Because of the variability of
emission reductions and costs of the
final standards and EG over time, the
EPA judged that the NPV of an impact
is a more valuable tool in the decision
process for landfills and has used NPV
in the development of both the proposal
and final nationwide impacts. The NPV
is computed by discounting the capital
and operating costs and emission
reductions that will be incurred
throughout the control periods to arrive
at a measure of their current value. In
this way, the NPV accounts for the
unique emission patterns of landfills
when evaluating nationwide costs and
benefits over different discrete time
periods for individual sources. Thus,
the impacts presented include both
annualized estimates and estimates
expressed in terms of NPV in 1992.
1. Air Emissions
The methodology for estimating the
impacts of the NSPS and EG is
discussed in the proposal BID and in
memoranda in the docket. The analysis
of impacts for the NSPS is based on new
landfills (beginning construction after
May 30, 1991) that are projected to
begin accepting waste over the first 5
years of the standards. The NPV of the
emission reduction achieved by the
final standards is estimated to be 79,300
Mg, which reflects a 50 percent
reduction from the NPV of the baseline
emissions of 160,000 Mg. Substantial
reduction of methane emissions is also
achieved. Table 1 presents the emission
reductions of the final NSPS in
annualized values as well as NPV.
Table 1.—Summary of Emission Reduction and Cost Impacts for the NSPS
Baseline NMOC Emissions-' (Mg)
NMOC Emission Reductions (Mg) ..
% NMOC Emission Reduction
Baseline Methane Emissionsj (Mg)
Methane Emission Reductionh (Mg)
% Methane Emission Reduction ..
Cost (Million $)
NPV
160,000
79,300
50%
10,600.000
3,890,000
37%
97
Annualized
'In the absence of an NSPS This does not include landfills closed prior to November 8, 1987.
'This does not enclude landfills expected to undertake profitable energy recovery.
For existing landfills, the NPV of the
NMOC emission reduction achieved by
the final EG is estimated to be 1.1
million Mg, or a 53 percent reduction
from a baseline of 2.07 million Mg
(NPV). The NPV of the methane
reduction is estimated to be 47 million
Mg. Table 2 presents the emission
reductions of the final EG in annualized
values as well as NPV. Note that the
baseline methane emissions do not
include landfills closed prior to
November 8, 1987, and that methane
reductions shown in Tables 1 and 2 do
not include landfills expected to
undertake profitable energy recovery.
Total methane reductions are
anticipated to be on the order of 7
million megagrams in the year 2000.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
Table 2—Summary of Emission Reduction and Cost Impacts for the Emission Guidelines
NPV
Baseline NMOC Emissions^ (Mg) .
NMOC Emission Reductions (Mg) ..
% NMOC Emission Reduction
Baseline Methane Emissions1- (Mg)
Methane Emission Reduction (Mg)
% Methane Emission Reduction ....
Cost (Million $)
2,070,000
1,100,000
53%
120,000,000
47,000,000
39%
1,278
Mn the absence of EG. This does not include landfills closed prior to November 8, 1987.
bThis does not enclude landfills expected to undertake profitable energy recovery.
As existing landfills are filled, closed,
and replaced by new landfills, the
actual annual emissions reductions
achieved by the guidelines will
decrease, while the reductions achieved
bv the standards will increase.
' Certain by-product emissions, such as
NOx, CO, SOx, and particulates, may be
generated by the combustion devices
used to reduce air emissions from MSW
landfills. The types and quantities of
these by-product emissions vary
depending on the control device
However, by-product emissions are very
low compared to the achievable NMOC
and methane emission reductions
Chapters 4 and 6 of the proposal BID
(EPA-450/3-90-011a) present
additional information about the
magnitude of potential secondary air
impacts.
2 Water
Landfill leachate is the primary
potential source of water pollution from
a landfill. Although there is no data on
the effect of gas collection on leachate
composition, the amount of water
pollution present as NMOC in the
leachate may be reduced under these
standards and guidelines
When LFG is collected organic;. and
water are condensed inside the header
pipes of the gas collection system This
waste also contains NMOC and various
toxic substances present in the LFG The
pH of this condensate is normally
adjusted by adding caustic at the
landfill and then routing it to a public
treatment works where it would be
treated and discharged. At this time,
there is insufficient data available to
quantify the effects of the rule on
leachate.
3. Solid Waste
The final NSPS and EG will likely
have little impact on the quantity of
solid waste generated nationwide. Aside
from the disposal of the collection and
control system equipment once it can be
removed from the landfill no other
solid wastes are expected to be
generated by the required controls The
increased cost of landfill operation
resulting from the control requirements
ma} cause greater use of waste recycling
and other alternatives to landfill
disposal, leading to a decrease in
landfill use. However, quantification of
such an impact is not possible at this
time,
4. Superfund Sites
Municipal solid waste landfill sites
comprise approximately 20 percent of
the sites placed by the EPA on the
national priorities list, Often, remedial
actions selected at these sites include
venting methane and volatile organic
contaminants, which would be
controlled as necessary to protect
human health and the environment.
The final NSPS and EG may affect
remedial actions under Superfund for
MSW landfills. Section 121(d)(2) of
CERCLA requires compliance with the
substantive standards of applicable or
relevant and appropriate requirements
(ARAR) of certain provisions in other
environmental laws when selecting and
implementing on-site remedial actions.
"Applicable" requirements specifically
address a hazardous substance,
pollutant, contaminant, remedial action,
location, or other circumstance at a
Superfund site "Relevant and
appropriate" requirements are not
legally applicable, but ma) address
problems or situations sufficiently
similar to those encountered so that
their use is well suited to a particular
site. See 40 CFR 300.5 (55 FR 8814,
8817. March 8, 1990)
These air emission rules will apply to
new MSW landfills, as well as to those
facilities that have accepted waste since
November 8, 1987, or that have capacity
available for future use. For CERCLA
municipal landfill remediations, these
requirements would be potential ARAR
for all Records of Decision signed after
the date of promulgation. These NSPS
and EG w ill be applicable for those
MSW landfill sites on the national
priorities list that accepted waste on or
after November 8, 1987, or that are
operating and have capacity for future
use. These standards may also be
determined relevant and appropriate for
sites that accepted wastes prior to
November 8, 1987. The determination of
relevance and appropriateness is made
on a site-specific basis pursuant to 40
CFR 300.400(g) (55 FR 8841, March 8,
1990), Because the NSPS and EG apply
only to landfills with design capacities
greater than or equal to 2.5 million Mg
or 2.5 million cubic meters, the
collection and control requirements may
not be relevant and appropriate for
smaller landfills.
Given the significant public policy
benefits that result from the collection
and processing of landfill gas, Congress,
as part of the 1986 SARA Amendments,
enacted CERCLA Section 124 to provide
broad liability protection for companies
engaged in landfill gas recovery or
processing. Landfill gas emissions, in
addition to being a significant source of
air pollution, can leach underground
and cause explosions in nearby
residences. If recovered, landfill gas
could supply as much as 1 percent of
the U.S. energy requirements.
CERCLA Section 124 states that
owners or operators of equipment
installed "for the recovery or processing
(including recirculation of condensate)
of methane" shall not be liable as a
CERCLA "owner or operator" under
CERCLA Section 101 (20) nor shall they
be deemed "to have arranged for
disposal or treatment of any hazardous
substance* * *" pursuant to CERCLA
Section 107. Exceptions are provided (1)
where a release is primarily caused by
activities of the landfill gas owner/
operator or (2) where such owner/
operator would be otherwise liable due
to activities unrelated to methane
recovery.
Since passage of CERCLA section 124,
methane emissions have been targeted
by the EPA as a large contributor to
global warming {18 percent) and
landfills are one of the largest source of
methane emissions (36 percent).
Because of this, the EPA's Atmospheric
Pollution Prevention Division has
initiated the Landfill Methane Outreach
Program to promote landfill gas
-------
9910 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
collection projects at the 750 landfills
where methane could profitably be
recovered. Methane recovery, as
compared with collection and flaring of
landfill gas without recovery, results in
significantly less emissions. It also can
greatly reduce the financial burden on
local governments (as well as taxpayers)
since the energy recovered can be sold
to utilities or other consumers and
thereby create a revenue stream that
may cover the costs of collection and
recovery.
The EPA is aware that the standards
and guidelines promulgated today for
control of emissions at municipal solid
waste landfills may change the focus of
the landfill gas collection and
processing for methane recovery. The
landfill gas owner/operator will now
need to consider how the collection and
recovery of methane will impact on
controlling the MSW landfill emissions.
It is also likely that the landfill gas
owner/operator will be asked to advise
and in some cases help implement the
MSW landfill's compliance obligations.
These related objectives, the control of
emissions at municipal solid waste
landfills in order to comply with the
Clean Air Act Amendments and the
reduction of methane emissions in order
to mitigate global warming, will need to
be coordinated in carrying out common
activities such as laying a system of
collection piping at a given landfill.
In promulgating today s standards and
guidelines, the EPA wants to promote
the policy incorporated in CERCLA
Section 124. Recognizing the chilling
effect that potential CERCLA liability
might otherwise have on landfill gas
collection or processing activities, the
EPA interprets CERCLA Section 124 in
a manner thai will encourage the
beneficial recovery of methane.
Specifically. EPA believes that Congress
intended Section 124 topro\ide liability
protection to owners and operators of
equipment for the recovery or
processing of methane with respect to
all phases involved in landfill gas
collection and methane processing. This
includes any assistance (related to
recovery or processing of methane)
provided by the landfill gas equipment
owner or operator to the landfill owner/
operator for achieving compliance with
the emission standards promulgated
today or similar Federal, State, or local
controls on landfill emissions. In
general, Section 124 will be interpreted
in a manner to provide owners and
operators of equipment for the recovery
or processing of methane with
comprehensive protection from
CERCLA liability, unless the release or
threatened release was primarily caused
by activities of the owners and operators
of the equipment, or unless such owners
or operators would be otherwise liable
under CERCLA,
B. Energy and Economic Impacts of
Promulgated Action
The energy and economic impacts are
summarized in chapter 1 and fully
discussed in chapter 3 and appendix A
of the promulgation BID (EPA-453/R-
94-021). The estimated impacts have
changed somewhat as a result of
changes in the final rules and changes
in the impacts estimation methodology
made in response to public comments.
1, Energy Impacts
Affected and designated landfills with
NMOC emission rates of 50 Mg/yr or
more are required to install a gas
collection system and control device.
The gas collection system would require
a relatively small amount of energy to
run the blowers and the pumps. If a
flare is used for control, auxiliary fuel
should not be necessary because of the
high heat content of LFG, commonly
1.86 x 101 J/scm or more. If a recovery
device such as an internal combustion
(I.C.) engine or a gas turbine is used, an
energy savings would result.
The EPA evaluated the overall energy
impacts resulting from the use of flares,
1.C. engines, or gas turbines for control
of collected emissions at all affected
landfills The least cost control option
was identified by taking the NPV costs
of the three control options (flares, l.C.
engines, and turbines), including any
cost savings from the use of recovered
landfill gas, and determining the option
that costs the least. If landfills use the
least cost control device, it is estimated
that the NSPS will produce SI70
million of energy revenue as NPV in
1992 The EG are estimated to generated
$15 billion of energy revenue as NPV in
1992. if the least cost control device is
used.
2. Control Costs and Economic Impacts
Nationwide annualized costs for
collection and control of air emissions
from new MSW landfills are estimated
to be $4 million. The nationwide cost of
the EG would be approximately S90
million. These values are annualized
costs. Tables 1 and 2 present costs in
both annualized and NPV values. In
comparison to other solid waste-related
rules, the nationwide costs of the
recently promulgated RCRA Subtitle D
(40 CFR 257 and 258) rule are estimated
to be $300 million per year and the
estimated nationwide costs of the MWC
rules promulgated in 1991 are estimated
to be $170 million per year for new
combustors and $302 million per year
for existing combustors (56 FR 5488 and
5514).
The incremental costs and benefits of
the different options are presented in
tables 3, 4, 5, and 6 in section VIII.E. For
NMOC, the average cost effectiveness is
approximately $1.200/Mg for both the
NSPS and the EG. Preliminary economic
analysis indicates that the annual cost of
waste disposal may increase by an
average of approximately $0.60 per Mg
for the NSPS and $1.30 per Mg for the
EG. Costs per household would increase
approximately $2.50 to $5.00 per year,
when the household is served by a new
or existing landfill, respectively.
Additionally, less than 10 percent of the
households would face annual increases
of $15 or more per household as a result
of the final EG. However, the EPA
anticipates that many landfills will elect
to use energy recovery systems, and
costs per household for those areas
would be less. The EPA has concluded
that households would not incur severe
economic impacts. For additional
information, please refer to the
regulatory impact analysis (Docket No.
A-88-09, Item No, IV-A-7) and chapter
3 of the promulgation BID (EPA-453/R-
94-021).
VI. Significant Changes to the Proposed
Standards and Emission Guidelines
All of the significant public comments
received on the proposed standards and
EG and the Notice of Data Availability
are addressed in the promulgation BID
(EPA-453/R-94-021). This section of
the preamble reviews the major changes
to the standards and EG resulting from
public comments. A more detailed
rationale for these changes is provided
in chapters 1 and 2 of the promulgation
BID (EPA-453/R-94-021),
A. Design Capacity Exemption
A design capacity exemption of
100.000 Mg was included in the
proposed NSPS and EG to relieve
owners and operators of small landfills
that the EPA considered unlikely to
emit NMOC above the emission rate
cutoff requiring control from undue
recordkeeping and reporting
responsibilities, Commenters indicated
that the exemption level was too low,
and would still impact many small
businesses and municipalities. In
response to these comments and as a
result of changes to the nationwide
impacts analysis, the design capacity
exemption in the final NSPS was
revised to 2.5 million Mg. The 2.5
million Mg exemption level would
exempt 90 percent of the existing
landfills while only losing 15 percent of
the total NMOC emission reduction.
Most of the exempt landfills are owned
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9911
by municipalities. The 2.5 million Mg
level was chosen to relieve as many
small businesses and municipalities as
possible from the regulatory
requirements while still maintaining
significant emission reduction.
This cutoff excludes those landfills
who would be least able to afford the
costs of a landfill gas collection and
control system and are less likely to
have successful energy recovery
projects. However, depending on site-
specific factors including landfill gas
characteristics and local markets, some
landfills smaller than the design
capacity exemption level may be able to
make a profit by installing collection
and control systems that recover energy.
While the rule does not require control
of landfills smaller than 2.5 million Mg,
the EPA encourages energy recovery in
cases where it is profitable. The EPA has
developed a Landfill Methane Outreach
Program to encourage more widespread
utilization of landfill gas as an energy
source. Information can be obtained by
calling the Landfill Methane Outreach
Program Hotline at (202) 233-9042.
Available publications are identified in
section 1.2.1 of the promulgation BID.
Since some landfills record waste by
volume and have their design capacities
calculated in volume, the EPA also
established an equivalent design
capacity exemption of 2.5 million m 3 of
waste. The density of solid waste within
different landfills varies depending on
several factors, including the
compaction practices. Any landfill that
reports waste by volume and wishes to
establish a mass design capacity must
document the basis for their density
calculation
B. Emission Rate Cutoff
Some commenters asserted that the
proposed emission rate cutoff of 150
Mg'jr should be made more stringent,
while others favored the proposal cutoff
or higher The commenters favoring the
more stringent level indicated that the
EPA's data on NMOC concentration, the
benefits of energy recovery and reduced
global warming, and the reduced health
risks all supported an increased
stringency level.
The Climate Change Action Plan,
signed by the President in October,
} 993 calls for EPA to promulgate a
tough" landfill gas rule as soon as
possible. This initiative also supports a
more stringent emission rate cutoff that
will achieve greater emission reduction.
Due to the small-size exemption, only
landfills with design capacities greater
than 2 5 million Mg of waste or 2.5
million cubic meters of waste will be
affected by this rule. It is estimated that
a landfill of 2.5 million Mg design
capacity corresponds to cities greater
than about 125,000 people. On the
whole, large landfills service areas with
large population. A reasonable
assumption is that many of these large
landfills are in the 400 counties that
have been designated as urban ozone
nonattainment areas and are developing
plans to address ozone nonattainment.
Finally, the new data and modeling
methodologies, which were published
in the Notice of Data Availability on
June 21, 1993, significantly reduced the
emission reduction and corresponding
effectiveness of the rule. Therefore, a
more stringent emission rate cutoff
would achieve similar emission
reductions at similar cost effectiveness
to the proposed rule.
Based on all of these reasons, the EPA
reevaluated the stringency level and
chose an emission rate cutoff of 50 Mg/
yr of NMOC for the final rules. This
revision would affect more landfills
than the proposal value of 150 Mg/yr of
NMOC; however, the 50 Mg/yr of
NMOC will only affect less than 5
percent of all landfills and is estimated
to reduce NMOC emissions by
approximately 53 percent and methane
emissions by 39 percent. The 150 Mg/
yr emission rate cutoff would have
reduced NMOC emissions by 45 percent
and methane emissions by 24 percent.
The incremental cost effectiveness of
control of going from a 150 Mg/yr cutoff
level to a 50 Mg/yr cutoff level is
$2,900/Mg NMOC reduction for new
landfills and $3,300/Mg for existing
landfills.
The values for NMOC cost
effectiveness do not include any credit
for the benefits for toxics, odor,
explosion control, or the indirect benefit
of methane control. A revised cost
effectiveness could be calculated with
an assumed credit value for one or more
of the other benefits. As an example,
assuming a $30/Mg credit for the
methane emission reduction, the
incremental cost effectiveness from the
proposal cutoff of 1 50 Mg/yr to the final
cutoff of 50 Mg/yr would be reduced to
$660/Mg NMOC.
C. Collection System Design
Specifications
Commenters indicated that the
proposed design specifications for the
collection system were overly
prescriptive, discouraged innovation,
and did not prevent off-site migration of
LFG. In the new §60.759 for design
specifications, certain criteria still
require proper landfill gas collection:
however, the proposed design
specifications for the LFG collection
system were removed from the final
regulations Instead, the final rule
allows sources to design their own
collection systems. Design plans must
meet certain requirements and be signed
by a registered professional engineer,
and are subject to agency approval.
These changes were made to provide
flexibility and encourage technological
innovation.
D. Timing for Well Placement
The proposed regulations required the
installation of collection wells at
applicable landfills within 2 years of
initial waste placement. Commenters
indicated that the installation of wells
within 2 years was not practiced at
many landfills, because many cells were
still active (receiving waste) 2 years after
initial placement Collection wells
installed at these cells would have to be
covered over, which would decrease the
operational life of the well and be costly
and inefficient.
The proposed timing for the
placement of collection wells has been
revised to reduce costs and better
coincide with common operational
practices at MSW landfills. The final
regulation allows for well installation
up to 5 years from initial waste
placement for active cells. An area that
reaches final grade or closure must
install collection wells within 2 years of
initial waste placement.
E. Operational Standards
In response to commenters concerns
about the operation of collection
systems, the final NSPS contains a new
section, §60.753, "Operational
Standards for Collection and Control
Equipment." Various operational
provisions that had previously been
located throughout the proposed rule
have been organized under this one
section, and new provisions on
collection and control systems have
been added The new section addresses
the following areas. (1) Collection of gas
from active areas containing solid waste
older than 5 years (changed from 2 years
at proposal]; (2) operation of the
collection system with negative pressure
at each wellhead (except as noted in the
rule); (3) operation of the collection
system with a landfill temperature less
than 55c (or a higher established
temperature) and either an N; level less
than or equal to 20 percent or an O:
level less than or equal to 5 percent; (4)
operation of the collection system with
a surface concentration less than 500
ppm methane; (5) venting all collected
gases to a treatment or control device;
and (6) operation of the treatment or
control device at all times when the
collected gas is routed to the control
device. The numerical requirements (for
the N; or 02 levels, landfill temperature.
-------
9912
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
and surface concentration) are new
requirements that will verify that the
system is being adequately operated and
maintained. In conjunction with the
new operational provisions, the
compliance, testing and monitoring
sections were revised to reference and
support these new or relocated
provisions.
F. Surface Emission Monitoring
Numerous commenters asserted that
the proposed rules did not address
surface methane emissions resulting
from insufficient well spacing or from
breaks in the cover material. The
commenters recommended that
monitoring of surface emissions'be
required to ensure the proper operation
of collection system equipment. Upon
further analysis, the EPA decided to
require surface emission monitoring and
the maintenance of negative pressure at
all wells, except under specified
conditions, to ensure proper collection
system design and operation. Based on
information submitted by commenters, a
maximum surface concentration of 500
ppm methane should be demonstrated
to indicate proper operation of the
collection system. Monitoring is to be
done quarterly, with provisions for
increasing monitoring and corrective
procedures if readings above 500 ppm
are detected. Instrumentation
specifications, monitoring frequencies,
and monitoring patterns have been
structured to provide clear and straight-
forward procedures that are the
minimum necessary to assure
compliance.
G Model Default Values
The EPA recei\ed additional data
after proposal on the model defaults that
were included in the tier system
calculations Thpse default values are
used to calculate whether the NMOC
concentration is above the cutoff level
for control requirements of 50 Mg/yr.
The new information received lead the
EPA to revise the default values for the
site-specific methane generation rate
constant (k), the methane generation
potential (L„), and the NMOC
concentration (Cnmoc). In the absence of
site-specific data, the landfill owner or
operator would use the default values
for k, L„, and Cnmoc in order to estimate
the annual NMOC emission rate More
information on the model defaults may
be found in the final BID (EPA-453/R-
94-021) and the memorandum
"Documentation of Small-Size
Exemption Cutoff Level and Tier 1
Default Values (Revised)," October 21,
1993, (Docket No A-88-09, Item No.
IV-B-5).
The Tier 1 default values of k, Lo, and
Cnmoc tend to overstate NMOC
emission rates for most landfills, and are
intended to be used to indicate the need
to install a collection and control system
or perform a more detailed Tier 2
analysis. It is recommended that these
default values not be used for estimating
landfill emissions for purposes other
than the NSPS and EG. The EPA
document "Compilation of Air Pollution
Emission Factors" (AP-42) provides
emission estimation procedures and
default values that can be used for
emissions inventories and other
purposes.
VII. Permitting
A. New Source Review Permits
Today's rulemaking under section
111 (b) establishes a new classification of
pollutants subject to regulation under
the CAA: "MSW landfill emissions."
Therefore, PSD rules now apply to all
subject stationary sources which have
increases in landfill gas above the
significance level, 50 tpy or more of
NMOC. Landfills below the 2.5 million
Mg design capacity exemption, which
are not required by the regulations to
install controls, may exceed this
significance level. In this case, the State
will need to determine if controls
should be installed for purposes of PSD
or NSR compliance.
The proposed significance level for
MSW landfill emissions of 40 tpy of
NMOC was changed to 50 tpy after
consideration of public comments. The
PSD significance level for VOC
emissions is 40 tpy. At proposal, the
landfill gas emission level was set at 40
tpy of NMOC to be consistent with the
40 tpy level for VOC. However, NMOC
contains organic compounds that are
not VOC An NMOC emission rate of
roughly 50 tpy corresponds to a VOC
emission rate of 40 tpy.
The components of MSW landfill
emissions that are regulated as
pollutants or precursors of an air
pollutant listed under section 108 of the
CAA are also regulated by other
provisions of CAA as applicable For
example, the components of MSW
landfill emissions that are emitted as
photochemically reactive VOCs are
regulated, as applicable, under the
nonattainment provisions for ozone
contained in part D of title I of the CAA.
B. Operating Permits
Section 502 of the CAA and § 70.3(a)
require any source subject to standards
or regulations under section 111 of the
CAA to obtain part 70 operating
permits. However, landfills below 2.5
million Mg design capacity are not
subject to standards under section 111
because they are not required to put on
controls and are not subject to emission
limits These landfills are subject to a
reporting requirement under the section
111 rule; however, this requirement
determines applicability of the standard
and does not make them "subject" for
the purposes of part 70. Consequently,
landfills below 2.5 million Mg design
capacity are not subject to part 70,
provided they are not major sources;
and this is stated in § 60.752(a) of the
rule. If landfills below 2.5 million Mg
design capacity are major sources, they
must obtain a part 70 permit under the
same deadlines and requirements that
apply to any other major source. States
may request additional information to
verify whether landfills have the
potential to emit at major source levels.
For landfills above the 2.5 million Mg
design capacity exemption, part 70
operating permits are required. These
landfills are subject to emission limits
and will most often be major sources.
Since landfill emissions increase over
time, a landfill over 2.5 million Mg may
not be major in the beginning; however,
as the landfill progresses to capacity, it
may become major. Many of the
landfills above the 2.5 million Mg
exemption will be required to collect
and control the gas under the regulation.
The issuance of a permit will also help
enforce and implement the standard.
Therefore, the EPA has decided to
require permits for all landfills with
design capacities above 2.5 million Mg,
whether or not the landfill will be
required to install a collection and
control system.
The regulation also provides for
termination of operating permits.
Landfill emissions, unlike emissions
from other source categories, decrease
over time after the landfill is closed. If
a landfill has closed and a control
system was never required or the
conditions for control system removal
specified in the regulation have been
met, an operating permit is no longer
necessary.
VIII. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
The docket (Docket No. A-88-09) is
an organized and complete file of all the
information considered by the EPA in
the development of this rulemaking.
The docket is a dynamic file, since
material is added throughout the
rulemaking development The docketing
system is intended to allow members of
the public and industries involved to
readily identify and locate documents
so that they can effectively participate
in the rulemaking process. Along with
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9913
the statement of basis and purpose of
the proposed and promulgated
standards and the EPA responses to
significant comments, the contents of
the docket, except for interagency
review materials, will serve as the
record in case of judicial review (section
307(d)(7)(A)],
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements in this rule have been
submitted for approval to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. An Information Collection
Request (ICR) document has been
prepared by the EPA (ICR No 1557.03)
and a copy may be obtained from Sandy
Farmer, OPPE Regulatory Information
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (2137), 401 M St., S W.;
Washington, DC 20460, or by calling
(202) 260-2740. The information
requirements are not effective until
OMB approves them.
The information required to be
collected by this rule is necessary to
identify the regulated entities who are
subject to the rule and to ensure their
compliance with the rule. The
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements are mandatory and are
being established under authority of
section 114 of the Act. All information
submitted as part of a report to the
Agency for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be
safeguarded according to the Agency
policies set forth in title 40. chapter 1,
part 2. subpart B—Confidentiality of
Business Information (see 40 CFR 2; 41
FR 36902. September 1, 1976, amended
by 43 FR 39999, September 28, 1978. 43
FR 4225], September 28, 1978. 44 FR
17674. March 23. 1979)
The total annual reporting and
recordkeeping burden for this
collection, averaged over the first 3
years of the NSPS applicability to new
MSW landfills, is estimated to be 3,379
person hours per year. This is the
estimated burden for 299 respondents
(e.g., MSW landfill owners/operators)
per year, at an estimated annual
reporting and recordkeeping burden
averaging 11.3 hours per respondent
The rule requires an initial one-time
notification of landfill design capacity
If the landfill is larger than the design
capacity cutoff, annual reports are
required. The capital cost to purchase
required monitoring equipment is
$8,100 per monitor. The total
annualized capital and startup costs for
purchase of monitoring equipment are
580,250. The total national annual cost
burden including all labor costs and
annualized capital costs for
recordkeeping and reporting is
$188,850.
Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons
to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
or provide information to or for a
Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology
and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing
and providing information; adjust the
existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and
requirements; train personnel to be able
to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
C. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR
51735 (October 4, 1993)) the EPA must
determine whether the regulatory action
is "significant" and therefore subject to
OMB review and the requirements of
the Executive Order. The Order defines
"significant regulatory action" as one
that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely effect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or Tribal governments or
communities; (2) create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by
another agency; (3) materially alter the
budgetary impact of entitlement, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights
and obligations of recipients thereof: or
(4) raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles
met forth in the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive
Order 12866, this action was submitted
to OMB for review. Changes made in
response to OMB suggestions or
recommendations are documented in
the public record
D. Executive Order 12875
To reduce the burden of Federal
regulations on States and small
governments, the President issued E.O.
12875 on October 26, 1993. Under E.O.
12875, the EPA is required to consult
with representatives of affected State,
local, and tribal governments. Because
this regulatory action imposes costs to
the private sector and government
entities in excess of $100 million per
year, the EPA pursued the preparation
of an unfunded mandates statement,
consultations, and other requirements of
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
The requirements are met as presented
under the following unfunded mandates
section (section VIII.E of this notice).
E. Unfunded Mandate Reform Act
Under section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
("Unfunded Mandates Act"), signed
into law on March 22, 1995, the EPA
must prepare a statement to accompany
any rule where the estimated costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to
the private sector, will be $100 million
or more per year. Section 203 requires
the Agency to establish a plan for
informing and advising any small
governments that may be significantly
or uniquely affected by the rule. Section
204 requires that the Agency "to the
extent permitted in law, develop an
effective process to permit elected
officers of State, local, and tribal
governments * * * to provide
meaningful and timely input in the
development of regulatory proposals
containing significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates". Under
section 205(a), the EPA must select the
"least costly, most cost-effective or least
burdensome alternative that achieves
the objectives of the rule" and is
consistent with statutory requirements.
The unfunded mandates statement
under section 202 must include: (1) A
citation of the statutory authority under
which the rule is proposed, (2) an
assessment of the costs and benefits of
the rule including the effect of the
mandate on health, safety and the
environment, and the Federal resources
available to defray the costs, (3) where
feasible, estimates of future compliance
costs and disproportionate impacts
upon particular geographic or social
segments of the nation or industry, (4)
where relevant, an estimate of the effect
on the national economy, and (5) a
description of the EPA's consultation
with State, local, and tribal officials.
Because this rule is estimated to
impose costs to the private sector and
governments entities in excess of $100
million per year (based on tenth or
fifteenth year annualized values), it is
considered a significant regulatory
action.
The EPA has thus prepared the
following statement with respect to
sections 202 through 205 of the
Unfunded Mandates Act.
1. Statutory Authority
As discussed in section II of this
preamble, the statutory authority for this
rulemaking is section 111 of the CAA.
The rule establishes emission guidelines
-------
9914 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
for existing MSW landfills and
standards of performance for new MSW
landfills. Section 111(a)(1) of the
requires that standards of performance
for new sources reflect the—
* * * degree of emission limitation and
the percentage reduction achievable through
application of the best technological system
of continuous emission reduction which
(taking into consideration the cost of
achieving such emission reduction, anv
nonair quality health and environmental
impact and energy requirements) the
Administrator determines has been
adequately demonstrated.
Section 111 (d) requires emission
guidelines for existing sources to reflect
a similar degree of emission reduction.
These systems are referred to as BDT
for new and existing sources.
Properly operated gas collection and
control systems achieving 98 percent
emission reduction have been
demonstrated on landfills of the size
affected by the standards and EG, and
represent BDT Control technologies and
their performance are discussed in the
preamble to the proposed rules (56 FR
24476, May 30, 1991)
In selecting BDT, the EPA also
considered which landfills should be
required to apply collection and control
systems. A range of landfill design
capacity and emission rate cutoffs were
evaluated, as described below in section
2.b "Regulatory Alternatives
Considered." The promulgated
standards contain a design capacity
exemption of 2.5 million Mg or 2.5
million cubic meters and an emission
rate cutoff of 50 Mg NMOC/yr.
The EPA considered emission
reduction, costs, and energy
requirements, as required by the
statutory language of section 111 of the
CAA, in selecting the promulgated
standards and EG. The promulgated
standards represent BDT They achieve
significant reductions in landfill gas
emissions—a 53 percent reduction in
NMOC emissions, and a 39 percent
reduction in methane reduction
emissions nationwide. The cost impacts
of the standards are presented in section
V.B and in section VII.E.2 (below). The
public entities and affected industries
who were consulted, as required by the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act,
understand the cost impacts and
support the final rules (see Section 4,
"Consultation with Government
Officials" below). The energy impacts
are discussed in section V.B of this
notice. To the extent energy recovery
devices are used to comply with the
rules, the rules will result in a net
energy savings (production of energy).
Compliance with section 205(a):
Regarding the EPA's compliance with
section 205(a), the EPA did identify and
consider a reasonable number of
alternatives, and presents a summary of
these below. The EPA has chosen to
adopt the alternative with a size cutoff
of 2.5 million Mg capacity, and 50 Mg/
yr emissions. The incremental cost
effectiveness of this 50 Mg/yr option is
$6,250 per ton of NMOC reduced
(versus the less stringent 75 Mg/yr
option). This cost effectiveness is much
higher than is typical for NMOC (or
VOC) controls in NSPSs. However, the
EPA also considers the reductions in
methane achieved by this 50 Mg/yr
option as necessary to "achieve the
objectives" of section 111. The
additional methane reductions achieved
by this option are also an important part
of the total carbon reductions identified
under the Administration's 1993
Climate Change Action Plan. The EPA
thus concludes that the chosen
alternative is the most cost-effective to
achieve the objectives of section 111, as
called for in section 205(a).
2. Social Costs and Benefits
This assessment of the cost and
benefits to State, local, and tribal
governments of the guidelines is based
on EPA s "Economic Impact Analysis
for Proposed Emission Standards and
Guidelines for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills" and updates to the analysis
contained in "Air Emissions from
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills—
Background Information for Final
Standards and Guidelines" (EPA-453/
R—94—021) Measuring the social costs of
the guidelines requires identification of
the affected entities by ownership
(public or private), consideration of
regulatory alternatives, calculation of
the regulatory compliance costs for each
affected entity, and assessment of the
market implications of the additional
pollution control costs. Considering the
social benefits of the guidelines requires
estimating the anticipated reductions in
emissions at MSW landfills due to
regulation and identifying the harmful
effects of exposure to MSW landfill
emissions. Quantitative valuation of the
expected benefits to society was not
done for this rule.
a. Affected Entities. The standards of
performance for new sources will
require control of approximately 43 new
landfills constructed in the first 5 years
the standards are in effect. The EG will
require control of approximately 312
existing landfills. This represents less
than 5 percent of the total number of
landfills in the U.S.
Of the landfills required to install
controls, about 30 percent of the
existing landfills and 20 percent of the
new landfills are privately owned. The
remainder are publicly owned. (These
percentages are taken from section 3.2.1
of the promulgation BID (EPA-453/R-
94-021). While that analysis used a
design capacity exemption level of 1
million Mg rather than the 2.5 million
Mg exemption level contained in the
final rule, the percentage of private
versus publicly owned landfills would
be similar.
b. Regulatory Alternatives Considered.
Under section 205 of the Unfunded
Mandates Act, the Agency must identify
and consider a reasonable number of
regulatory alternatives before
promulgating a rule for which a
budgetary impact statement must be
prepared. The Agency must select from
those alternatives the least costly, most
cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule, unless the Agency explains
why this alternative is not selected or
the selection of this alternative is
inconsistent with the law.
A number of alternatives were
considered. These included design
capacity exemption levels of 1, 2.5, and
3 million Mg and emission rate cutoffs
of 50, 75, 100, and 150 Mg/year Table
3 presents the impacts of alternative
design capacity exemption levels for
existing landfills. Table 4 presents the
impacts of alternative emission rate
cutoffs for existing landfills. Tables 5
and 6 present alternative design
capacity exemption levels and emission
rate cutoffs for new landfills.
Table 3—Alternative Design Capacity Exemption Level Options for the Emission Guidelinesjb-
Small size cutoff (millions Mg)
Number land-
fills affected
Annualc
NMOC emis-
sion reduc-
tion (Mg/yr)
Annuald
methane
emission re-
duction
(Mg/yr)
Annual cost
(million S/yr)
NMOC aver-
age cost eff.
($/Mg)
NMOC Incre-
mental cost
eff ($/Mg)
Baseline
3,000,000
273
73,356
3,220,000
84
1,145
1,145
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9915
Table 3.—Alternative Design Capacity Exemption Level Options for the Emission Guidelines a b—Continued
Small size cutoff (millions Mg)
Number land-
fills affected
Annualc
NMOC emis-
sion reduc-
tion (Mg/yr)
Annuald
methane
emission re-
duction
(Mg/yr)
Annual cost
(million $/yr)
NMOC aver-
age cost eff.
($/Mg)
NMOC Incre-
mental cost
eff. ($/Mg)
2,500,000
312
77,600
3,370,000
89
1,147
1,178
1,000,000
572
97,600
3,990,000
119
1,219
1,500
No cutoff1
7,299
142,000
8,270,000
719
5,063
13,514
• Emission rate cutoff level of 50 Mg NMOC/yr.
b All values are fifth year annualized
cNMOC emission reductions are from a baseline of 145,000 Mg NMOC/vr.
d Methane emission reductions are from a baseline of 8,400,000 Mg metnane/yr.
e in the absence of an emission guidelines.
1 No emission rate cutoff and no design capacity exemption level.
Table 4.—Alternative NMOC Emission Rate Stringency Level Options for the Emission Guidelines ab
Emission rate cutoff (Mg NMOC/yr)
Number land-
fills affected
Annual1
NMOC emis-
sion reduc-
tion (Mg/yr)
Annuald
methane
emission re-
duction (Mg/
yo
Annual cost
(million $/yr)
NMOC aver-
age cost eff.
($/Mgj
NMOC Incre-
mental cost
eff. ($/Mg)
Baselinec.
150
142
66,600
2,210,000
51
766
766
100
201
72,700
2,720,000
66
908
2,459
75
250
76,000
3,080,000
79
1,039
3,939
50
312
77,600
3,370,000
89
1,147
6,250
No cutoff1
7,299
142,000
8,270,000
719
5,063
9,783
8 Design capacity exemption level of 2,500,000 Mg of refuse.
b All values are fifth year annualized
cNMOC emission reductions are from a baseline of 145,000 Mg NMOC/yr.
d Methane emission reductions are from a baseline of 8,400,000 Mg metnane/yr.
c In the absence of an emission guidelines
fNo emission rate cutoff and no design capacity exemption level
Table 5.—Alternative Design Capacity Exemption Level Options for the New Source Performance
Standards a-b
Small size cutoff (millions Mgr)
Number land-
fills affected
Annual'
NMOC emis-
sion reduc-
tion (Mg/yr)
Annuald
methane
emission re-
duction (Mg'
yr)
Annualc cost
(million $/yr)
NMOC aver-
age cost eff.
(S/Mg)
NMOC' In-
cremental
cost eff
($/Mg)
Baselinec
3 000,000
41
4,900
193,000
4
816
N/A
2 500,000
43
4,900
193,000
4
816
N/A
1.000,000 . .
89
4,900
193,000
4
816
N/A
No cutoffh
872
J
13.115
881,000
81
6,176
N/A
¦'Emission rate cutoff level of 50 Mg NMOC/yr
b All values are fifth year annualized
cNMOC emission reductions are from a baseline of 13,400 Mg NMOC/yr.
d Methane emission reductions are from a baseline of 899,000 Mg methane/yr.
Due to rounding off to the nearest million dollar, cost values do not appear to change for each option However, actual costs are slightly less
for a less stringent option
1 Because the annual cost does not change enough to show a different cost from one option to the next, incremental cost effectiveness values
are not applicable
p In the absence of a standard
hNo emission rate cutoff and no design capacity exemption level
Table 6—Alternative NMOC Emission Rate Stringency Level Options for the New Source Performance
Standards ah
Emission rate cutoff (Mg NMOC/yr)
Number land-
fills affected
Annualc d
NMOC emis-
sion reduc-
tion (Mg/yr)
Annual ¦-e
methane
emission re-
duction (Mg/
yr)
Annual' cost
(million S/yr)
NMOC aver-
age cost eff.
(S/Mg)
NMOCs In-
cremental
cost eff. ($/
Mg)
Baseline''.
150
14
5,200
187,000
4
769
NA
100
25
5,100
203,000
4
784
NA
75
33
5,000
194,000
4
800
NA
-------
9916 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
Table 6— Alternative NMOC Emission Rate Stringency Level Options for the New Source Performance
Standards ab—Continued
Emission rate cutoff (Mg NMOC/yr)
Number land-
fills affected
Annualcd
NMOC emis-
sion reduc-
tion (Mg/yr)
Annualc e
methane
emission re-
duction (Mg/
yO
Annual < cost
(million $/yr)
NMOC aver-
age cost eff.
($/Mg)
NMOC* In-
cremental
cost eft. ($/
Mg)
50
43
872
4,900
13,115
193,000
881,000
4
81
816
6,176
NA
NA
No Cutoff'
a Design capacity exemption level of 2,500,000 Mg of refuse
b All values are fifth year annualized.
c Because of the small number of landfills and the longer time period of control for a given landfill at a more stringent option, the average an-
nual emission reduction appears to decrease for a more stringent option. However, the emission reduction for a given year increase for more
stringent options.
<>NMOC emission reductions are from a baseline of 13,400 Mg NMOC/yr.
«Methane emission reductions are from a baseline of 899,000 Mg NMOC/yr.
fDue to rounding off to the nearest million dollar, cost values do not appear to change for each option. However, actual costs are slightly less
for a less stringent option
i Because the annual cost does not change enough to show a different cost from one option to the next, incremental cost effectiveness values
are not applicable.
" In the absence of a standard
• No emission rate cutoff and no design capacity exemption level
The design capacity cutoff of 2.5
million Mg or 2.5 million cubic meters
was chosen as a result of changes to the
nationwide impacts analysis and to
relieve as many small businesses and
municipalities as possible from the
regulatory requirements while still
maintaining significant emission
reduction The 2.5 million Mg cutoff
level exempts landfills that serve
populations of less than about 125,000
people from periodic reporting and
control requirements. This cutoff
excludes those landfills who would be
least able to afford the costs of a landfill
gas collection and control system A less
stringent design capacity exemption
level (e.g., 3 million Mg) was not
selected because it would result in less
emissions reductions. A more stringent
design capacity exemption level (e.g.. 1
million Mg) was not selected because it
would increase the number of landfills
required to apply control b\ over 80
percent (572 vs 312 existing landfills)
while only achieving an additional 25
percent NMOC emission reduction (see
table 3) It would also increase national
costs and subject smaller government
entities to the regulatory requirements,
since smaller governments typically
operate smaller landfills.
The emission rate cutoff of 50 Mg/yr
of NMOC was chosen because, in
conjunction with the 2.5 million Mg
design capacity cutoff, it will require
control of less than 5 percent of all
landfills, yet is estimated to reduce
NMOC emissions by approximately 53
percent and methane emissions by 39
percent. The Climate Change Action
Plan, signed by the President in October
1993, calls for the EPA to promulgate a
"tough" landfill gas rule as soon as
possible.
The average cost effectiveness is about
$1,150/Mg NMOC (see table 4) .While
the incremental cost effectiveness for
NMOC control of going from a cutoff of
75 Mg/yr to a 50 Mg/yr cutoff is high
($6,250/Mg NMOC), this value does not
include any credit for the benefits of
toxics, odor, explosion control, or the
indirect benefit of methane control. The
economic analysis indicated that the
final rule (including the 50 Mg/yr cutoff
level) would cause a relatively small
increase in waste disposal costs
compared to the current costs and
would not result in severe economic
impacts on households (see section C.
"Social Costs" below).
A more stringent option (e.g , no
cutoff) was not chosen because the
average and incremental cost and cost
effectiveness was not reasonable (see
table 4). Less stringent emission rate
cutoff levels were not chosen because
they result in less NMOC and methane
reduction, and would not be consistent
with the section 111 statutory
requirement to base emission standards
on BDT.
The public entities with whom the
EPA consulted understood the EPA's
concerns regarding the loss of emission
reductions by changing the proposed
capacity exemption level from 100,000
Mg to 5 million Mg and agreed that 2.5
million relieved 90 percent of the
landfills from the burden of regulation
and was reasonable.
c. Social Costs. The regulatory
compliance costs of reducing air
emissions from MSW landfills include
the total and annualized capital costs;
operating and maintenance costs,
monitoring, inspection, recordkeeping,
and reporting costs: and total annual
costs. The annualized capital cost is
calculated using a 7 percent discount
rate. The total annual cost is calculated
as the sum of the annualized capital
cost; operating and maintenance costs;
and the monitoring, inspection,
recordkeeping, and reporting costs.
The total nationwide annualized cost
for collection and control of air
emissions from new MSW landfills are
estimated to be $4 million. The
nationwide costs of the EG for existing
landfills is estimated to be about $90
million. The annual cost of waste
disposal is estimated to increase by an
average of $0.60/Mg for the NSPS and
$1.30/Mg for the EG. Costs per
household would increase by
approximately $2.50 to S5.00 per year
for households served by a new or
existing landfill, respectively, that is
required to install a collection and
control system. Because the rule
requires control of onl\ about 5 percent
of the landfills in the U S many
households would experience no
increase in disposal costs. Furthermore,
if affected landfills choose to use energy
recovery systems, the cost per
household in those areas would be less.
The EPA has concluded that households
would not incur severe economic
impacts. For additional information,
please refer to the regulatory impacts
analysis (Docket No. A-88-09, Item IV-
A-7) and chapter 3 of the promulgation
BID (EPA-453/R-94-021). There are no
Federal funds available to assist State
and local governments in meeting these
costs.
d. Social Benefits. Society will benefit
from the NSPS and EG through the
reduction of landfill gas emissions,
including NMOC and methane
reductions The total nationwide
annualized emission reduction of the
EG is estimated to be 77,600 Mg/yr of
NMOC and 3,370,000 Mg/yr of methane.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9917
The total nationwide annualized
emission reduction for the NSPS is
about 4,900 Mg/yr of NMOC and
881,000 Mg/yr of methane.
The NMOC s present several hazards
to human health. The NMOC's
participate in chemical reactions
leading to the formation of ozone, which
causes health effects. Also, certain
NMOC's have cancer risks and cause
noncancer health effects.
Ozone is created by sunlight acting on
NOx and NMOC's in ambient air. Ozone
leads to alterations in pulmonary
function, aggravation of pre-existing
respiratory disease, damage to lung
structure, and adverse effects on blood
enzymes, the central nervous system,
and endocrine systems Ozone also
warrants control due to its welfare
effects, specifically, reduced plant
growth, decreased crop yield, necrosis
of plant tissue, and deterioration of
certain synthetic materials such as
rubber (Docket No. A-88-09, Item Nos.
Il-A-26, IIT-16, etc ).
There is also concern about cancer
risks from landfill NMOC emissions. In
reviewing limited emissions data from
MSW landfills, EPA identified both
known and suspected carcinogens such
as benzene, carbon tetrachloride,
chloroform, ethylene dichloride.
methylene dichloride,
perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene,
\inyl chloride, and vinylidene chloride.
Prior to proposal, the EPA attempted to
apply statistical methods to the limited
data to generate the average annual
increased cancer incidence and the
maximum individual risk (MIR). In
evaluating the result of the calculations
for annual incidence and MIR, the EPA
could not determine reasonable
estimates of either an annual incidence
or the MIR The EPA concluded, at
proposal, that the uncertainties in the
database are too great to calculate
credible estimates of the cancer risks
associated with MSW landfills
Another benefit of the NSPS and EG
is reduced fire explosion hazard through
reduction of methane emissions. The
EPA has documented many cases of
acute injury and death caused b>
explosions and fires related to
municipal landfill gas emissions. In
addition to these health effects, the
associated property damage is a welfare
effect. Furthermore, when the migration
of methane and the ensuring hazard are
identified, adjacent property values can
be adversely affected (Docket No. A-88-
09, Item Nos. II-I-6, II-1-7, etc.)
Another aspect of MSW landfill
emissions is the offensive odor
associated with landfills. While the
nature of the wastes themselves
contribute to the problem of odor, the
gaseous decomposition products are
often characteristically malodorous and
unpleasant. Various welfare effects may
be associated with odors, but due to the
subjective nature of the impact and
perception of odor, it is difficult to
quantify these effects. Studies indicate
that unpleasant odors can discourage
capital investment and lower the
socioeconomic status of an area. Odors
have been shown to interfere with daily
activities, discourage facility use, and
lead to a decline in property values, tax
revenues, and payroll (Docket No. A-
88-09, Item Nos. II—I—6, II—I—7, etc.)
An ancillary benefit from regulating
air emissions from MSW landfills is a
reduction in the contribution of MSW
landfill emissions to global emissions of
methane. Methane is a major
greenhouse gas, and is 20 to 30 times
more potent than CO2 on a molecule-
per-molecule basis. This is due to the
radiative characteristics of methane and
other effects methane has on
atmospheric chemistry. There is a
general concern within the scientific
community that the increasing
emissions of greenhouse gases could
lead to climate change, although the rate
and magnitude of these changes are
uncertain.
In conclusion, while the social
benefits of the rule have not been
quantified, significant health and
welfare benefits are expected to result
from the reduction in landfill gas
emissions caused by the rule.
3. Effects on the National Economy
The Unfunded Mandates Act requires
that the EPA estimate "the effect" of this
rule—
"on the national economy. such as the
effect on productivity economic growth, full
employment creation of productive jobs and
international competitiveness of the Lk S
goods and services, if and to the extent that
the EPA in its sole discretion determines that
accurate estimates are reasonably feasible
and that such effect is relevant and material."
As stated in the Unfunded Mandates
Act, such macroeconomic effects tend to
be measurable, in nationwide
econometric models, only if the
economic impact of the regulation
reaches 0.25 to 0.5 percent of gross
domestic product (in the range of $1.5
billion to S3 billion). A regulation with
a smaller aggregate effect is highly
unlikely to have any measurable impact
in macroeconomic terms unless it is
highly focused on a particular
geographic region or economic sector.
For this reason, no estimate of this rule's
effect on the national economy has been
conducted
4. Consultation with Government
Officials
The Unfunded Mandates Act requires
that the EPA describe the extent of the
EPA's consultation with affected State,
local, and tribal officials, summarize the
officials' comments or concerns, and
summarize the EPA's response to those
comments or concerns. These goals
were addressed through meetings held
with a number of public entities over
the course of six months. Those entities
included the US Conference of Mayors,
the National League of Cities, the
National Governor's Association, the
National Association of Counties, and
the Solid Waste Association of North
America (SW'ANA). Through these
meetings, these entities were informed
of the rule, educated about it, and
advised as to whether or not they would
be impacted by it. These initial
education and information sharing
meetings were followed by meetings in
which consultations and analysis of
various alternatives took place.
Documentation of all meetings and
public comments can be found in
Docket A-88-09.
Various concerns were discussed
during the meetings. These concerns
included: (1) The design capacity cutoff;
(2) collection wells, their costing and
installation requirements; (3) design
specifications for collection systems; (4)
well head nitrogen measurement of 20
percent; and (5) the surface monitoring
requirements.
As a result of these consultations, the
EPA decided to modify the final
regulatory package to address these
concerns. In the final regulatory package
promulgated today: (1) The design
capacity cutoff has been raised from the
proposed level of 100,000 to 2.5 million
Mg; (2) Changes were made to the way
the costing algorithm calculates 'he
number of vertical collection wells. The
rule was also changed to require active
areas to install wells 5 years from initial
waste placement instead of 2 years.
Closed areas or areas at final grade must
install a collection system within 2
years; (3) Prescriptive design
specifications have been removed from
the rule and replaced with general
criteria. The EPA is developing an
Enabling Document to assist State and
local permitting agencies in their review
of designs; (4) Well head pressure
monitoring can meet either 20 percent
nitrogen or 5 percent oxygen; (5) Surface
monitoring is to be done quarterly
instead of monthly, not to exceed 500
ppm methane above background.
These changes were made in response
to consultations held regarding burden
of the regulation and as a result of new
-------
9918
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
data presented by the entities with
whom the EPA met. A letter from the
Solid Waste Management of North
America and SWAC to the EPA
demonstrates their support of this
decision. Detailed summaries of the
meetings and the letter can be obtained
from the Docket A-88-09.
Documentation of the EPA's
consideration of comments on the
proposed standards and guidelines is
provided in the BID's for the proposed
and final standards and guidelines.
Refer to the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble for information on how to
acquire copies of these documents.
The final rule reflects a minimization
of burden on small landfills and does
not create an unreasonable burden for
large public entities. The EPA has
considered the purpose and intent of the
Unfunded Mandate Act and has
determined the landfill NSPS and EG
are needed.
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires the EPA to
give special consideration to the impact
of regulation on small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
units. The Regulatory Flexibility Act
specifies that EPA must prepare an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis if a
regulation will have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C.
605(b), the Administrator certifies that
this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The final NSPS and Eg exempt small
landfills that have a design capacity
below 2.5 million Mg of MSW. This
design capacity exemption will exempt
landfills that serve communities of
125,000 people or less, assuming the
typical waste generation rate of 5 lb of
waste per person per day and an average
landfill age of 20 years. Section 601 of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act defines a
"small governmental jurisdiction" as
governments of cities, counties, towns,
or other districts with a population less
than 50,000 The design capacity
exemption will exempt landfills that
serve small governmental jurisdictions.
Therefore, the landfills NSPS and EG
will have no impact on small entities.
The NSPS and EG will require
periodic emissions calculations or
control of emissions from only the
largest 10 percent of landfills in the U.S.
By controlling these large landfills, the
rules will significantly reduce landfill
gas emissions, which have adverse
effects on human health and welfare,
contribute to global warming, and can
create odors and explosion hazards. In
consideration of the potential regulatory
burden on small entities and in
response to public comment, the landfill
design capacity in the proposed rule
was raised to 2.5 million Mg/yr, thereby
exempting small entities.
G. Miscellaneous
The effective date of this regulation is
March 12, 1996. Section 111(b)(1)(B) of
the CAA provides that standards of
performance or revisions thereof
become effective upon promulgation
and apply to affected facilities of which
the construction or modification was
commenced after the date of proposal,
May 31, 1991.
As prescribed by section 111, the
promulgation of these standards was
preceded by the Administrator's
determination that MSW landfills
contribute significantly to air pollution
that may reasonably be anticipated to
endanger public health or welfare. In
accordance with section 117 of the
CAA, publication of these promulgated
standards was preceded by consultation
with appropriate advisory committees,
independent experts, and Federal
departments and agencies.
This regulation will be reviewed 4
years from the date of promulgation as
required by the CAA. This review will
include an assessment of such factors as
the need for integration with other
programs, the existence of alternative
methods, enforceability, improvements
in emission control technology, and
reporting requirements.
Section 317 of the CAA requires the
Administrator to prepare an economic
impact assessment for any NSPS
promulgated under section 111 (b) of the
CAA An economic impact assessment
was prepared for this regulation and for
other regulatory alternatives. All aspects
of the assessment were considered in
the formulation of the standards to
ensure that cost was carefully
considered in determining the BDT. The
economic impact assessment is
included in the BID for the proposed
standards and in Chapter 3 of the
promulgation BID
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 51
Environmental protection. Air
pollution control.
40 CFR Part 52
Air pollution control
40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. Municipal solid waste
landfills, Municipal solid waste.
Dated: March 1, 1996.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter 1, parts 51,
52 and 60 of the Code of Federal
Regulations are amended as follows:
PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR
PREPARATION, ADOPTION AND
SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION
PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 51
continues to read as follows:
Authority. 7401-767 lq
2. Section 51.166(b)(23)(i) is amended
by adding an entry to the end of the
Pollutant and Emission Rate list to read
as follows:
§51.166 Prevention of significant
deterioration of air quality.
* * * * *
(i) * * * Municipal solid waste
landfill emissions (measured as
nonmethane organic compounds): 45
megagrams per year (50 tons per year)
* * * * *
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
3. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows.
Authority: 42 U S C 7401-7671q
4. Section 52.21(b)(23)(i) is amended
by adding an entry to the end of the
Pollutant and Emission Rate list to read
as follows:
§52.21 Prevention of significant
deterioration of air quality.
*****
(b) * *
(23) * * *
(i) * * * Municipal solid waste
landfills emissions (measured as
nonmethane organic compounds): 45
megagrams per year (50 tons per year)
*****
PART 60—STANDARDS OF
PERFORMANCE FOR NEW
STATIONARY SOURCES
5. The authority citation for part 60
continues to read as follows:
Authority 42 U S C. 7401. 7411, 7414.
7416, and 7601.
6. Section 60.16 of subpart A is
amended by adding an entry to the end
to read under Other Source Categories
as follows:
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9919
§60.16 Priority list.
*****
Other Source Categories
*****
Municipal solid waste landfills.4
*****
7. Section 60.30 is amended by
adding a new paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
§60.30 Scope.
*****
(c) Subpart Cc—Municipal Solid
Waste Landfills.
8. Part 60 is further amended by
adding the Subpart Cc to read as
follows:
Subpart Cc—Emission Guidelines and
Compliance Times lor Municipal Solid
Waste Landfills
Sec.
60.30c Scope
60.31c Definitions.
60 32c Designated facilities
60.33c Emission guidelines for municipal
solid waste landfill emissions.
60 34c Test methods and procedures.
60 35c Reporting and recordkeeping
guidelines
60.36c Compliance times
Subpart Cc—Emission Guidelines and
Compliance Times for Municipal Solid
Waste Landfills
§ 60.30c Scope.
This subpart contains emission
guidelines and compliance times for the
control of certain designated pollutants
from certain designated municipal solid
waste landfills in accordance with
section 111 (d) of the Act and subpart B
§ 60.31c Definitions.
Terms used but not defined in this
subpart have the meaning given them in
the Act and in subparts A. B, and WWW
of this part.
Municipal solid waste landfill or
MSW landfill means an entire disposal
facility in a contiguous geographical
space where household waste is placed
in or on land. An MSW landfill ma)
also recei\ e other types of RCRA
Subtitle D wastes such as commercial
solid waste, nonhazardous sludge,
conditionallv exempt small quantity
generator waste, and industrial solid
w aste. Portions of an MSW landfill may
be separated by access roads. An MSW
landfill may be publicly or privately
owned. An MSW landfill nia\ be a new
MSW landfill, an existing MSW landfill
or a lateral expansion
JNot prioritised since an NSPS for this major
source categon, has alreach been promulgated
§ 60.32c Designated facilities.
(a) The designated facility to which
the guidelines apply is each existing
MSW landfill for which construction,
reconstruction or modification was
commenced before May 30, 1991.
(b) Physical or operational changes
made to an existing MSW landfill solely
to comply with an emission guideline
are not considered a modification or
reconstruction and would not subject an
existing MSW landfill to the
requirements of subpart WWW (see
§ 60.750 of Subpart WWW],
§60.33c Emission guidelines for municipal
solid waste landfill emissions.
(a) For approval, a State plan shall
include control of MSW landfill
emissions at each MSW landfill meeting
the following three conditions:
(1) The landfill has accepted waste at
any time since November 8, 1987, or has
additional design capacity available for
future waste deposition;
(2) The landfill has a design capacity
greater than or equal to 2.5 million
megagrams or 2.5 million cubic meters.
The landfill may calculate design
capacity in either megagrams or cubic
meters for comparison with the
exemption values. Any density
conversions shall be documented and
submitted with the report; and
(3) The landfill has a nonmethane
organic compound emission rate of 50
megagrams per year or more.
(b) For approval, a State plan shall
include the installation of a collection
and control system meeting the
conditions provided in § 60.752(b)(2)(ii)
of this part at each MSW landfill
meeting the conditions in paragraph (a)
of this section. The State plan shall
include a process for State review and
approval of the site-specific design
plans for the gas collection and control
system(s)
(c) Foi approval, a State plan shall
include provisions for the control of
collected MSW landfill emissions
through the use of control devices
meeting the requirements of paragraph
(c)(1), (2). or (3) of this section, except
as provided in §60.24.
(1) An open flare designed and
operated in accordance with the
parameters established in §60.18; or
(2) A control system designed and
operated to reduce NMOC by 98 weight
percent; or
(3) An enclosed combustor designed
and operated to reduce the outlet NMOC
concentration to 20 parts per million as
hexane by volume, dry basis at 3
percent oxygen, or less.
§ 60.34c Test methods and procedures.
For approval, a State plan shall
include provisions for: the calculation
of the landfill NMOC emission rate
listed in §60.754, as applicable, to
determine whether the landfill meets
the condition in § 60.33c(a)(3); the
operational standards in §60.753; the
compliance provisions in §60.755; and
the monitoring provisions in §60.756.
§ 60.35c Reporting and recordkeeping
guidelines.
For approval, a State plan shall
include the recordkeeping and reporting
provisions listed in §§60.757 and
60.758, as applicable, except as
provided under §60.24.
§ 60.36c Compliance times.
(a) Except as provided for under
paragraph (b) of this section, planning,
awarding of contracts, and installation
of MSW landfill air emission collection
and control equipment capable of
meeting the emission guidelines
established under § 60.33c shall be
accomplished within 30 months after
the effective date of a State emission
standard for MSW landfills.
(b) For each existing MSW landfill
meeting the conditions in §60.33c(a)(l)
and § 60.33c(a)(2) whose NMOC
emission rate is less than 50 megagrams
per year on the effective date of the
State emission standard, installation of
collection and control systems capable
of meeting emission guidelines in
§ 60.33c shall be accomplished within
30 months of the date when the
condition in §60.33c(a)(3) is met (i.e.,
the date of the first annual nonmethane
organic compounds emission rate which
equals or exceeds 50 megagrams per
year)
9. Part 60 is amended by adding a
new subpart WWW to read as follows:
Subpart WWW—Standards of Performance
for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
Sec.
60 750 Applicability desigi.-lion of
affected facility, and delegation of
authority.
60 751 Definitions
60 752 Standards for air emissions from
municipal solid waste landfills
60.753 Operational standards for collection
and control systems
60.754 Test methods and procedures
60.755 Compliance provisions
60 756 Monitoring of operations.
60.757 Reporting requirements
60.758 Recordkeeping requirements
60.759 Specifications for active collection
systems
Subpart WWW—Standards of
Performance for Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills
§60.750 Applicability, designation of
affected facility, and delegation of authority.
(a) The provisions of this subpart
appl> to each municipal solid waste
-------
9920 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
landfill that commenced construction,
reconstruction or modification or began
accepting waste on or after May 30,
1991. Physical or operational changes
made to an existing MSW landfill solely
to comply with Subpart Cc of this part
are not considered construction,
reconstruction, or modification for the
purposes of this section.
(b) The following authorities shall be
retained by the Administrator and not
transferred to the State: None.
§60.751 Definitions.
As used in this subpart, all terms not
defined herein shall have the meaning
given them in the Act or in subpart A
of this part.
Active collection system means a gas
collection system that uses gas mover
equipment.
Active landfill means a landfill in
which solid waste is being placed or a
landfill that is planned to accept waste
in the future.
Closed landfill means a landfill in
which solid waste is no longer being
placed, and in which no additional
solid wastes will be placed without first
filing a notification of modification as
prescribed under § 60.7(a)(4). Once a
notification of modification has been
filed, and additional solid waste is
placed in the landfill, the landfill is no
longer closed. A landfill is considered
closed after meeting the criteria of
§ 258.60 of this title.
Closure means that point in time
when a landfill becomes a closed
landfill.
Commercial solid waste means all
types of solid waste generated by stores,
offices, restaurants, warehouses, and
other nonmanufacturing activities,
excluding residential and industrial
wastes
Controlled landfill means any landfill
at which collection and control systems
are required under this subpart as a
result of the nonmethane organic
compounds emission rate The landfill
is considered controlled at the time
either
(1) A notification of intent to install
a collection and control system or
(2) A collection and control system
design plan is submitted in compliance
with § 60.752(b)(2)(i).
Design capacity means the maximum
amount of solid waste a landfill can
accept, as specified in the construction
or operating permit issued by the State,
local, or Tribal agency responsible for
regulating the landfill
Disposal facility means all contiguous
land and structures, other
appurtenances, and improvements on
the land used for the disposal of solid
waste.
Emission rate cutoff means the
threshold annual emission rate to which
a landfill compares its estimated
emission rate to determine if control
under the regulation is required.
Enclosed combustor means an
enclosed firebox which maintains a
relatively constant limited peak
temperature generally using a limited
supply of combustion air. An enclosed
flare is considered an enclosed
combustor.
Flare means an open combustor
without enclosure or shroud.
Gas mover equipment means the
equipment (i.e., fan, blower,
compressor) used to transport landfill
gas through the header system.
Household waste means any solid
waste (including garbage, trash, and
sanitary waste in septic tanks) derived
from households (including, but not
limited to, single and multiple
residences, hotels and motels,
bunkhouses, ranger stations, crew
quarters, campgrounds, picnic grounds,
and day-use recreation areas).
Industrial solid waste means solid
waste generated by manufacturing or
industrial processes that is not a
hazardous waste regulated under
Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, parts 264 and 265 of
this title. Such waste may include, but
is not limited to, waste resulting from
the following manufacturing processes',
electric power generation; fertilizer/
agricultural chemicals; food and related
products/by-products; inorganic
chemicals; iron and steel
manufacturing: leather and leather
products; nonferrous metals
manufacturing/foundries, organic
chemicals, plastics and resins
manufacturing: pulp and paper
industry, rubber and miscellaneous
plastic products, stone, glass, clay, and
concrete products; textile
manufacturing, transportation
equipment; and water treatment. This
term does not include mining waste or
oil and gas waste.
Interior well means any well or
similar collection component located
inside the perimeter of the landfill. A
perimeter well located outside the
landfilled waste is not an interior well.
Landfill means an area of land or an
excavation in which wastes are placed
for permanent disposal, and that is not
a land application unit, surface
impoundment, injection well, or waste
pile as those terms are defined under
§ 257.2 of this title.
Lateral expansion means a horizontal
expansion of the waste boundaries of an
existing MSW landfill. A lateral
expansion is not a modification unless
it results in an increase in the design
capacity of the landfill.
Municipal solid waste landfill or
MSW landfill means an entire disposal
facility in a contiguous geographical
space where household waste is placed
in or on land. An MSW landfill may
also receive other types of RCRA
Subtitle D wastes (§ 257.2 of this title)
such as commercial solid waste,
nonhazardous sludge, conditionally
exempt small quantity generator waste,
and industrial solid waste. Portions of
an MSW landfill may be separated by
access roads. An MSW landfill may be
publicly or privately owned. An MSW
landfill may be a new MSW landfill, an
existing MSW landfill, or a lateral
expansion.
Municipal solid waste landfill
emissions or MSW landfill emissions
means gas generated by the
decomposition of organic waste
deposited in an MSW landfill or derived
from the evolution of organic
compounds in the waste.
NMOC means nonmethane organic
compounds, as measured according to
the provisions of §60.754.
Nondegradable waste means any
waste that does not decompose through
chemical breakdown or microbiological
activity. Examples are, but are not
limited to, concrete, municipal waste
combustor ash, and metals.
Passive collection system means a gas
collection system that solely uses
positive pressure within the landfill (o
move the gas rather than using gas
mover equipment.
Sludge means any solid, semisolid or
liquid waste generated from a
municipal, commercial, or industrial
wastewater treatment plant, water
supply treatment plant, or air pollution
control facility, exclusive of the treated
effluent from a wastewater treatment
plant.
Solid waste means any garbage,
sludge from a wastewater treatment
plant, water supply treatment plant, or
air pollution control facility and other
discarded material, including solid,
liquid, semisolid, or contained gaseous
material resulting from industrial,
commercial, mining, and agricultural
operations, and from community
activities, but does not include solid or
dissolved material in domestic sewage,
or solid or dissolved materials in
irrigation return flows or industrial
discharges that are point sources subject
to permits under 33 U.S.C. 1342, or
source, special nuclear, or by-product
material as defined by the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954. as amended (42
U.S.C 2011 et seq.).
Sufficient density means any number,
spacing, and combination of collection
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9921
system components, including vertical
wells, horizontal collectors, and surface
collectors, necessary to maintain
emission and migration control as
determined by measures of performance
set forth in this part.
Sufficient extraction rate means a rate
sufficient to maintain a negative
pressure at all wellheads in the
collection system without causing air
infiltration, including any wellheads
connected to the system as a result of
expansion or excess surface emissions,
for the life of the blower.
§60.752 Standards (or air emissions from
municipal solid waste landfills.
(a) Each owner or operator of an MSW
landfill having a design capacity less
than 2.5 million megagrams by mass or
2.5 million cubic meters by volume
shall submit an initial design capacity
report to the Administrator as provided
in § 60.757(a). The landfill may
calculate design capacity in either
megagrams or cubic meters for
comparison with the exemption values
Any density conversions shall be
documented and submitted with the
report. For purposes of part 70
permitting, a landfill with a design
capacity less than 2.5 million
megagrams or 2.5 million cubic meters
does not require an operating permit
under part 70 of this chapter. Submittal
of the initial design capacity report shall
fulfill the requirements of this subpart
except as provided for in paragraphs
(a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section
(1) The owner or operator shall
submit to the Administrator an
amended design capacity report, as
provided for in § 60.757(a)(3). when
there is an\ increase in the design
capacity of a landfill sublet to the
provisions of this subpart whether the
increase results from an increase in the
area or depth of the landfill, 3 change
in the operating procedures of the
landfill, or any other means.
(2) If any increase in the maximum
design capacity of a landfill exempted
from the provisions of § 60.752(b)
through §60 759 of this subpart on the
basis of the design capacity exemption
in paragraph (a) of this section results in
a revised maximum design capacity
equal to or greater than 2.5 million
megagrams or 2 5 million cubic meters,
the owner or operator shall comply with
the provision of paragraph (b) of this
section.
(b) Each owner or operator of an MSW
landfill having a design capacity equal
to or greater than 2.5 million megagrams
or 2.5 million cubic meters, shall either
comply with paragraph (b)(2) of this
section or calculate an NMOC emission
iate for the landfill using the procedures
specified in §60.754. The NMOC
emission rate shall be recalculated
annually, except as provided in
§ 60.757(b) (1)(ii) of this subpart. The
owner or operator of an MSW landfill
subject to this subpart with a design
capacity greater than or equal to 2.5
million megagrams or 2.5 million cubic
meters is subject to part 70 permitting
requirements. When a landfill is closed,
and either never needed control or
meets the conditions for control system
removal specified in § 60.752(b) (2) (v) of
this subpart, a part 70 operating permit
is no longer required.
(1) If the calculated NMOC emission
rate is less than 50 megagrams per year,
the owner or operator shall:
(1) Submit an annual emission report
to the Administrator, except as provided
for in § 60.757 (b) (1) (ii); and
(ii) Recalculate the NMOC emission
rate annually using the procedures
specified in §60.754(a)(1) until such
time as the calculated NMOC emission
rate is equal to or greater than 50
megagrams per year, or the landfill is
closed.
(A) If the NMOC emission rate, upon
recalculation required in paragraph
(b) (1) (ii) of this section, is equal to or
greater than 50 megagrams per year, the
owner or operator shall install a
collection and control system in
compliance with paragraph (b)(2) of this
section
(B) If the landfill is permanently
closed, a closure notification shall be
submitted to the Administrator as
provided for in §60.757(d).
(2) If the calculated NMOC emission
rate is equal to or greater than 50
megagrams per year, the owner or
operator shall
(i) Submit a collection and control
system design plan prepared by a
professional engineer to the
Admimstiatoi within 1 year:
(A) The collection and control system
as described in the plan shall meet the
design requirements of paragraph
(b) (2) (ii) of this section
(B) The collection and control system
design plan shall include any
alternatives to the operational
standards, test methods, procedures,
compliance measures, monitoring,
recordkeeping or reporting provisions of
§§60 753 through 60 758 proposed by
the owner or operator.
(C) The collection and control system
design plan shall either conform with
specifications for active collection
systems in §60.759 or include a
demonstration to the Administrator's
satisfaction of the sufficiency of the
alternative provisions to § 60.759.
(D) The Administrator shall review
the information submitted under
paragraphs (b)(2)(i) (A),(B) and (C) of
this section and either approve it,
disapprove it, or request that additional
information be submitted. Because of
the many site-specific factors involved
with landfill gas system design,
alternative systems may be necessary. A
wide variety of system designs are
possible, such as vertical wells,
combination horizontal and vertical
collection systems, or horizontal
trenches only, leachate collection
components, and passive systems.
(ii) Install a collection and control
system within 18 months of the
submittal of the design plan under
paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section that
effectively captures the gas generated
within the landfill.
(A) An active collection system shall:
(J) Be designed to handle the
maximum expected gas flow rate from
the entire area of the landfill that
warrants control over the intended use
period of the gas control or treatment
system equipment;
(2) Collect gas from each area, cell, or
group of cells in the landfill in which
the initial solid waste has been placed
for a period of:
(i) 5 years or more if active; or
(ii) 2 years or more if closed or at final
grade;
(3) Collect gas at a sufficient
extraction rate;
(4) Be designed to minimize off-site
migration of subsurface gas.
(B) A passive collection system shall:
(1) Comply with the provisions
specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii), (A) (I),
(2), and (4) of this section
(2) Be installed with liners on the
bottom and all sides in all areas in
which gas is to be collected. The liners
shall be installed as required under
§ 258.40 of this title,
(iii) Route all the collected gas to a
control system that complies with the
requirements in either paragraph
(b)(2)(iii) (A), (B) or (C) of this section.
(A) An open flare designed and
operated in accordance with §60.18;
(B) A control system designed and
operated to reduce NMOC by 98 weight
percent, or, when an enclosed
combustion device is used for control,
to either reduce NMOC by 98 weight
percent or reduce the outlet NMOC
concentration to less than 20 parts per
million by volume, dry basis as hexane
at 3 percent oxygen. The reduction
efficiency or parts per million by
volume shall be established by an initial
performance test, required under § 60.8
using the test methods specified in
§ 60.754(d).
(J) If a boiler or process heater is used
as the control device, the landfill gas
-------
9922 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
stream shall be introduced into the
flame zone.
(2) The control device shall be
operated within the parameter ranges
established during the initial or most
recent performance test. The operating
parameters to be monitored are
specified in §60.756;
(C) Route the collected gas to a
treatment system that processes the
collected gas for subsequent sale or use.
All emissions from any atmospheric
vent from the gas treatment system shall
be subject to the requirements of
paragraph (b) (2) (iii) (A) or (B) of this
section.
(iv) Operate the collection and control
device installed to comply with this
subpart in accordance with the
provisions of § § 60.753, 60.755 and
60.756.
(v) The collection and control system
may be capped or removed provided
that all the conditions of paragraphs
(b)(2)(v) (A), (B), and (C) of this section
are met:
(A) The landfill shall be no longer
accepting solid waste and be
permanently closed under the
requirements of § 258.60 of this title. A
closure report shall be submitted to the
Administrator as provided in
§ 60.757(d),
(B) The collection and control system
shall have been in operation a minimum
of 15 years; and
(C) Following the procedures
specified in § 60.754(b) of this subpart,
the calculated NMOC gas produced by
the landfill shall be less than 50
megagrams per year on three sue cessi\ e
test dates. The test dates shall be no less
than 90 days apart, and no more than
180 days apart.
§60.753 Operational standards for
collection and control systems.
Each owner or operator of an MSW
landfill gas collection and control
system used to comply with the
provisions of § 60.752(b) (2) (ii) of this
subpart shall:
(a) Operate the collection system such
that gas is collected from each area, cell,
or group of cells in the MSW landfill in
which solid waste has been in place for:
(1) 5 years or more if active; or
(2) 2 years or more if closed or at final
grade.
(b) Operate the collection system with
negative pressure at each wellhead
except under the following conditions:
(1) A fire or increased well
temperature. The owner or operator
shall record instances when positive
pressure occurs in efforts to avoid a fire.
These records shall be submitted with
the annual reports as provided in
§ 60.757(f)(1),
(2) Use of a geomembrane or synthetic
cover. The owner or operator shall
develop acceptable pressure limits in
the design plan;
(3) A decommissioned well. A well
may experience a static positive
pressure after shut down to
accommodate for declining flows. All
design changes shall be approved by the
Administrator;
(c) Operate each interior wellhead in
the collection system with a landfill gas
temperature less than 55 °C and with
either a nitrogen level less than 20
percent or an oxygen level less than 5
percent. The owner or operator may
establish a higher operating
temperature, nitrogen, or oxygen value
at a particular well. A higher operating
value demonstration shall show
supporting data that the elevated
parameter does not cause fires or
significantly inhibit anaerobic
decomposition by killing methanogens.
(1) The nitrogen level shall be
determined using Method 3C, unless an
alternative test method is established as
allowed by § 60.752(b) (2) (i) of this
subpart.
(2) Unless an alternative test method
is established as allowed by
§ 60.752(b) (2) (i) of this subpart, the
oxygen shall be determined by an
oxygen meter using Method 3A except
that
(i) The span shall be set so that the
regulatory limit is between 20 and 50
percent of the span,
(ii) A data recorder is not required;
(iii) Only two calibration gases are
required, a zero and span, and ambient
air may be used as the span;
(iv) A calibration error check is not
required;
(v) The allowable sample bias, zero
drift, and calibration drift are +10
percent.
(d) Operate the collection system so
that the methane concentration is less
than 500 parts per million above
background at the surface of the landfill.
To determine if this level is exceeded,
the owner or operator shall conduct
surface testing around the perimeter of
the collection area along a pattern that
traverses the landfill at 30 meter
intervals and where visual observations
indicate elevated concentrations of
landfill gas, such as distressed
vegetation and cracks or seeps in the
cover. The owner or operator may
establish an alternative traversing
pattern that ensures equivalent
coverage. A surface monitoring design
plan shall be developed that includes a
topographical map with the monitoring
route and the rationale for any site-
specific deviations from the 30 metei
intervals. Areas with steep slopes or
other dangerous areas may be excluded
from the surface testing
(e) Operate the system such that all
collected gases are vented to a control
system designed and operated in
compliance with § 60.752(b)(2)(iii). In
the event the collection or control
system is inoperable, the gas mover
system shall be shut down and all
valves in the collection and control
system contributing to venting of the gas
to the atmosphere shall be closed within
1 hour; and
(f) Operate the control or treatment
system at all times when the collected
gas is routed to the system.
(g) If monitoring demonstrates that the
operational requirement in paragraphs
(b), (c), or (d) of this section are not met,
corrective action shall be taken as
specified in § 60.752(a) (3) through (5)
or § 60.755(c) of this subpart. If
corrective actions are taken as specified
in §60.755, the monitored exceedance is
not a violation of the operational
requirements in this section
§60.754 Test methods and procedures.
(a)(1) The landfill owner or operator
shall calculate the NMOC emission rate
using either the equation provided in
paragraph (a)(l)(i) of this section or the
equation provided in paragraph (a)(1)(ii)
of this section. The values to be used in
both equations are 0.05 per year for k,
170 cubic meters per megagram for Lo,
and 4,000 parts per million by volume
as hexane for the Cnmoc
(i) The following equation shall be
used if the actual year-to-year solid
waste acceptance rate is known.
Mnmoc = 12 k L0M,(e-k,i)(CNMOC)(3.6x 10-9)
1 = 1
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9923
where,
M.vMoc=TotaI NMOC emission rate from the
landfill, megagrams per year
k=methane generation rate constant, year"!
L,,=methane generation potential, cubic
meters per rnegagram solid waste
M -mass of solid waste in the i"1 section,
megagrams
t,=age o? the i"= section, years
CsM! ^concentration of NMOC, parts per
million by volume as hexane
3.6 x 10^9=conversion factor
The mass of nondegradable solid waste
may be subtracted from the total mass of
solid waste in a particular section of the
landfill when calculating the value for M, If
the documentation provisions of
§ 60.758(d)(2) are followed.
(ii) The following equation shall be
used if the actual year-to-year solid
waste acceptance rate is unknown.
Mnmoc"21.1, R (e~kc - e-"t) (CvMOC) (3.6 x
10_»)
where,
MNMDc=mass emission rate of NMOC,
megagrams per year
L„=methane generation potential, cubic
meters per rnegagram solid waste
R=average annual acceptance rate,
megagrams per year
k=methane generation rate constant, year"1
t=age of landfill, years
CsM(c=concentration of NMOC, parts per
million by volume as hexane
c=time since closure, years. For acthe
landfill c = O and e~kl=l
3 6 x 10_4l=conversion factor
The mass of nondegradable solid waste
may be subtracted from the average annual
acceptance rate when calculating a value for
R, if the documentation provisions of
§60 758(d)(2) are followed
(2) Tier 1. The owner or operator shall
compare the calculated NMOC mass
emission rate to the standard of 50
megagrams per year
(i) If the NMOC emission rate
c alculated in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section is less than 50 megagrams per
\ear, then the landfill owner shall
submit an emission rate report as
provided in §60,757(b)(1), and shall
recalculate the NMOC mass emission
rate annually as required under
§ 60.752(b)(1)
(ii) If the calculated NMOC emission
rate is equal to or greater than 50
megagrams per year, then the landfill
owner shall either comply with
§ 60.752(b)(2) , or determine a site-
specific NMOC concentration and
recalculate the NMOC emission rate
using the procedures provided in
paragraph (a)(3) of this section.
(3) Tier 2. The landfill owner or
operator shall determine the NMOC
concentration using the following
sampling procedure, The landfill owner
or operator shad install at least two
sample probes per hectare of landfill
surface that has retained waste for at
least 2 years. If the landfill is larger than
25 hectares in area, only 50 samples are
required. The sample probes should be
located to avoid known areas of
nondegradable solid waste. The owner
or operator shall collect and analyze one
sample of landfill gas from each probe
to determine the NMOC concentration
using Method 25C of appendix A of this
part or Method 18 of appendix A of this
part. If using Method 18 of appendix A
of this part, the minimum list of
compounds to be tested shall be those
published in the most recent
Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors (AP 42). If composite sampling
is used, equal volumes shall be taken
from each sample probe. If more than
the required number of samples are
taken, all samples shall be used in the
analysis. The landfill owner or operator
shall divide the NMOC concentration
from Method 25C of appendix A of this
part by six to convert from CNMoc as
carbon to CnmOC as hexane.
(i) The landfill owner or operator
shall recalculate the NMOC mass
emission rate using the equations
provided in paragraph (a)(l)(i) or
(a)(l)(ii) of this section and using the
average NMOC concentration from the
collected samples instead of the default
value in the equation provided in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
(ii) If the resulting mass emission rate
calculated using the site-specific NMOC
concentration is equal to or greater than
50 megagrams per year, then the landfill
owner or operator shall either comply
with § 60.752(b)(2). or determine the
site-specific methane generation rate
constant and recalculate the NMOC
emission rate using the site-specific
methane generation rate using the
procedure specified in paragraph (a)(4)
of this section
(in) If the resulting NMOC mass
emission rate is less than 50 megagrams
per year, the owner or operator shall
submit a periodic estimate of the
emission rate report as provided in
§60.757(b)(1) and retest the site-specific
NMOC concentration every 5 years
using the methods specified in this
section
(4) Tier 3 The site-specific methane
generation rate constant shall be
determined using the procedures
provided in Method 2E of appendix A
of this part. The landfill owner or
operator shall estimate the NMOC mass
emission rate using equations in
paragraph (a)(l)(i) or (a)(1)(ii) of this
section and using a site-specific
methane generation rate constant k, and
the site-specific NMOC concentration as
determined in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section instead of the default values
provided in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section. The landfill owner or operator
shall compare the resulting NMOC mass
emission rate to the standard of 50
megagrams per year.
(i) If the NMOC mass emission rate as
calculated using the site-specific
methane generation rate and
concentration of NMOC is equal to or
greater than 50 megagrams per year, the
owner or operator shall comply with
§ 60.752(b)(2).
(ii) If the NMOC mass emission rate
is less than 50 megagrams per year, then
the owner or operator shall submit a
periodic emission rate report as
provided in §60.757(b)(1) and shall
recalculate the NMOC mass emission
rate annually, as provided in
§ 60.757(b)(1) using the equations in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section and
using the site-specific methane
generation rate constant and NMOC
concentration obtained in paragraph
(a)(3) of this section. The calculation of
the methane generation rate constant is
performed only once, and the value
obtained is used in all subsequent
annual NMOC emission rate
calculations.
(5) The owner or operator may use
other methods to determine the NMOC
concentration or a site-specific k as an
alternative to the methods required in
paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4) of this
section if the method has been approved
by the Administrator as provided in
5 60.752(b) (2) (i)(B).
(b) After the installation of a
collection and control system in
compliance with § 60.755. the owner or
operator shall calculate the NMOC
emission rate for purposes of
determining when the system can be
removed as provided in
§60.752(b)(2)(\). using the following
equation.
MnMOC *= 1.89 X 10" * QlFG CsMOC
where.
Mnmoc = mass emission rate of NMOC.
megagrams per year
Qlfg = flow rate of landfill gas, cubic meters
per minute
Cnmoc = NMOC concentration, parts per
million by volume as hexane
(1) The flow rate of landfill gas, Qlfg.
shall be determined by measuring the
total landfill gas flow rate at the
common header pipe that leads to the
control device using a gas flow
measuring device calibrated according
to the provisions of section 4 of Method
2E of appendix A of this part
(2) The average NMOC concentration,
Cnmoc, shall be determined by
collecting and analyzing landfill gas
sampled from the common header pipe
before the gas moving or condensate
-------
9924 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
removal equipment using the
procedures in Method 25C or Method 18
of appendix A of this part. If using
Method 18 of appendix A of this part,
the minimum list of compounds to be
tested shall be those published in the
most recent Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42). The
sample location on the common header
pipe shall be before any condensate
removal or other gas refining units. The
landfill owner or operator shall divide
the NMOC concentration from Method
25C of appendix A of this part by six to
convert from Cnmoc as carbon to Cnmoc
as hexane.
(3) The owner or operator may use
another method to determine landfill
gas flow rate and NMOC concentration
if the method has been approved by the
Administrator as provided in
§ 60.752(b)(2) (i)(B).
(c) The owner or operator of each
MSW landfill subject to the provisions
of this subpart shall estimate the NMOC
emission rate for comparison to the PSD
major source and significance levels in
§§ 51.166 or 52.21 of this chapter using
AP-42 or other approved measurement
procedures. If a collection system,
which complies with the provisions in
§60.752(b)(2) is already installed, the
owner or operator shall estimate the
NMOC emission rate using the
procedures provided in paragraph (b) of
this section.
(d) For the performance test required
in §60.752(b) (2) (iii) (B), Method 25 or
Method 18 of appendix A of this part
shall be used to determine compliance
with 98 weight-percent efficiency or the
20 ppmv outlet concentration level,
unless another method to demonstrate
compliance has been approved by the
Administrator as provided b>
§60 752(b)(2)(i)(B) If using Method 18
if appendix A of this part, the minimum
list of compounds to be tested shall be
those published in the most recent
Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors (AP-42) The following equation
shall be used to calculate efficiency:
Control Efficiency = (NMOC,,, - NMOCom)/
(NMOC.r,)
where,
NMOC,„ = mass of NMOC entering control
device
NMOC„u, = mass of NMOC exiting control
device
§60.755 Compliance provisions.
(a) Except as provided in
§60 752(b) (2) (i) (B), the specified
methods in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(a)(6) of this section shall be used to
determine whether the gas collection
system is in compliance with
§ 60.752(b) (2)(ii).
(1) For the purposes of calculating the
maximum expected gas generation flow
rate from the landfill to determine
compliance with § 60.752(b) (2) (ii) (A)(i),
one of the following equations shall be
used. The k and Lt, kinetic factors
should be those published in the most
recent Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors (AP-42) or other site
specific values demonstrated to be
appropriate and approved by the
Administrator. If k has been determined
as specified in § 60.754(a)(4), the value
of k determined from the test shall be
used. A value of no more than 15 years
shall be used for the intended use
period of the gas mover equipment. The
active life of the landfill is the age of the
landfill plus the estimated number of
years until closure.
(i) For sites with unknown year-to-
year solid waste acceptance rate:
Qm = 2L„R (e">- - e-kl)
where,
Qm = maximum expected gas generation flow
rate, cubic meters per year
L„ = methane generation potential, cubic
meters per megagram solid waste
R = average annual acceptance rate,
megagrams per year
k = methane generation rate constant, year -1
t = age of the landfill at equipment
installation plus the time the owner or
operator intends to use the gas mover
equipment or active life of the landfill,
whichever is less. If the equipment is
installed after closure, t is the age of the
landfill at installation, years
c = time since closure, years (for an active
landfill c = O and e*1-1 = 1)
(ii) For sites with known year-to-year
solid waste acceptance rate.
Qm =X2kLrM,(e-kt.)
1=1
where
QKjsmaxir.-.um expected gas generation flow
rate, cubic meters per year
k=methane generation rate constant, year" 1
L„=methane generation potential, cubic
meters per megagram solid waste
M,=mass of solid waste in the ilh section.
megagrams
t,=age of the i|h section, years
(iii) If a collection and control system
has been installed, actual flow data may
be used to project the maximum
expected gas generation flow rate
instead of, or in conjunction with, the
equations in paragraphs (a)(1) (i) and (ii)
of this section. If the landfill is still
accepting waste, the actual measured
flow data will not equal the maximum
expected gas generation rate, so
calculations using the equations in
paragraphs (a)(1) (i) or (ii) or other
methods shall be used to predict the
maximum expected gas generation rate
over the intended period of use of the
gas control system equipment.
(2) For the purposes of determining
sufficient density of gas collectors for
compliance with § 60.752(b)(2)(ii)(A)(2),
the owner or operator shall design a
system of vertical wells, horizontal
collectors, or other collection devices,
satisfactory to the Administrator,
capable of controlling and extracting gas
from all portions of the landfill
sufficient to meet all operational and
performance standards.
(3) For the purpose of demonstrating
whether the gas collection system flow
rate is sufficient to determine
compliance with §60.752(b)(2)(ii)(A)(3),
the owner or operator shall measure
gauge pressure in the gas collection
header at each individual well,
monthly. If a positive pressure exists,
action shall be initiated to correct the
exceedance within 5 calendar days,
except for the three conditions allowed
under § 60.753(b). If negative pressure
cannot be achieved without excess air
infiltration within 15 calendar days of
the first measurement, the gas collection
system shall be expanded to correct the
exceedance within 120 days of the
initial measurement of positive
pressure. Any attempted corrective
measure shall not cause exceedances of
other operational or performance
standards.
(4) Owners or operators are not
required to install additional wells as
required in paragraph (a)(3) of this
section during the first 180 days after
gas collection system start-up.
(5) For the purpose of identifying
whether excess air infiltration into the
landfill is occurring, the owner or
operator shall monitor each well
month))' for temperature and nitrogen or
oxygen as provided in § 60.753(c). If a
well exceeds one of these operating
parameters, action shall be initiated to
correct the exceedance within 5
calendar days. If correction of the
exceedance cannot be achieved within
15 calendar days of the first
measurement, the gas collection system
shall be expanded to correct the
exceedance within 120 days of the
initial exceedance. Any attempted
corrective measure shall not cause
exceedances of other operational or
performance standards.
(6) An owner or operator seeking to
demonstrate compliance with
§60.752(b)(2)(ii)(A)(4) through the use
of a collection system not conforming to
the specifications provided in §60.759
shall provide information satisfactory to
the Administrator as specified in
§ 60.752(b) (2)(i)(C) demonstrating that
off-site migration is being controlled.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9925
(b) For purposes of compliance with
§ 60.753(a), each owner or operator of a
controlled landfill shall place each well
or design component as specified in the
approved design plan as provided in
§60.752(b)(2)(i). Each well shall be
installed within 60 days of the date in
which the initial solid waste has been
in place for a period of:
(1) 5 years or more if active; or
(2) 2 years or more if closed or at final
grade.
(c) The following procedures shall be
used for compliance with the surface
methane operational standard as
provided in § 60.753(d).
(1) After installation of the collection
system, the owner or operator shall
monitor surface concentrations of
methane along the entire perimeter of
the collection area and along a
serpentine pattern spaced 30 meters
apart (or a site-specific established
spacing) for each collection area on a
quarterly basis using an organic vapor
analyzer, flame ionization detector, or
other portable monitor meeting the
specifications provided in paragraph (d)
of this section.
(2) The background concentration
shall be determined by moving the
probe inlet upwind and downwind
outside the boundary of the landfill at
a distance of at least 30 meters from the
perimeter wells.
(3) Surface emission monitoring shall
be performed in accordance with
section 4.3.1 of Method 21 of appendix
A of this part, except that the probe inlet
shall be placed within 5 to 10
centimeters of the ground. Monitoring
shall be performed during typical
meteorological conditions
(4) An) reading of 500 parts per
million or more above background at
any location shall be recorded as a
monitored exceedance and the actions
specified in paragraphs (c)(4) (i) through
(v) of this section shall be taken As long
as the specified actions are taken, the
exceedance is not a violation of the
operational requirements of §60.753(d)
(i) The location of each monitored
exceedance shall be marked and the
location recorded.
(ii) Cover maintenance or adjustments
to the vacuum of the adjacent wells to
increase the gas collection in the
vicinity of each exceedance shall be
made and the location shall be re-
monitored within 10 calendar days of
detecting the exceedance.
(iii) If the re-monitoring of the
location shows a second exceedance,
additional corrective action shall be
taken and the location shall be
monitored again within 10 days of the
second exceedance If the re-monitoring
shows a third exceedance for the same
location, the action specified in
paragraph (c)(4)(v) of this section shall
be taken, and no further monitoring of
that location is required until the action
specified in paragraph (c)(4)(v) has been
taken,
(iv) Any location that initially showed
an exceedance but has a methane
concentration less than 500 ppm
methane above background at the 10-
day re-monitoring specified in
paragraph (c)(4) (ii) or (iii) of this
section shall be re-monitored 1 month
from the initial exceedance. If the 1-
month remonitoring shows a
concentration less than 500 parts per
million above background, no further
monitoring of that location is required
until the next quarterly monitoring
period. If the 1-month remonitoring
shows an exceedance, the actions
specified in paragraph (c)(4) (iii) or (v)
shall be taken.
(v) For any location where monitored
methane concentration equals or
exceeds 500 parts per million above
background three times within a
quarterly period, a new well or other
collection device shall be installed
within 120 calendar days of the initial
exceedance. An alternative remedy to
the exceedance, such as upgrading the
blower, header pipes or control device,
and a corresponding timeline for
installation may be submitted to the
Administrator for approval.
(5) The owner or operator shall
implement a program to monitor for
cover integrity and implement cover
repairs as necessary on a monthly basis.
(d) Each owner or operator seeking to
comply with the provisions in
paragraph (c) of this section shall
comply with the following
instrumentation specifications and
procedures for surface emission
monitoring devices:
(1) The portable analyzer shall meet
the instrument specifications provided
in section 3 of Method 21 of appendix
A of this part, except that "methane"
shall replace all references to VOC.
(2) The calibration gas shall be
methane, diluted to a nominal
concentration of 500 parts per million in
air.
(3) To meet the performance
evaluation requirements in section 3.1.3
of Method 21 of appendix A of this part,
the instrument evaluation procedures of
section 4.4 of Method 21 of appendix A
of this part shall be used.
(4) The calibration procedures
provided in section 4.2 of Method 21 of
appendix A of this part shall be
followed immediately before
commencing a surface monitoring
survey.
(e) The provisions of this subpart
apply at all times, except during periods
of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction,
provided that the duration of start-up,
shutdown, or malfunction shall not
exceed 5 days for collection systems and
shall not exceed 1 hour for treatment or
control devices.
§60.756 Monitoring of operations.
Except as provided in
§60.752 (b)(2) (i)(B),
(a) Each owner or operator seeking to
comply with §60,752(b)(2){ii)(A) for an
active gas collection system shall install
a sampling port and a thermometer or
other temperature measuring device at
each wellhead and:
(1) Measure the gauge pressure in the
gas collection header on a monthly basis
as provided in § 60.755(a)(3): and
(2) Monitor nitrogen or oxygen
concentration in the landfill gas on a
monthly basis as provided in
§ 60.755(a)(5); and
(3) Monitor temperature of the landfill
gas on a monthly basis as provided in
§ 60.755(a)(5).
(b) Each owner or operator seeking to
comply with §60.752(b)(2)(iii) using an
enclosed combustor shall calibrate,
maintain, and operate according to the
manufacturer's specifications, the
following equipment.
(1) A temperature monitoring device
equipped with a continuous recorder
and having an accuracy of +1 percent of
the temperature being measured
expressed in degrees Celsius or ±0.5 °C,
whichever is greater. A temperature
monitoring device is not required for
boilers or process heaters with design
heat input capacity greater than 44
megawatts.
(2) A gas flow rate measuring device
that provides a measurement of gas flow
to or bypass of the control device The
ow ner or operator shall either
(i) Install, calibrate, and maintain a
gas flow rate measuring device that shall
record the flow to the control device at
least every 15 minutes; or
(ii) Secure the bypass line valve in the
closed position with a car-seal or a lock-
and-key type configuration. A visual
inspection of the seal or closure
mechanism shall be performed at least
once every month to ensure that the
valve is maintained in the closed
position and that the gas flow is not
diverted through the bypass line.
(c) Each owner or operator seeking to
comply with §60.752(b)(2) (iii) using an
open flare shall install, calibrate,
maintain, and operate according to the
manufacturer's specifications the
following equipment
(1) A heat sensing device, such as an
ultraviolet beam sensor or
-------
9926 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
thermocouple, at the pilot light or the
flame itself to indicate the continuous
presence of a flame.
(2) A device that records flow to or
bypass of the flare. The owner or
operator shall either:
(i) Install, calibrate, and maintain a
gas flow rate measuring device that shall
record the flow to the control device at
least every 15 minutes; or
(ii) Secure the bypass line valve in the
closed position with a car-seal or a lock-
and-key type configuration. A visual
inspection of the seal or closure
mechanism shall be performed at least
once every month to ensure that the
valve is maintained in the closed
position and that the gas flow is not
diverted through the bypass line.
(d) Each owner or operator seeking to
demonstrate compliance with
§ 60.752 (b) (2) (iii) using a device other
than an open flare or an enclosed
combustor shall provide information
satisfactory to the Administrator as
provided in § 60.752(b)(2)(i)(B)
describing the operation of the control
device, the operating parameters that
would indicate proper performance, and
appropriate monitoring procedures. The
Administrator shall review the
information and either approve it, or
request that additional information be
submitted. The Administrator may
specify additional appropriate
monitoring procedures.
(e) Each owner or operator seeking to
install a collection system that does not
meet the specifications in § 60.759 or
seeking to monitor alternative
parameters to those required by §60.753
through §60.756 shall provide
information satisfactory to the
Administrator as provided in
§ 60.752(b) (2) (i) (B) and (C) describing
the design and operation of the
collection system, the operating
parameters that would indicate proper
performance, and appropriate
monitoring procedures. The
Administrator may specify additional
appropriate monitoring procedures.
(f) Each owner or operator seeking to
demonstrate compliance with
§60.755(c), shall monitor surface
concentrations of methane according to
the instrument specifications and
procedures provided in §60.755(d). Any
closed landfill that has no monitored
exceedances of the operational standard
in three consecutive quarterly
monitoring periods may skip to annual
monitoring. Any methane reading of 500
ppm or more above background
detected during the annual monitoring
returns the frequency for that landfill to
quarterly monitoring.
§60.757 Reporting requirements.
Except as provided in
§ 60.752(b) (2) (i) (B),
(a) Each owner or operator subject to
the requirements of this subpart shall
submit an initial design capacity report
to the Administrator.
(1) The initial design capacity report
shall fulfill the requirements of the
notification of the date construction is
commenced as required under
§60.7(a)(1) and shall be submitted no
later than the earliest day from the
following:
(1) 90 days of the issuance of the State,
Local, Tribal, or RCRA construction or
operating permit; or
(ii) 30 days of the date of construction
or reconstruction as defined under
§60.15; or
(iii) 30 days of the initial acceptance
of solid waste.
(2) The initial design capacity report
shall contain the following information:
(i) A map or plot of the landfill,
providing the size and location of the
landfill, and identifying all areas where
solid waste may be landfilled according
to the provisions of the State, local,
Tribal, or RCRA construction or
operating permit;
(ii) The maximum design capacity of
the landfill. Where the maximum design
capacity is specified in the State or local
construction or RCRA permit, a copy of
the permit specifying the maximum
design capacity may be submitted as
part of the report. If the maximum
design capacity of the landfill is not
specified in the permit, the maximum
design capacity shall be calculated
using good engineering practices. The
calculations shall be provided, along
with such parameters as depth of solid
waste solid waste acceptance rate, and
compaction practices as part of the
report The State, Tribal, local agency or
Administrator may request other
reasonable information as may be
necessary to verify the maximum design
capacity of the landfill.
(3) An amended design capacity
report shall be submitted to the
Administrator providing notification of
any increase in the design capacity of
the landfill, whether the increase results
from an increase in the permitted area
or depth of the landfill, a change in the
operating procedures, or any other
means which results in an increase in
the maximum design capacity of the
landfill above 2.5 million megagrams or
2.5 million cubic meters. The amended
design capacity report shall be
submitted within 90 days of the
issuance of an amended construction or
operating permit, or the placement of
waste in additional land, or the change
in operating procedures which will
result in an increase in maximum
design capacity, whichever occurs first.
(b) Each owner or operator subject to
the requirements of this subpart shall
submit an NMOC emission rate report to
the Administrator initially and annually
thereafter, except as provided for in
paragraphs (b)(l)(ii) or (b)(3) of this
section. The Administrator may request
such additional information as may be
necessary to verify the reported NMOC
emission rate.
(1) The NMOC emission rate report
shall contain an annual or 5-year
estimate of the NMOC emission rate
calculated using the formula and
procedures provided in § 60.754(a) or
(b), as applicable.
(1) The initial NMOC emission rate
report shall be submitted within 90 days
of the date waste acceptance
commences and may be combined with
the initial design capacity report
required in paragraph (a) of this section.
Subsequent NMOC emission rate reports
shall be submitted annually thereafter,
except as provided for in paragraphs
(b)(l)(ii) and (b)(3) of this section.
(ii) If the estimated NMOC emission
rate as reported in the annual report to
the Administrator is less than 50
megagrams per year in each of the next
5 consecutive years, the owner or
operator may elect to submit an estimate
of the NMOC emission rate for the next
5-year period in lieu of the annual
report. This estimate shall include the
current amount of solid waste-in-place
and the estimated waste acceptance rate
for each year of the 5 years for which
an NMOC emission rate is estimated
All data and calculations upon which
this estimate is based shall be provided
to the Administrator. This estimate shall
be revised at least once every 5 years.
If the actual waste acceptance rate
exceeds the estimated waste acceptance
rate in any year reported in the 5-year
estimate, a revised 5-year estimate shall
be submitted to the Administrator. The
revised estimate shall cover the 5-year
period beginning with the year in which
the actual waste acceptance rate
exceeded the estimated waste
acceptance rate.
(2) The NMOC emission rate report
shall include all the data, calculations,
sample reports and measurements used
to estimate the annual or 5-year
emissions.
(3) Each owner or operator subject to
the requirements of this subpart is
exempted from the requirements of
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section,
after the installation of a collection and
control system in compliance with
§60.752(b)(2), during such time as the
collection and control system is in
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9927
operation and in compliance with
§§60.753 and 60.755.
(c) Each owner or operator subject to
the provisions of § 60.75 2(b) (2) {i) shall
submit a collection and control system
design plan to the Administrator within
1 year of the first report, required under
paragraph (b) of this section, in which
the emission rate exceeds 50 megagrams
per year, except as follows:
(1) If the owner or operator elects to
recalculate the NMOC emission rate
after Tier 2 NMOC sampling and
analysis as provided in §60.754 (a) (3)
and the resulting rate is less than 50
megagrams per year, annual periodic
reporting shall be resumed, using the
Tier 2 determined site-specific NMOC
concentration, until the calculated
emission rate is equal to or greater than
50 megagrams per year or the landfill is
closed. The revised NMOC emission
rate report, with the recalculated
emission rate based on NMOC sampling
and analysis, shall be submitted within
180 days of the first calculated
exceedance of 50 megagrams per year.
(2) If the owner or operator elects to
recalculate the NMOC emission rate
after determining a site-specific
methane generation rate constant (k). as
provided in Tier 3 in §60.754(a)(4), and
the resulting NMOC emission rate is less
than 50 Mg/yr, annual periodic
reporting shall be resumed. The
resulting site-specific methane
generation rate constant (k) shall be
used in the emission rate calculation
until such time as the emissions rate
calculation results in an exceedance
The revised NMOC emission rate report
based on the provisions of §60 754(a)(4)
and the resulting site-specific methane
generation rate constant (k) shall be
submitted to the Administrator w ithin ]
year of the first calculated emission rate
exceeding 50 megagrams per year
(d) Each o\\ ner or operator of a
controlled landfill shall submit a
closure report to the Administrator
within 30 days of waste acceptance
cessation. The Administrator may
request additional information as may
be necessary to verify that permanent
closure has taken place in accordance
with the requirements of 40 CFR 258,60.
If a closure report has been submitted to
the Administrator, no additional wastes
may be placed into the landfill without
filing a notification of modification as
described under § 60.7(a)(4).
(e) Each owner or operator of a
controlled landfill shall submit an
equipment removal report to the
Administrator 30 days prior to removal
or cessation of operation of the control
equipment.
(1) The equipment removal report
shall contain all of the following items:
(1) A copy of the closure report
submitted in accordance with paragraph
(d) of this section;
(ii) A copy of the initial performance
test report demonstrating that the 15
year minimum control period has
expired: and
(iii) Dated copies of three successive
NMOC emission rate reports
demonstrating that the landfill is no
longer producing 50 megagrams or
greater of NMOC per year.
(2) The Administrator may request
such additional information as may be
necessary to verify that all of the
conditions for removal in
§ 60.752(b) (2)(v) have been met.
(f) Each owner or operator of a landfill
seeking to comply with § 60.752(b)(2)
using an active collection system
designed in accordance with
§60.75 2(b) (2) (ii) shall submit to the
Administrator annual reports of the
recorded information in (f)(1) through
(f)(6) of this paragraph. The initial
annual report shall be submitted within
180 days of installation and start-up of
the collection and control system, and
shall include the initial performance
test report required under §60.8. For
enclosed combustion devices and flares,
reportable exceedances are defined
under § 60.758(c).
(1) Value and length of time for
exceedance of applicable parameters
monitored under §60.756(a), (b), (c),
and (d).
(2) Description and duration of all
periods when the gas stream is diverted
from the control device through a
bypass line or the indication of bypass
flow as specified under § 60.756.
(3) Description and duration of all
periods when the control device was not
operating for a period exceeding 1 hour
and length of time the control device
was not operating.
(4) All periods when the collection
system was not operating in excess of 5
days.
(5) The location of each exceedance of
the 500 parts per million methane
concentration as provided in § 60.753(d)
and the concentration recorded at each
location for which an exceedance was
recorded in the previous month.
(6) The date of installation and the
location of each well or collection
system expansion added pursuant to
paragraphs (a)(3), (b), and (c)(4) of
§60.755.
(g) Each owner or operator seeking to
comply with § 60.752(b) (2) (i) shall
include the following information with
the initial performance test report
required under §60.8:
(1) A diagram of the collection system
showing collection system positioning
including all wells, horizontal
collectors, surface collectors, or other
gas extraction devices, including the
locations of any areas excluded from
collection and the proposed sites for the
future collection system expansion;
(2) The data upon which the sufficient
density of wells, horizontal collectors,
surface collectors, or other gas
extraction devices and the gas mover
equipment sizing are based;
(3) The documentation of the
presence of asbestos or nondegradable
material for each area from which
collection wells have been excluded
based on the presence of asbestos or
nondegradable material;
(4) The sum of the gas generation flow
rates for all areas from which collection
wells have been excluded based on
nonproductivity and the calculations of
gas generation flow rate for each
excluded area; and
(5) The provisions for increasing gas
mover equipment capacity with
increased gas generation flow rate, if the
present gas mover equipment is
inadequate to move the maximum flow
rate expected over the life of the
landfill; and
(6) The provisions for the control of
off-site migration.
§60.758 Recordkeeping requirements.
Except as provided in
§ 60.752(b)(2) (i) (B),
(a) Each owner or operator of an MSW
landfill subject to the provisions of
§ 60.752(b) shall keep for at least 5 years
up-to-date, readily accessible, on-site
records of the maximum design
capacity, the current amount of solid
waste in-place, and the year-by-year
waste acceptance rate. Off-site records
may be maintained if they are
retrievable within 4 hours Either paper
copy or electronic formats are
acceptable
(b) Each owner or operator of a
controlled landfill shall keep up-to-date,
readily accessible records for the life of
the control equipment of the data listed
in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of
this section as measured during the
initial performance test or compliance
determination. Records of subsequent
tests or monitoring shall be maintained
for a minimum of 5 years. Records of the
control device vendor specifications
shall be maintained until removal.
(1) Where an owner or operator
subject to the provisions of this subpart
seeks to demonstrate compliance with
§60.752(b)(2)(ii):
(i) The maximum expected gas
generation flow rate as calculated in
§60.755(a)(1). The owner or operator
may use another method to determine
the maximum gas generation flow rate.
-------
9928
Federal Register / Vol 61, No. 49 / Tuesday. March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
if the method has been approved by the
Administrator.
(ii) The density of wells, horizontal
collectors, surface collectors, or other
gas extraction devices determined using
the procedures specified in
§60.759(a)(l).
(2) Where an owner or operator
subject to the provisions of this subpart
seeks to demonstrate compliance with
§60.752(b)(2)(iii) through use of an
enclosed combustion device other than
a boiler or process heater with a design
heat input capacity greater than 44
megawatts:
(i) The average combustion
temperature measured at least every 15
minutes and averaged over the same
time period of the performance test
(ii) The percent reduction of NMOC
determined as specified in
§ 60.752(b)(2)(iii)(B) achieved by the
control device.
(3) Where an owner or operator
subject to the provisions of this subpart
seeks to demonstrate compliance with
§ 60.752(b) (2) (iii) (B)(i) through use of a
boiler or process heater of any size: a
description of the location at which the
collected gas vent stream is introduced
into the boiler or process heater over the
same time period of the performance
testing.
(4) Where an owner or operator
subject to the provisions of this subpart
seeks to demonstrate compliance with
§ 60.752(b) (2)(iii)(A) through use of an
open flare, the flare type (i e.. steam-
assisted, air-assisted, or nonassisted), all
visible emission readings, heat content
determination, flow rate or bypass flow
rate measurements, and exit velocity
determinations made during the
performance test as specified in §60.18,
continuous records of the flare pilot
flame or flare flame monitoring and
records of all periods of operations
during which the pilot flame of the flare
flame is absent
(c) Each owner or operator of a
controlled landfill subject to the
provisions of this subpart shall keep for
5 years up-to-date, readily accessible
continuous records of the equipment
operating parameters specified to be
monitored in § 60.756 as well as up-to-
date, readily accessible records for
periods of operation during which the
parameter boundaries established
during the most recent performance test
are exceeded.
(1) The following constitute
exceedances that shall be recorded and
reported under § 60.757(f):
(i) For enclosed combustors except for
boilers and process heaters with design
heat input capacity of 44 megawatts
(150 million British thermal unit per
hour) or greater, all 3-hour periods of
operation during which the average
combustion temperature was more than
28 oC below the average combustion
temperature during the most recent
performance test at which compliance
with § 60.752(b)(2)(iii) was determined.
(ii) For boilers or process heaters,
whenever there is a change in the
location at which the vent stream is
introduced into the flame zone as
required under paragraph (b) (3)(i) of this
section.
(2) Each owner or operator subject to
the provisions of this subpart shall keep
up-to-date, readily accessible
continuous records of the indication of
flow to the control device or the
indication of bypass flow or records of
monthly inspections of car-seals or lock-
and-key configurations used to seal
bypass lines, specified under §60.756.
(3) Each owner or operator subject to
the provisions of this subpart who uses
a boiler or process heater with a design
heat input capacity of 44 megawatts or
greater to comply with § 60.752(b)(2) (iii)
shall keep an up-to-date, readily
accessible record of all periods of
operation of the boiler or process heater.
(Examples of such records could
include records of steam use, fuel use,
or monitoring data collected pursuant to
other State, local, Tribal, or Federal
regulatory requirements.)
(4) Each owner or operator seeking to
comply with the provisions of this
subpart by use of an open flare shall
keep up-to-date, readily accessible
continuous records of the flame or flare
pilot flame monitoring specified under
§60 756(c), and up-to-date, readily
accessible records of all periods of
operation in which the flame or flare
pilot flame is absent
(d) Each owner or operator subject to
the provisions of this subpart shall keep
for the life of the collection system an
up-to-date, readily accessible plot map
showing each existing and planned
collector in the system and providing a
unique identification location label for
each collector
(1) Each owner or operator subject to
the provisions of this subpart shall keep
up-to-date, readily accessible records of
the installation date and location of all
newly installed collectors as specified
under § 60.755(b).
(2) Each owner or operator subject to
the provisions of this subpart shall keep
readily accessible documentation of the
nature, date of deposition, amount, and
location of asbestos-containing or
nondegradable waste excluded from
collection as provided in
§ 60.759(a) (3) (i) as well as any
nonproductive areas excluded from
collection as provided in
§ 60.759(a) (3) (ii).
(e) Each owner or operator subject to
the provisions of this subpart shall keep
for at least 5 years up-to-date, readily
accessible records of all collection and
control system exceedances of the
operational standards in §60.753, the
reading in the subsequent month
whether or not the second reading is an
exceedance, and the location of each
exceedance.
§ 60.759 Specifications for active
collection systems.
(a) Each owner or operator seeking to
comply with § 60.752(b)(2)(i) shall site
active collection wells, horizontal
collectors, surface collectors, or other
extraction devices at a sufficient density
throughout all gas producing areas using
the following procedures unless
alternative procedures have been
approved by the Administrator as
provided in § 60.752(b)(2)(i)(C) and (D):
(1) The collection devices within the
interior and along the perimeter areas
shall be certified to achieve
comprehensive control of surface gas
emissions by a professional engineer.
The following issues shall be addressed
in the design: depths of refuse, refuse
gas generation rates and flow
characteristics, cover properties, gas
system expandibility, leachate and
condensate management, accessibility,
compatibility with filling operations,
integration with closure end use, air
intrusion control, corrosion resistance,
fill settlement, and resistance to the
refuse decomposition heat.
(2) The sufficient density of gas
collection devices determined in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall
address landfill gas migration issues and
augmentation of the collection system
through the use of active or passive
systems at the landfill perimeter or
exterior
(3) The placement of gas rollection
devices determined in paragraph (a)(1)
of this section shall control all gas
producing areas, except as provided bv
paragraphs (a) (3) (i) and (a)(3)(ii) of this
section.
(i) Any segregated area of asbestos or
nondegradable material ma) be
excluded from collection if documented
as provided under § 60.758(d). The
documentation shall provide the nature,
date of deposition, location and amount
of asbestos or nondegradable material
deposited in the area, and shall be
provided to the Administrator upon
request.
(ii) Any nonproductive area of the
landfill may be excluded from control,
provided that the total of all excluded
areas can be shown to contribute less
than 1 percent of the total amount of
NMOC emissions from the landfill. The
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
9929
amount, location, and age of the
material shall be documented and
provided to the Administrator upon
request. A separate NMOC emissions
estimate shall be made for each section
proposed for exclusion, and the sum of
all such sections shall be compared to
the NMOC emissions estimate for the
entire landfill. Emissions from each
section shall be computed using the
following equation:
Q, = 2 k Lo M, (e-k,i) (CnmOC) (3.6 x 10 -")
where,
Q, = NMOC emission rate from the i,h section,
megagrams per year
k = methane generation rate constant, year"1
L„ = methane generation potential, cubic
meters per megagram solid waste
M, = mass of the degradable solid waste in
the iIh section, megagram
t, = age of the solid waste in the ilh section,
years
Cnmoc = concentration of nonmethane
organic compounds, parts per million by
volume
3 6 x 10 = conversion factor
(iii) The values for k, Lu, and CnmOC
determined in field testing shall be
used, if field testing has been performed
in determining the NMOC emission rate
or the radii of influence. If field testing
has not been performed, the default
values for k, L„ and CnmOC provided in
§60.754(a)(1) shall be used The mass of
nondegradable solid waste contained
within the given section may be
subtracted from the total mass of the
section when estimating emissions
provided the nature, location, age, and
amount of the nondegradable material is
documented as provided in paragraph
(a)(3)(i) of this section.
(b) Each owner or operator seeking to
comply with § 60.752(b)(2) (i) (A) shall
construct the gas collection dexices
using the following equipment or
procedures:
(1) The landfill gas extraction
components shall be constructed of
polyvinyl chloride (PVC), high density
polyethylene (HDPE) pipe, fiberglass,
stainless steel, or other nonporous
corrosion resistant material of suitable
dimensions to: convey projected
amounts of gases; withstand
installation, static, and settlement
forces: and withstand planned
overburden or traffic loads The
collection system shall extend as
necessary to comply with emission and
migration standards. Collection devices
such as wells and horizontal collectors
shall be perforated to allow gas entry
without head loss sufficient to impair
performance across the intended extent
of control. Perforations shall be situated
with regard to the need to prevent
excessive air infiltration.
(2) Vertical wells shall be placed so as
not to endanger underlying liners and
shall address the occurrence of water
within the landfill. Holes and trenches
constructed for piped wells and
horizontal collectors shall be of
sufficient cross-section so as to allow for
their proper construction and
completion including, for example,
centering of pipes and placement of
gravel backfill. Collection devices shall
be designed so as not to allow indirect
short circuiting of air into the cover or
refuse into the collection system or gas
into the air. Any gravel used around
pipe perforations should be of a
dimension so as not to penetrate or
block perforations.
(3) Collection devices may be
connected to the collection header pipes
below or above the landfill surface. The
connector assembly shall include a
positive closing throttle valve, any
necessary seals and couplings, access
couplings and at least one sampling
port. The collection devices shall be
constructed of PVC, HDPE, fiberglass,
stainless steel, or other nonporous
material of suitable thickness.
(c) Each owner or operator seeking to
comply with § 60.752(b)(2) (i) (A) shall
convey the landfill gas to a control
system in compliance with
§60 752(b)(2)(iii) through the collection
header pipe(s) The gas mover
equipment shall be sized to handle the
maximum gas generation flow rate
expected over the intended use period
of the gas moving equipment using the
following procedures:
(1) For existing collection systems, the
flow data shall be used to project the
maximum flow rate. If no flow data
exists, the procedures in paragraph
(c)(2) of this section shall be used.
(2) For new collection systems, the
maximum flow rate shall be in
accordance with §60.755(a)(1).
10. Part 60 is further amended by
adding Methods 2E, 3C and 25C to
appendix A as follows:
Appendix A—Reference Methods
*****
Method 2E—Determination of Landfill Gas:
Gas Production Flow Rate
1. Applicability and Principle
1.1 Applicability. This method applies to
the measurement of landfill gas (LFG)
production flow rate from municipal solid
waste (MSW) landfills and is used to
calculate the flow rate of nonmethane organic
compounds (NMOC) from landfills. This
method also applies to calculating a site-
specific k value as provided in §60.754(a)(4).
It is unlikely that a site-specific k value
obtained through Method 2E testing will
lower the annual emission estimate below 50
Mg/yr NMOC unless the Tier 2 emission
estimate is only slightly higher than 50 Mg/
yr NMOC. Dry. arid regions may show a more
significant difference between the default
and calculated k values than wet regions
1 2 Principle Extraction wells are
installed either in a cluster of three or at five
locations dispersed throughout the landfill. A
blower is used to extract LFG from the
landfill LFG composition, landfill pressures
near the extraction well, and volumetric flow
rate of LFG extracted from the wells are
measured and the landfill gas production
flow rate is calculated.
2. Apparatus
2.1 Well Drilling Rig. Capable of boring a
0.6 meters diameter hole into the landfill to
a minimum of 75 percent of the landfill
depth The depth of the well shall not exceed
the bottom of the landfill or the liquid level
2.2 Gravel. No fines. Gravel diameter
should be appreciably larger than
perforations stated in sections 2 10 and 3.2 of
this method
2 3 Bentonite
2 4 Backfill Material. Clav, soil, and
sandy loam have been found to be
acceptable
2 5 Extraction Well Pipe Polyvinyl
chloride (PVC). high density polyethylene
(HDPE) fiberglass, stainless steel, or other
suitable nonporous material capable of
transporting landfill gas with a minimum
diameter of 0 075 meters and suitable wall-
thickness.
2 6 Wellhead Assembly. Valve capable of
adjusting gas flow at the wellhead and outlet,
and a flow measuring device, such as an in-
line orifice meter or pitot tube. A schematic
of the wellhead assembly is shown in figure
1.
BILLING CODE 656O-50-P
-------
9930 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
Flare
Dutlet Sample
Pat
Blower
Water
Knockout
Well Head
Control Valve
Well Head-
Sample Port
Orifice
Ueter
Figura 1. Schematic of abova ground wall haad a»»anbly.
BILLING CODE 6S60-S0-C
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9931
2 7 Cap. PVC, HDPE, fiberglass, stainless
steel, or other suitable nonporous material
capable of transporting landfill gas with a
suitable wall-thickness
2.8 Header Piping PVC, HDPE, fiberglass,
stainless steel, or other suitable nonporous
material capable of transporting landfill gas
with a suitable wall-thickness.
2.9 Auger Capable of boring a 0.15 to
0.23 meters diameter hole to a depth equal
to the top of the perforated section of the
extraction well, for pressure probe
installation.
2.10 Pressure Probe. PVC or stainless
steel (316), 0.025 meters. Schedule 40 pipe
Perforate the bottom two thirds. A minimum
requirement for perforations is slots or holes
with an open area equivalent to four 6.0
millimeter diameter holes spaced 90° apart
every 0.15 meters
2.11 Blower and Flare Assembly A water
knockout, flare or incinerator, and an
explosion-proof blower, capable of extracting
LFG at a flow rate of at least 8.5 cubic meters
per minute.
2.12 Standard Pitot Tube and Differential
Pressure Gauge for Flow Rate Calibration
with Standard Pitot Same as Method 2,
sections 2.1 and 2 8
2.13 Gas flow measuring device
Permanently mounted Type S pitot tube or
an orifice meter.
2.14 Barometer. Same as Method 4,
section 2 15
2 15 Differential Pressure Gauge. Water-
filled U-tube manometer or equivalent,
capable of measuring within 0.02 mm Hg, for
measuring the pressure of the pressure
probes.
3. Procedure
3.1 Placement of Extraction Wells. The
landfill owner or operator shall either install
a single cluster of three extraction wells in
a test area or space five wells over the
landfill. The cluster wells are recommended
but may be used only if the composition, age
of the solid waste, and the landfill depth of
the test area can be determined. CAUTION.
Since this method is complex, only
experienced personnel should conduct the
test. Landfill gas contains methane, therefore
explosive mixtures may exist at or near the
landfill. It is advisable to take appropriate
safety precautions when testing landfills,
such as installing explosion-proof equipment
and refraining from smoking.
3 1.1 Cluster Wells. Consult landfill site
records for the age of the solid waste, depth,
and composition of various sections of the
landfill. Select an area near the perimeter of
the landfill with a depth equal to or greater
than the average depth of the landfill and
with the average age of the solid waste
between 2 and 10 years old. Avoid areas
known to contain nondecomposable
materials, such as concrete and asbestos
Locate wells as shown in figure 2.
Because the age of the solid waste in a test
area will not be uniform, calculate a
weighted average to determine the average
age of the solid waste as follows.
n
^a\g — ^
i=]
where,
Aavg=average age of the solid waste tested,
year
f,=fraction of the solid waste in the ilh section
A,=age of the ilh fraction, year
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
-------
9932 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
PERIMETER
15.25m
Figure 2. Location of Cluster Wells
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9933
3.1.2 Equal Volume Wells. This
procedure is used when the composition, age
of solid waste, and landfill depth are not well
known. Divide the portion of the landfill that
has had waste for at least 2 years into five
areas representing equal volumes. Locate an
extraction well near the center of each area.
Avoid areas known to contain
nondecomposable materials, such as concrete
and asbestos.
3.2 Installation of Extraction Wells. Use a
well drilling rig to dig a 0.6 meters diameter
hole in the landfill to a minimum of 75
percent of the landfill depth, not to exceed
the bottom of the landfill or the water table.
Perforate the bottom two thirds of the
extraction well pipe. Perforations shall not be
closer than 6 meters from the cover.
Perforations shall be holes or slots with an
open area equivalent to 1.0 centimeter
diameter holes spaced 90 degrees apart every
0.1 to 0.2 meters. Place the extraction well in
the center of the hole and backfill with 2.0
to 7.5 centimeters gravel to a level 0.3 meters
above the perforated section Add a layer of
backfill material 1.2 meters thick Add a layer
of bentonite 1.0 meter thick, and backfill the
remainder of the hole with cover material or
material equal in permeability to the existing
cover material The specifications for
extraction well installation are shown in
figure 3.
BILLING CODE 6S60-S0-P
-------
9934 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 I Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
T
O.Sat
J
£3*
WC « HOPE
73% ofiht
Landlil Oapih
a
1.0a
l.2ii
forfotalt
2/3 of Ptp#
Ltnglh
Cap. 0j079« (ain) Dia.
PVC m HDPE Kj*.
- OjMSh (Bin) Dia.
Ground St* (aca
0 Mm
VMIbora
Basting Cow
BaMonfit 8*ti
_ Coh«»oril*jj
Badilll UaiariiJ
Awtl.no Firas
0.02 ¦ io 0.075*
PVC or HDPi
"* PI pa
PVC Of HOPS
CapA.Tte (»ln) Dl«
8
S
Figure 3, Gas extraction wall.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9935
3.3 Pressure Probes. Shallow pressure
probes are used in the check for infiltration
of air into the landfill, and deep pressure
probes are used to determine the radius of
influence. Locate the deep pressure probes
along three radial arms approximately 120
degrees apart at distances of 3, 15, 30, and
45 meters from the extraction well. The tester
has the option of locating additional pressure
probes at distances every 15 meters beyond
45 meters. Example placements of probes are
shown in figure 4.
The probes located 15, 30, and 45 meters
from each well, and any additional probes
located along the three radial arms (deep
probes), shall extend to a depth equal to the
top of the perforated section of the extraction
wells. Locate three shallow probes at a
distance of 3 m from the extraction well.
Shallow probes shall extend to a depth equal
to half the depth of the deep probes.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
-------
9936 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
„ 15m
LoAo^'
A
«VMI
o
-SftalowPreb*
X
¦DmpPtoIm
Figure 4. Cluster well configuration.
BJLUNG CODE 6560-50-C
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9937
Use an auger to dig a hole, approximately
0.15 to 0.23 meters in diameter, for each
pressure probe. Perforate the bottom two
thirds of the pressure probe. Perforations
shall be holes or slots with an open area
equivalent to four 6.0 millimeter diameter
holes spaced 90 degrees apart every 0 15
meters. Place the pressure probe in the center
of the hole and backfill with gravel to a level
0.30 meters above the perforated section.
Add a layer of backfill material at least 1.2
meters thick. Add a layer of bentonite at least
0.3 meters thick, and backfill the remainder
of the hole with cover material or material
equal in permeability to the existing cover
material. The specifications for pressure
probe installation are shown in figure 5
BILLING CODE 6560-5O-P
-------
9938 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
^jQuick Connect
^ —0.025m Cap
¦< 0.025m Pipe
Oov«f MlMflll
^or Equivalent
Btntonitt
<3 r»v«l
0.15m to 0.23m Bore Hole
Figure 5. Pr-ftflsuro proba.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9939
3.4 LFG Flow Rate Measurement.
Determine the flow rate of LFG from the test
wells continuously during testing with an
orifice meter. Alternative methods to
measure the LFG flow rate may be used with
approval of the Administrator. Locate the
orifice meter as shown in figure 1. Attach the
wells to the blower and flare assembly. The
individual wells may be ducted to a common
header so that a single blower and flare
assembly and flow meter may be used Use
the procedures in section 4.1 to calibrate the
flow meter.
3.5 Leak Check. A leak check of the above
ground system is required for accurate flow
rate measurements and for safety. Sample
LFG at the wellhead sample port and at a
point downstream of the flow measuring
device. Use Method 3C to determine nitrogen
(N2) concentrations. Determine the difference
by using the formula below.
Difference=C„ - C»
where,
C. ^concentration of N: at the outlet, ppmv
C„=concentration of N; at the wellhead,
ppmv
The system passes the leak check if the
difference is less than 10,000 ppmv. If the
system fails the leak check, make the
appropriate adjustments to the above ground
system and repeat the leak check,
3.6 Static Testing. The purpose of the
static testing is to determine the initial
conditions of the landfill. Close the control
valves on the wells so that there is no flow
of landfill gas from the well. Measure the
gauge pressure (Pg) at each deep pressure
probe and the barometric pressure (Phl„)
every 8 hours for 3 days. Convert the gauge
pressure of each deep pressure probe to
absolute pressure by using the following
equation. Record as P,
P,=Pbar+Pf
where,
Pi-.«=Atmospherir pressure, mm Hg
Pf=Gauge pressure of the deep probes, mm
Hg
P,=lnitial absolute pressure of the deep
probes during static testing, mm Hg
3.6 1 For each probe, average all of the 8
hr deep pressure probe readings and record
as P.j. The PlA is used in section 3.7 6 to
determine the maximum radius of influence
3.6.2 Measure the LFG temperature and
the static flow rate of each well once during
static testing using a flow measurement
device, such as a Type S pitot tube and
measure the temperature of the landfill gas
The flow measurements should be made
either just before or just after the
measurements of the probe pressures and are
used in determining the initial flow from the
extraction well during the short term testing
The temperature measurement is used in the
check for infiltration
3.7 Short Term Testing. The purpose of
short term testing is to determine the
maximum vacuum that can be applied to the
wells without infiltration of air into the
landfill. The short term testing is done on
one well at a time During the short term
testing, burn LFG with a flare or incinerator.
3.7.1 Use the blower to extract LFG from
a single well at a rate at least twice the static
flow rate of the respective well measured in
section 3.6.2. If using a single blower and
flare assembly and a common header system,
close the control valve on the wells not being
measured. Allow 24 hours for the system to
stabilize at this flow rate.
3.7.2 Check for infiltration of air into the
landfill by measuring the temperature of the
LFG at the wellhead, the gauge pressures of
the shallow pressure probes, and the LFG N2
concentration by using Method 3C.
CAUTION: Increased vacuum at the wellhead
may cause infiltration of air into the landfill,
which increases the possibility of a landfill
fire. Infiltration of air into the landfill may
occur if any of the following conditions are
met: the LFG N2 concentration is more than
20 percent, any of the shallow probes have
a negative gauge pressure, or the temperature
has increased above 55°C or the maximum
established temperature during static testing.
If infiltration has not occurred, increase the
blower vacuum by 4 mm Hg, wait 24 hours,
and repeat the infiltration check. If at any
time, the temperature change exceeds the
limit, stop the test until it is safe to proceed.
Continue the above steps of increasing
blower vacuum by 4 mm Hg, waiting 24
hours, and checking for infiltration until the
concentration of Na exceeds 20 percent or
any of the shallow probes have a negative
gauge pressure, at which time reduce the
vacuum at the wellhead so that the N2
concentration is less than 20 percent and the
gauge pressures of the shallow probes are
positive. This is the maximum vacuum at
which infiltration does not occur.
3.7.3 At this maximum vacuum, measure
Pb,„ every 8 hours for 24 hours and record the
LFG flow rate as Q„ and the probe gauge
pressures for all of the probes as P,. Convert
the gauge pressures of the deep probes to
absolute pressures for each 8-hour reading at
Qv as follows:
P=Pb,,+P.
where,
Pbjr=Atmospheric pressure, mm Hg
P,=Final absolute pressure of the deep probes
during short term testing, mm Hg
P=Pressure of the deep probes, mm Hg
3 7 4 For each probe, average the 8-hr
deep pressure probe readings and record as
Pm
3 7 5 For each probe, compare the initial
average pressure (P, J from section 3.6.1 to
the final average pressure (Pla). Determine the
furthermost point from the wellhead along
each radial arm where Pu < P,., This distance
is the maximum radius of influence (ROl),
which is the distance from the well affected
by the vacuum. Average these values to
determine the average maximum radius of
influence (Rmj)
The average R,,,., may also be determined by
plotting on semi-log paper the pressure
differentials (Pu-P.J on the y-axis (abscissa)
versus the distances (3, 15, 30 and 45 meters)
from the wellhead on the x-axis (ordinate).
Use a linear regression analysis to determine
the distance when the pressure differential is
zero. Additional pressure probes may be used
to obtain more points on the semi-long plot
of pressure differentials versus distances
3.7.6 Calculate the depth {D„) affected by
the extraction well during the short term test
as follows. If the computed value of D„
exceeds the depth of the landfill, set D« equal
to the landfill depth.
DS,=WD + R„a2
where,
Dsl=depth, m
WD=well depth, m
Rma=maximum radius of influence, m
3.7.7 Calculate the void volume for the
extraction well (V) as follows
V=0.40 jr Rma2 DS|
where,
V=void volume of test well, ms
Rnl,,=maximum radius of influence, m
Dsl=depth, m
3.7.8 Repeat the procedures in section 3.7
for each well.
3.8 Calculate the total void volume of the
test wells (V,) by summing the void volumes
(V) of each well.
3.9 Long Term Testing. The purpose of
long term testing is to determine the methane
generation rate constant, k. Use the blower to
extract LFG from the wells. If a single blower
and flare assembly and common header
system are used, open all control valves and
set the blower vacuum equal to the highest
stabilized blower vacuum demonstrated by
any individual well in section 3.7, Every 8
hours, sample the LFG from the wellhead
sample port, measure the gauge pressures of
the shallow pressure probes, the blower
vacuum, the LFG flow rate, and use the
criteria for infiltration in section 3.7.2 and
Method 3C to check for infiltration. If
infiltration is detected, do not reduce the
blower vacuum, but reduce the LFG flow rate
from the well by adjusting the control valve
on the wellhead. Adjust each affected well
individually. Continue until the equivalent of
two total void volumes (V,) have been
extracted, or until V,=2 V».
3.9.1 Calculate V., the total volume of
LFG extracted from the wells, as follows
V, =X60Q,tvl
1=1
where,
V,=total volume of LFG extracted from wells,
nr
Q,=LFG flow rate measured at orifice meter
at the ith interval, cubic meters per
minute
t,,=tiroe of the iIh interval, hour (usually 8)
3.9.2 Record the final stabilized flow rate
as Q,. If, during the long term testing, the
flow rate does not stabilize, calculate Q, by
averaging the last 10 recorded flow rates.
3.9.3 For each deep probe, convert each
gauge pressure to absolute pressure as in
section 3.7 4 Average these values and
record as Pw For each probe, compare P;J to
Pu Determine the furthermost point from the
wellhead along each radial arm where P,„ <
Pu. This distance is the stabilized radius of
influence. Average these values to determine
the average stabilized radius of influence
ou
3.10 Determine the NMOC mass emission
rate using the procedures in section 5.
3.11 Deactivation of pressure probe holes.
Upon completion of measurements, if
pressure probes are removed, restore the
-------
9940 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
integrity of the landfill cover by backfilling
and sealing to prevent venting of LFG to the
atmosphere or air infiltration.
4. Calibrations
Gas Flow Measuring Device Calibration
Procedure. Locate a standard pitot tube in
line with a gas flow measuring device. Use
the procedures in Method 2D, section 4, to
calibrate the orifice meter. Method 3C may be
used to determine the dry molecular weight.
It may be necessary to calibrate more than
one gas flow measuring device to bracket the
landfill gas flow rates. Construct a calibration
curve by plotting the pressure drops across
the gas flow measuring device for each flow
rate versus the average dry gas volumetric
flow rate in cubic meters per minute of the
gas. Use this calibration curve to determine
the volumetric flow from the wells during
testing.
5. Calculations
5.1 Nomenclature.
Aj,g=average age of the solid waste tested,
year
A,=age of solid waste in the ith fraction, year
A=age of landfill, year
Ar=acceptance rate, megagrams per year
Cnmoc=NMOC concentration, ppmv as
hexane (Cnmoc=C,/6)
C^NMOC concentration, ppmv (carbon
equivalent) from Method 25C
D = depth affected by the test wells, m
D>l=depth affected by the test wells in the
short term test, m
DLF=landfill depth, m
f = fraction of decomposable solid waste in
the landfill
f,=fraction of the solid waste in the ilh section
k=methane generation rate constant, year ~1
L„=methane generation potential, cubic
meters per megagram
L„=revised methane generation potential to
account for the amount of
nondecomposable material in the
landfill, cubic meters per megagram
M,=mass of solid waste of the ilh section,
megagrams
Mr=mass of decomposable solid waste
affected b> the test well, megagrams
M*=number of wells
Pb..r=atmospheric pressure, mm Hg
PE=gauge pressure of the deep pressure
probes, mm Hg
P,=initial absolute pressure of the deep
pressure probes during static testing, mm
Hg
P,3=average initial absolute pressure of the
deep pressure probes during static
testing, mm Hg
Pt=final absolute pressure of the deep
pressure probes during short term
testing, mm Hg
Pu=average final absolute pressure of the
deep pressure probes during short term
testing, mm Hg
Ps=final absolute pressure of the deep
pressure probes during long term testing,
mm Hg
P,.,=average final absolute pressure of the
deep pressure probes during long term
testing, mm Hg
QB=required blow flow rate, cubic meters per
minute
Qf=final stabilized flow rate, cubic meters per
minute
Q,=LFG flow rate measured at orifice meter
during the ilh interval, cubic meters per
minute
Qs=maximum LFG flow rate at each well
determined by short term test, cubic
meters per minute
Qt=NMOC mass emission rate, cubic meters
per minute
Rm=maximurn radius of influence, m
Rma=average maximum radius of influence, m
Rs=stabilized radius of influence for an
individual well, m
Rsa=average stabilized radius of influence, m
t,=age of section i, year
t,=totaI time of long term testing, year
V=void volume of test well, m3
Vr=volume of solid waste affected by the test
well, m3
V,=total volume of solid waste affected by the
long term testing, m3
W=total void volume affected by test wells,
m3
WD=well depth, m
p=solid waste density, m3 (Assume 0.64
megagrams per cubic meter if data are
unavailable)
5.2 Use the following equation to
calculate the depth affected by the test well.
If using cluster wells, use the average depth
of the wells for WD. If the value of D is
greater than the depth of the landfill, set D
equal to the landfill depth.
D=WD+R„
5.3 Use the following equation to
calculate the volume of solid waste affected
by the test well.
Vr=R,„2 n D
5.4 Use the following equation to
calculate the mass affected by the test well
M,=V,p
5 5 Modify L0 to account for the
nondecomposable solid waste in the landfill
L„'=f L„
5.6 In the following equation, solve for k
by iteration. A suggested procedure is to
select a value for k, calculate the left side of
the equation, and if not equal to zero, select
another value for k. Continue this process
until the left hand side of the equation equals
zero, #0.001.
ke A
ivg-(5.256 xlO5)
Qf
2 L ' M,
= 0
5.7 Use the following equation to
determine landfill NMOC mass emission rate
if the yearly acceptance rate of solid waste
has been consistent (±10 percent) over the
life of the landfill.
Q, = 2 L,,' Ar (1 — e~k A) Cnmoc / (5.256 x
ion)
5.8 Use the following equation to
determine landfill NMOC mass emission rate
if the acceptance rate has not been consistent
over the life of the landfill.
Q,
2kL • C
NMOC
(5.256xlOn) 1=
-kt-
e i
6. Bibliography
1. Same as Method 2, appendix A, 40 CFR
part 60.
2. Emcon Associates, Methane Generation
and Recovery from Landfills. Ann Arbor
Science, 1982.
3. The Johns Hopkins University, Brown
Station Road Testing and Gas Recovery
Projections. Laurel, Maryland: October 1982.
4. Mandeville and Associates, Procedure
Manual for Landfill Gases Emission Testing.
5. Letter and attachments from Briggurn, S.,
Waste Management of North America, to
Thorneloe, S-, EPA. Response to July 28,
1988 request for additional information.
August 18,1988.
6. Letter and attachments from Briggurn, S.,
Waste Management of North America, to
Wyatt, S., EPA. Response to December 7,
1988 request for additional information.
January 16, 1989.
Method 3C—Determination of Carbon
Dioxide, Methane, Nitrogen, and Oxygen
From Stationary Sources
1. Applicability and Principle
1.1 Applicability. This method applies to
the analysis of carbon dioxide (CO2),
methane (CH4), nitrogen (N2), and oxygen
(O2) in samples from municipal solid waste
landfills and other sources when specified in
an applicable subpart
1.2 Principle. A portion of the sample is
injected into a gas chromatograph (GC) and
the C02, CH4, N2, and O2 concentrations are
determined by using a thermal conductivity
detector (TCD) and integrator
2. Range and Sensitivity
2.1 Range. The range of this method
depends upon the concentration of samples.
The analytical range of TCD's is generally
between approximately 10 ppmv and the
upper percent range.
2.2 Sensitivity The sensitivity limit for a
compound is defined as the minimum
detectable concentration of that compound,
or the concentration that produces a signal-
to-noise ratio of three to one. For CO2. CHj,
N2, and O2. the sensitivity limit is in the low
ppmv range
3. Interferences
Since the TCD exhibits universal response
and detects all gas components except the
carrier, interferences may occur. Choosing
the appropriate GC or shifting the retention
times by changing the column flow rate may
help to eliminate resolution interferences.
To assure consistent detector response,
helium is used to prepare calibration gases.
Frequent exposure to samples or carrier gas
containing oxygen may gradually destroy
filaments
4. Apparatus
4.1 Gas Chromatograph. GC having at
least the following components:
4.1.1 Separation Column. Appropriate
column(s) to resolve C02, CHj, N2, O2, and
other gas components that may be present in
the sample.
4.1.2 Sample Loop. Teflon or stainless
steel tubing of the appropriate diameter.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9941
Note: Mention of trade names or specific
products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation by the U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
4.1.3 Conditioning System. To maintain
the column and sample loop at constant
temperature.
4.1.4 Thermal Conductivity Detector.
4.2 Recorder Recorder with linear strip
chart. Electronic integrator (optional) is
recommended.
4.3 Teflon Tubing. Diameter and length
determined by connection requirements of
cylinder regulators and the GC.
4.4 Regulators. To control gas cylinder
pressures and flow rates.
4.5 Adsorption Tubes. Applicable traps to
remove any O2 from the carrier gas.
5 Reagents
5.1 Calibration and Linearity Gases.
Standard cylinder gas mixtures for each
compound of interest with at least three
concentration levels spanning the range of
suspected sample concentrations. The
calibration gases shall be prepared in helium.
5.2 Carrier Gas. Helium, high-purity.
6 Analysis
6.1 Sample Collection. Use the sample
c ollection procedures described in Methods
3 or 25C to collect a sample of landfill gas
(LFG).
6.2 Preparation of GC. Before putting the
GC, analyzer into routine operation, optimize
the operational conditions according to the
manufacturer's specifications to provide good
resolution and minimum analysis time
Establish the appropriate carrier gas flow and
set the detector sample and reference cell
flow rates at exactly the same levels. Adjust
the column and detector temperatures to the
recommended levels. Allow sufficient time
foi temperature stabilization. This may
typically require 1 hour for each change in
temperature.
6.3 Analyzer Linearity Check and
( alibration. Perform this test before sample
analysis. Using the gas mixtures in section
5 i, verify the detector linearity over the
range of suspected sample concentrations
with at least three points per compound of
interest This initial check may also serve as
the initial instrument calibration. All
subsequent calibrations may be performed
using a single-point standard gas provided
the calibration point is within 20 percent of
the sample component concentration. For
each instrument calibration, record the
carrier and detector flow rates, detector
fil.iment and block temperatures, attenuation
factor, injection time, chart speed, sample
loop volume, and component concentrations.
Plot a linear regression of the standard
e oicentrations versus area values to obtain
the response factor of each compound
Alternatively, response factors of uncorrected
component concentrations (wet basis) may be
generated using instrumental integration.
Note: Peak height may be used instead of
peak area throughout this method.
6.4 Sample Analysis. Purge the sample
loop with sample, and allow to come to
atmospheric pressure before each injection
Analyze each sample in duplicate, and
calculate the average sample area (A) The
results are acceptable When the peak areas for
two consecutive injections agree within 5
percent of their average. If they do not agree,
run additional samples until consistent area
data are obtained. Determine the tank sample
concentrations according to section 7.2.
7 Calculations
Carry out calculations retaining at least one
extra decimal figure beyond that of the
acquired data. Round off results only after
the final calculation.
7.1 Nomenclature.
A = average sample area
B„ = moisture content in the sample, fraction
C = component concentration in the sample,
dry basis, ppmv
Ct = calculated NMOC concentration, ppmv
C equivalent
C,m = measured NMOC concentration, ppmv
C equivalent
Pb,,r = barometric pressure, mm Hg
P„ = gas sample tank pressure after
evacuation, mm Hg absolute
P, = gas sample tank pressure after sampling,
but before pressurizing, mm Hg absolute
P,i = final gas sample tank pressure after
pressurizing, mm Hg absolute
Pw = vapor pressure of H2O (from table 3C-
1), mm Hg
T„ = sample tank temperature before
sampling, °K
T, = sample tank temperature at completion
of sampling, °K
T„ = sample tank temperature after
pressurizing, °K
r = total number of analyzer injections of
sample tank during analysis (where j =
injection number, 1 . ¦ r)
R = Mean calibration response factor for
specific sample component, area/ppmv
Table 3C-1—Moisture
Correction
B,„ = A.
bar
Temperature CC
4 .
6 .
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
Vapor Pres-
sure of
H2O, mm
Hg
6.1
7.0
8.0
9.2
10.5
12 0
13.6
15 5
17.5
19.8
22.4
25.2
28.3
31.8
7.2 Concentration of Sample
Components. Calculate C for each compound
using Equations 3C-1 and 3C-2. Use the
temperature and barometric pressure at the
sampling site to calculate Bw. If the sample
was diluted with helium using the
procedures in Method 25C, use Equation 3C-
3 to calculate the concentration.
c =
c =
p p
11 _ tl
T T
At u
R(l-Bw)
3C-1
3C-2
3C-3
8. Bibliography
1. McNair, H.M., and E.J. Bonnelli. Basic
Gas Chromatography. Consolidated Printers,
Berkeley, CA. 1969.
*****
Method 25C—Determination of Nonmethane
Organic Compounds (NMOC) in MSW
Landfill Gases
1. Applicability and Principle
1.1 Applicability. This method is
applicable to the sampling and measurement
of nonmethane organic compounds (NMOC)
as carbon in MSW landfill gases.
1.2 Principle. A sample probe that has
been perforated at one end is driven or
augered to a depth of 1.0 meter below the
bottom of the landfill cover. A sample of the
landfill gas is extracted with an evacuated
cylinder. The NMOC content of the gas is
determined by injecting a portion of the gas
into a gas chromatographic column to
separate the NMOC from carbon monoxide
(CO), carbon dioxide (CO2). and methane
(CH4); the NMOC are oxidized to CO:,
reduced to CH4, and measured by a flame
ionization detector (FID). In this manner, the
variable response of the FID associated with
different types of organics is eliminated.
2. Apparatus
2.1 Sample Probe. Stainless steel, with
the bottom third perforated. The sample
probe shall be capped at the bottom and shall
have a threaded cap with a sampling
attachment at the top. The sample probe shall
be long enough to go through and extend no
less than 1.0 meter below the landfill cover.
If the sample probe is to be driven into the
landfill, the bottom cap should be designed
to facilitate driving the probe into the
landfill.
2.2 Sampling Train
2 2.1 Rotameter with Flow Control Valve.
Capable of measuring a sample flow rate of
500 ml/min or less (30.5±3.I m3/min). The
control valve shall be made of stainless steel.
2.2.2 Sampling Valve. Stainless steel.
2.2.3 Pressure Gauge U-tube mercury
manometer, or equivalent, capable of
measuring pressure to within 1 mm Hg in the
range of 0 to 1,100 mm Hg.
2.2.4 Sample Tank. Stainless steel or
aluminum cylinder, with a minimum volume
of 4 liters and equipped with a stainless steel
sample tank valve.
2.3 Vacuum Pump. Capable of evacuating
to an absolute pressure of 10 mm Hg
2.4 Purging Pump. Portable, explosion
proof, and suitable for sampling NMOC.
-------
9942 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
2.5 Pilot Probe Procedure. The following
are needed only if the tester chooses to use
the procedure described in section 4.2.1.
2.5.1 Pilot Probe. Tubing of sufficient
strength to withstand being driven into the
landfill by a post driver and an outside
diameter of at least 6.0 millimeters smaller
than the sample probe. The pilot probe shall
be capped on both ends and long enough to
go through the landfill cover and extend no
less than 1.0 meter into the landfill.
2.5.2 Post Driver and Compressor.
Capable of driving the pilot probe and the
sampling probe into the landfill.
2.6 Auger Procedure. The following are
needed only if the tester chooses to use the
procedure described in section 4.2.2.
2.6.1 Auger. Capable of drilling through
the landfill cover and to a depth of no less
than 0.9 meters into the landfill.
2.6.2 Pea Gravel.
2.6.3 Bentonite.
2.7 NMOC Analyzer, Barometer,
Thermometer, and Syringes. Same as in
sections 2.3, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 2.4.4, respectively,
of Method 25.
3. Reagents
3.1 NMOC Analysis. Same as in Method
25, section 3.2.
4.4 Sampling Procedure. Open the
sampling valve and use the purge pump and
the flow control valve to evacuate at least two
sample probe volumes from the system at a
flow rate of 500 ml/min or less (30.5±3.1 m3/
min). Close the sampling valve and replace
the purge pump with the sample tank
apparatus as shown in figure 2. Open the
sampling valve and the sample tank valves
3.2 Calibration. Same as in Method 25,
section 3.4, except omit section 3.4.3.
4 Procedure
4 1 Sample Tank Evacuation and Leak
Check. Conduct the sample tank evacuation
and leak check either in the laboratory or the
field. Connect the pressure gauge and
sampling valve to the sample tank. Evacuate
the sample tank to 10 mm Hg absolute
pressure or less. Close the sampling valve,
and allow the tank to sit for 60 minutes. The
tank is acceptable if no change is noted.
Include the results of the leak check in the
test report.
4.2 Sample Probe Installation. The tester
may use the procedure in sections 4.2.1 or
4.2.2. CAUTION: Since this method is
complex, only experienced personnel should
perform this test. LFG contains methane,
therefore explosive mixtures may exist on or
near the landfill. It is advisable to take
appropriate safety precautions when testing
landfills, such as refraining from smoking
and installing explosion-proof equipment.
4.2.1 Pilot Probe Procedure. Use the post
driver to drive the pilot probe at least 1.0
meter below the landfill cover. Alternative
procedures to drive the probe into the
landfill may be used subject to the approval
of the Administrator.
and, using the flow control valve, sample at
a flow rate of 500 ml/min or less (30.5±3.1
m3/min) until the sample tank gauge pressure
is zero. Disconnect the sampling tank
apparatus and use the carrier gas bypass
valve to pressurize the sample cylinder to
approximately 1,060 mm Hg absolute
pressure with helium and record the final
pressure. Alternatively, the sample tank may
Remove the pilot probe and drive the
sample probe into the hole left by the pilot
probe. The sample probe shall extend not
less than 1.0 meter below the landfill cover
and shall protrude about 0.3 meters above the
landfill cover. Seal around the sampling
probe with bentonite and cap the sampling
probe with the sampling probe cap.
4.2.2 Auger Procedure. Use an auger to
drill a hole through the landfill cover and to
at least 1.0 meter below the landfill cover.
Place the sample probe in the hole and
backfill with pea gravel to a level 0.6 meters
from the surface. The sample probe shall
protrude at least 0.3 meters above the landfill
cover. Seal the remaining area around the
probe with bentonite. Allow 24 hours for the
landfill gases to equilibrate inside the
augered probe before sampling.
4.3 Sample Train Assembly. Prepare the
sample by evacuating and filling the sample
tank with helium three times. After the third
evacuation, charge the sample tank with
helium to a pressure of approximately 325
mm Hg. Record the pressure, the ambient
temperature, and the barometric pressure.
Assemble the sampling probe purging system
as shown in figure 1.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
be pressurized in the lab. If not analyzing for
N2. the sample cylinder may be pressurized
with zero air. Use Method 3C to determine
the percent Nt in the sample Presence of N2
indicates infiltration of ambient air into the
gas sample. The landfill sample is acceptable
if the concentration of N; is less than 20
percent.
Sampling
\fehw
Vent
Flow Control
Vai*
Purge Pump
Landfill Cover Surface
Figura 1. Schematic of stapling prob« purging system.
-------
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 9943
I
Sampling
Piobe
Flow Control
Val/e
Sampling
Valve
&
Rol»ati«r
Sample Piobe
Cap
Landfill Cover Surface
0
Vacuum Gauge
Quick Disconnect
Sample Tank Valve
Sample Tank
a
k
Figure 2. Schematic of stapling train.
4.5 Analysis. The oxidation, reduction,
and measurement of NMOC is similar to
Method 25. Before putting the NMOC
analyzer into routine operation, conduct an
initial performance test. Start the analyzer,
and perform all the necessary functions to
put the analyzer into proper working order.
Conduct the performance test according to
the procedures established in section 5 1.
Once the performance test has been
successfully completed and the NMOC
calibration response factor has been
determined, proceed with sample analysis as
follows'
1.5.1 Daily Operations and Calibration
( hecks. Before and immediately after the
analysis of each set of samples or on a daily
basis (whichever occurs first), conduct a
< alibration test according to the procedures
established in section 5.2 If the criteria of the
daily calibration test cannot be met, repeat
the NMOC analyzer performance test (section
j 1) before proceeding.
1.5.2 Operating Conditions Same as in
Method 25. section 4.4.2
1.5.3 Analysis of Sample Tank Purge the
sample loop with sample, and then inject the
sample Under the specified operating
conditions, the C02 in the sample will elute
m approximately 100 seconds. As soon as the
detector response returns to baseline
following the CO2 peak, switch the carrier gas
flew to backflush, and raise the column oven
temperature to 195 °C as rapidly as possible.
A rate of 30 °C/min has been shown to be
adequate. Record the value obtained for any
measured NMOC. Return the column oven
temperature to 85 °C in preparation for the
next analysis Analyze each sample in
triplicate, and report the average as Clm
•1.6 Audit Samples. Same as in Method
25 section 4.5.
4.7 Deactivation of Sample Probe Holes.
Once sampling has taken place, either plug
the sampling probes with a cap or remove the
probes and refill the hole with cover
material.
5 Calibration and Operational Checks
Maintain a record of performance of each
item
5 1 Initial NMOC Analyzer Performance
Test. Same as in Method 25, section 5.2,
except omit the linearity checks for C02
standards
5.2 NMOC Analyzer Daily Calibration
NMOC response factors, same as in Method
25, section 5.3.2,
6. Calculations
All equations are written using absolute
pressure, absolute pressures are determined
by adding the measured barometric pressure
to the measured gauge of manometer
pressure
6.1 Nomenclature.
EL=moisture content in the sample, fraction
Cv:=measured N2 concentration, fraction
C,=calculated NMOC concentration, ppmv C
equivalent
C,m=measured NMOC concentration, ppmv C
equivalent
Pb=barometric pressure, mm Hg
P„=gas sample tank pressure before sampling,
mm Hg absolute
P,=gas sample tank pressure at completion of
sampling, but before pressurizing, mm
Hg absolute
P„=final gas sample tank pressure after
pressurizing, mm Hg absolute
P„=vapor pressure of H2O (from table 25C-
1), mm Hg
Tu=sample tank temperature before sampling,
°K
T,=sample tank temperature at completion of
sampling, but before pressuring, °K
Tu=sample tank temperature after
pressurizing, °K
r=total number of analyzer injections of
sample tank during analysis (where
j=injection number, 1. . .r)
6.2 Water Correction. Use table 25C-1,
the LFG temperature, and barometric
pressure at the sampling site to calculate Bw.
Table 25C-1.—Moisture
Correction
Temperature, °C
Vapor Pres-
sure of H20,
mm Hg
4
6
6 1
7.0
8.0
92
10.5
12.0
13.6
15.5
17.5
19.8
22.4
25.2
28.3
31.8
8
1
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
6.3 NMOC Concentration. Use the
following equation to calculate the
concentration of NMOC for each sample tank.
-------
9944 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 12, 1996 / Rules and Regulations
T 1 r
c tf ! Vr {)>
t p P / \ tm
— —(l-Bw-CN2)rJ=1
T, T„
7. Bibliography
1. Salon, Albert E., Samuel Witz, and
Robert D. MacPhee. Determination of Solvent
Vapor Concentrations by Total Combustion
Analysis: A Comparison of Infrared with
Flame Ionization Detectors. Paper No. 75-
33.2. (Presented at the 68th Annual Meeting
of the Air Pollution Control Association.
Boston, Massachusetts. June 15-20, 1975.) p.
14.
2. Salon, Albert E., William L. Oaks, and
Robert D. MacPhee. Measuring the Organic
Carbon Content of Source Emissions for Air
Pollution Control Paper No. 74-190.
(Presented at the 67th Annual Meeting of the
Air Pollution Control Association. Denver,
Colorado. June 9-13, 1974 ) p. 25.
[FR Doc. 96-5529 Filed 3-11-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
46 CFR Part 501
The Federal Maritime Commission—
General
AGENCY: Federal Maritime Commission
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Federal Maritime
Commission is revising its statement of
delegations of authorities to include
new authority delegated to the Director
of the Bureau of Economics and
Agreement Analysis to grant or deny
applications for waivers of certain
regulations.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 12, 1996
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Austin L. Schmitt. Director, Bureau of
Economics and Agreement Analysis,
Federal Maritime Commission, 800
North Capitol Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20573-0001, (202) 523-5787.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Docket
No. 94-31, Information Form and Post-
Effective Reporting Requirements for
Agreements Among Ocean Common
Carriers Subject to the Shipping Act of
1984, the Federal Maritime Commission
("Commission") has amended its
regulations set forth in 46 CFR Part 572
governing the filing, processing and
review of agreements among ocean
common carriers subject to the Shipping
Act of 1984. The amended regulations
provide that, upon a showing of good
cause, the Commission may waive any
part of their requirements, and set forth
procedures and standards governing
applications for a waiver.
This rule amends the Commission's
statement of delegations of authorities
in 46 CFR Part 501 to include a new
delegation to the Director of the
Commission's Bureau of Economics and
Agreement Analysis to grant or deny
applications for waivers of the
agreement regulations. Review of the
Director's grant or denial of a waiver is
available under the procedures already
in effect pursuant to 46 CFR 501.21(f).
Notice and opportunity for public
comment were not necessary prior to
issuance of this rule and because it
deals solely with matters of agency
organization and procedure. 5 U.S.C.
553.
List of Subjects in 46 CFR Part 501
Administrative practice and
procedure; authority delegations;
organization and functions; seals and
insignia.
Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 551 —
557, 701-706, 2903 and 6304; 31 U.S.C.
3721; 41 U.S.C. 414 and 418; 44 U.S.C.
501-520 and 3501-3520; 46 U.S.C. app.
801-848, 876, 1111 and 1701-1720;
Reorganization Plan No. 7 of 1961, 26
FR 7315, August 12, 1961; Pub. L. 89-
56, 79 Stat. 195; and 5 CFR Part 2638,
Part 501 of Title 46, Code of Federal
Regulations, is amended to read as
follows:
PART 501—THE FEDERAL MARITIME
COMMISSION—GENERAL
1. The authority citation for Part 501
continues to read as follows:
Authority 5 U.S.C. 551-557, 701-706,
2903 and 6304; 31 U.S.C. 3721; 41 U.S C. 414
and 418, 44 U.S.C. 501-520 and 3501-3520,
46 U.S.C app 801-848, 876, 1111 and 1701-
1720; Reorganization Plan No 7 of 1961, 26
FR 7315. August 12, 1961: Pub L 89-56. 79
Stat. 195, 5 CFR Part 2638
2. In section 501.26, paragraph (f) is
amended by changing the reference to
"572.404" to "572.406," and by
changing the references to "572.501 and
572.502" to "572.404 and 572.405;"
paragraphs (g) through (m) are
redesignated (i) through (o); newly
redesignated (i) (6) is removed; and new
paragraphs (g) and (h) are added, as
follows:
§ 501.26 Delegation to the Director, Bureau
of Economics and Agreement Analysis.
*****
(g) Authority to grant or deny
applications filed under § 572.505 of
this chapter for waiver of the
information form requirements of
§§ 572.503 and 572.504 of this chapter.
By the Commission
(h) Authority to grant or deny
applications filed under §572.709 of
this chapter for waiver of the reporting
and record retention requirements of
§§572.701, 572.702, 572.703, 572.704,
572.705, 572.706, 572.707 and 572.708
of this chapter.
*****
By the Commission.
Ronald D. Murphy,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-5807 Filed 3-11-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR PART 25
[CC Docket No. 92-166; FCC 96-54]
Mobile Satellite Service in the 1610-
1626.5/2483.5-2500 MHz Frequency
Band
AGENCY: Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule: petition for
reconsideration.
SUMMARY: The Commission has adopted,
upon reconsideration, changes to the
rules and policies establishing service
and licensing rules for the Mobile
Satellite Service in the 1610-1626.5/
2483.5-2500 MHz Frequency Band.
Specifically, we conclude that the
"interim plan," designed to avoid
interference between the Big LEO
systems and the Russian Global
Navigation Satellite System
("GLONASS"), is unnecessary at this
time. We also clarify our views
concerning position determination
capabilities in Big LEO earth terminals,
and modifications to feeder link
proposals. In order to ensure that United
States licensees do not engage in
practices that are contrary to the goal of
competitive markets world-wide, we
also adopt a rule concerning exclusive
arrangements for provision of Big LEO
service. We also clarify our "two-tiered"
processing scheme for financial
qualifications. In addition, we make a
number of minor editorial and clarifying
changes to our technical rules.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 11, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl
Kensinger, International Bureau,
Satellite and Radiocommunication
Division, Satellite Policy Branch, (202)
418-0773.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission 's
Memorandum Opinion and Order in CC
Docket No. 92-166; FCC 96-54, adopted
February 12, 1996 and released
February 15, 1996. The complete text of
this Memorandum Opinion and Order is
-------
APPENDIX A2
Amendments to Subparts Cc and WWW appeared as a direct final notice
in the Federal Register on June 16, 1998 (63 FR 32743) and can also be found
on the internet at http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/1998/June
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16, 1998/Rules and Regulations 32743
transiting the ICW once the last tall ship
in the parade clears the Savannah River
and Fields Cut junction.
(3) From 2 p.m. until 5 p.m. EDT on
July 3, 1998, and from 8 a.m. until 11
a m EDT on July 6, 1998, all waters
bounded by the south bank of the
Savannah River to the center of the
Savannah River Channel, from the
Talmadge Bridge to position 32-04.45,
081-04.45W. During these times no
vessel shall be allowed to enter these
safety zones unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port
(4) From 9 p.m. to 11 p.m. EDT on
July 4, 1998, a 300 foot radius around
a fireworks staging area in approximate
position 32-05N, 081-05W. During this
time no vessel shall be allowed to enter
this safety zone unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port.
(5) From 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. EDT on July
6 1998, the center 300 feet of the
Savannah River channel from the
Talmadge Bridge to the entrance of
Bloody Point Range. Vessels that cannot
safely navigate outside of this safety
zone and desire to depart the port of
Savannah on July 6, 1998, would be
required to begin the outbound transit
m sufficient time to clear the Savannah
Riverfront area prior to 8 a m. Vessels
that cannot safely navigate outside of
this safety zone and desire to enter the
port of Savannah on July 6, 1998. would
be required to clear the Savannah
Riverfront area prior to 8 a.m. If unable
tci clear the Savannah Riverfront area by
8am., these vessels would be required
to start the inbound transit after 2pm
I he Captain of the Port will allow vessel
ti affic to resume outbound transits
utilizing the entire navigational channel
when the last tall ship in the parade
c ears longitude 080-51W Vessels using
the ICW will not be allowed to cross the
savannah River at the junction of the
f lelds Cut once the parade approaches
within one (1) nautical mile of this area
\ essels will be allowed to resume
transiting the ICW once the last tall ship
;r i the parade clears the Savannah River
a id Fields Cut junction.
(6) From 10 a.m to 2 p.m. EDT on
lulv 6, 1998, an area bounded by 32-
00T9N, 080-44 07W, 31-59.35N, 080-
4 3.08W, 32-00.59N, 080-41.32W, and
3>-01.43N, 080-42.28W. During this
time no vessel shall be allowed to enter
tl lis safety zone unless authorized by the
C aptain of the Port.
Note: The regulations specified in
paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(6) apply only within
tl e navigable waters of the United States In
tl e waters within the offshore staging area
and pre-race staging area that are outside the
navigable waters of the United States, the
following nonobligatory guidelines apply
(i) All unaffiliated Americas' Sail
vessels should remain clear of the
staging area and pre-race staging area
and avoid interfering with any
Americas' Sail participant or Coast
Guard vessel. Interference with
anchoring or race activities may
constitute a safety hazard warranting
cancellation or termination of all or part
of the Americas' Sail activities by the
Captain of the Port.
(ii) Any unauthorized entry into these
zones by unaffiliated vessels constitutes
a risk to the safety of marine traffic.
Such entry will constitute a factor to be
considered in determining whether a
person has operated a vessel in a
negligent manner in violation of 46
U S.C. 2302.
(b) Regulations. In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23 of
this part, entry into these safety zones
is subject to the following requirements:
(1) These safety zones are closed to all
non-participating vessels, except as may
be permitted by the Captain of the Port
or a representative of the Captain of the
Port.
(2) The "representative of the Captain
of the Port'' is any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant or petty officer
who has been designated by the Captain
of the Port, Savannah, GA, to act on his
behalf. The representative of the Captain
of the Port will be aboard either a Coast
Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel.
(3) Non-participating vessel operators
desiring to enter or operate within the
safety zone shall contact the Captain of
the Port or his representative to obtain
permission to do so. Vessel operators
given permission to enter or operate in
the safety zone shall comply with all
directions given them by the Captain of
the Port or his representative.
(4) The Captain of the Port may be
contacted by telephone via the
Command Duty Officer at (912) 652-
4353. Vessels assisting in the
enforcement of the safety zone may be
contacted on VHF-FM channel 16.
Vessel operators may determine the
restrictions in effect for the safety zone
by coming alongside a Coast Guard
vessel patrolling the perimeter of the
safety zone
(5) The Captain of the Port Savannah
will issue a Marine Safety Information
Broadcast Notice to Mariners to notify
the maritime community of the safety
zones and restrictions imposed.
(c) Dates This section becomes
effective at 9 a.m , Eastern Daylight
Time (EDT) on July 2, 1998, and
terminates at 2 p m., EDT on July 6,
1998.
Dated June 3. 1998
R.E. Seebald,
Commander, U S Coast Guard, Captain of
the Port, Savannah, Georgia
[FR Doc 98-15965 Filed 6-15-98, 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-M
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[AD-FRL-6106-8]
Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources and Guidelines for
Control of Existing Sources: Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
SUMMARY: This action amends, corrects
errors, and clarifies regulatory text of
the "Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources and Guidelines for
Control of Existing Sources: Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills," which was
issued as a final rule and guideline on
March 12, 1996
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will become
effective August 17, 1998 without
further notice unless the Agency
receives relevant adverse comment by
July 16, 1998. Should the Agency
receive such comments, it will publish
a timely document withdrawing this
rule.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be
submitted (in duplicate if possible) to
Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center (MC-6102), Attn.
Docket No A-88-09/Category V-D, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401
M Street, SW., Washington. DC 20460.
The EPA request that a separate copy-
also be sent to the contact person listed
below. Refer to SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for information regarding
electronic submittal of comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information concerning this notice and
analyses performed in developing this
rule, contact Ms. Michele Laur, Waste
and Chemical Processes Group,
Emission Standards Division (MD-13),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park. North Carolina
2771 1, telephone number (919) 541 —
5256. For implementation issues,
contact Mary Ann Warner, Program
Review Group, Information Transfer and
Program Integration Division (MD-12),
U.S Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711, telephone number (919) 541 —
1192 For information on the Landfill
-------
32744 Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16, 1998/Rules and Regulations
Model, contact Susan Thorneloe
through the internet at'
thorneloe.susan@epamail.epa.gov. For
information concerning applicability
and rule determinations, contact the
appropriate regional representative:
Region I
Greg Roscoe, Air Programs Compliance
Branch Chief, U.S. EPA/ASO, Region
I, JFK Federal Building, Boston, MA
02203, (617) 565-3221
Region II
Christine DeRosa, U.S. EPA, Region II,
290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
NY 10007-1866, (212) 637-4022
Region III
James Topsale, U S. EPA/3AP22, Region
III, 841 Chestnut Building,
Philadelphia, PA 10107, (215) 566-
2190
Region IV
R. Douglas Neeley, Chief, Air and
Radiation Technology Branch, U.S.
EPA, Region IV, 61 Forsyth St., SW.,
Atlanta, GA 30303, (404) 562-9105
Region V
George T. Czerniak, Jr., Air Enforcement
Branch Chief, U.S. EPA/5AE-26,
Region V, 77 West Jackson Street,
Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 353-2088
Region VI
John R. Hepola. Air Enforcement Branch
Chief, U.S. EPA, Region VI, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, TX
75202-2733, (214) 655-7220
Region VII
Ward Burns, U.S. EPA/RME. Region VII,
726 Minnesota Avenue/ARTDAPCO.
Kansas City, KS 66101-2728, (913)
551-7960
Region VIII
Vicki Stamper, U S. EPA, Region VIII,
999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO
80202-2466, (303) 312-6445
Region IX
Patricia Bowlin, U.S. EPA/RM HAN/
17211, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street/AIR-4, San Francisco, CA,
(415) 744-1 188
Region X
Catherine Woo, U.S EPA, Region X,
Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards-107, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553-1814
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A
companion proposal to this final rule is
being published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register and
is identical to this direct final rule Any
comments on this direct final rule
should address the companion proposal.
The proposal provides information on
addresses for submittal of comments. If
relevant adverse comments are timely
received, such comments will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule. A document
informing the public that the direct final
rule did not take effect will be
published. If no relevant adverse
comments are timely filed on any
provision of this direct final rule, then
the entire direct final rule will become
effective 60 days from today's Federal
Register document and no further action
will be taken on the companion
proposal published today.
Background
On March 12, 1996 (60 FR 9918), the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) promulgated in the Federal
Register standards of performance for
new sources (NSPS) for municipal solid
waste landfills and emission guidelines
for existing municipal solid waste
landfills. These regulations and
guidelines were promulgated as
subparts WWW and Cc of 40 CFR part
60.
This document revises the wording of
the applicability sections of subparts
WWW and Cc and related definitions to
clarify the intent regarding which
landfills are subject to subpart WWW
versus subpart Cc. This notice also
corrects typographical and cross
referencing errors. A few editorial
modifications are also being made to
clarify the intent of certain provisions
and correct inconsistencies between
different sections of subpart WWW.
These changes do not significantly
modify the requirements of the
regulation.
I. Description of Changes
A Definitions
The NSPS applies to landfills that
commence construction, modification,
or reconstruction on or after May 30,
1991. A definition of "modification" is
being added The definition is specific
to landfills but is consistent with the
intent of section 60.14 of the NSPS
General Provisions. Application of the
NSPS General Provisions to landfills is
problematic due to the fact that a
landfill is not a typical production or
manufacturing facility for which the
General Provisions originally were
written. The following discussion
demonstrates the considerations made
to apply the NSPS General Provisions to
landfills. This limited definition of
modification is uniquely appropriate for
landfills, and EPA does not believe at
this time that such a rationale could be
extended outside the landfill context.
As stated in 40 CFR 60.14(a),
modifications are physical or
operational changes to an existing
facility that result in an increase in the
emissions of any pollutant to which a
standard applies. However, with respect
to landfills, the concept of a physical or
operational change leading to an
increase in emissions is of limited
application, since unlike more
traditional sources of air pollution,
increased emissions at landfills are
based on the amount and character of
waste placed in the landfill, rather than
through physical or operational changes
to equipment or production methods.
Equipment at a landfill is essentially the
landfill itself and while production can
be roughly equated to the amount of
waste placed in the landfill, total
"production" for the entire life of the
facility is controlled through the amount
of design capacity specified in the
permit. Although the amount and
character of waste present at any given
time may vary within the design
capacity constraints set forth in the
permit, emissions over the total life of
the facility depend on the amount of
waste a landfill can accept pursuant to
its permitted design capacity.
Accordingly, for landfills, it makes
sense to consider only those physical or
operational changes that increase the
size of the landfill beyond its permitted
capacity as modifications subjecting an
existing facility to the NSPS. Therefore,
if the design capacity of a landfill
increases, a change leading to an
increase in emissions is assumed to
have occurred. For purposes of this
NSPS, a landfill is considered modified
and subject to the NSPS if its design
capacity has been increased after May
30, 1991
Operational changes at landfills, such
as increasing the moisture content of the
waste, increasing the physical
compaction on the surface, changing the
cover material or thickness of daily
cover, and changing bailing or
compaction practices, can typically be
accomplished without a capital
expenditure. Consequently, the landfill
definition of modification does not
include such operational changes.
Existing landfills that make an
operational change but do not increase
the horizontal or vertical dimensions of
the landfill continue to be subject to the
emission guidelines rather than the
NSPS. Therefore, for landfills, the only
change which would constitute a
modification is an increase in design
capacity caused by an increase in the
permitted horizontal or vertical
dimensions of the landfill.
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16, 1998/Rules and Regulations 32745
Reconstructions are unlikely for
landfills. As specified in the NSPS
General Provisions, reconstructions are
"the replacement of components of an
existing facility [landfill] to such an
extent that' the fixed capital cost of the
new components exceeds 50 percent of
the fixed capital cost of a comparable
entirely new facility [landfill] * *
The Agency knows of no situation
where this would occur at a landfill.
The definition of "design capacity" is
being amended to clarify that the design
capacity is determined by the most
recent permit issued by the State, local,
or Tribal agency responsible for
regulating the landfill plus any in-place
waste not accounted for in that permit
This clarification addresses cases where
a landfill may have multiple permits. It
makes sense to use the most recent
permitted design capacity to determine
whether a landfill exceeds the design
capacity exemption level. The words
construction or operating" permit have
also been deleted and substituted with
the word "permit." The use of the term
"operating permit" could be
misinterpreted to mean a title V permit
The permit intended was the State,
local, or Tribal agency permit that
establishes the design capacity.
The definition of design capacity is
also being clarified to state that a permit
may express design capacity on a
volumetric or a mass basis. The revised
definition also states that the owner or
operator may choose to convert the
design capacity from volume to mass or
from mass to volume, using a site-
specific density, in order to demonstrate
[hat the design capacity is less than 2 5
million Mg or 2.5 million m3. If the
density changes, the design capacity
changes. Therefore, an owner or
operator who converts from volume to
inass or mass to volume must annually
calculate the site-specific density These
ic visions to the definition are
clarifications that do not change the
intent of the NSPS and emission
guidelines as promulgated on March 12,
1996.
Under the NSPS and emission
guidelines, design capacity is used to
determine whether or not a landfill is
below the design capacity cutoff. If the
design capacity in the permit is below
ei'her 2.5 million megagrams (Mg) or 2.5
million cubic meters (m3), the landfill is
exempt (except for design capacity
reporting requirements). A landfill with
a volumetric permit may choose to
calculate design capacity on a mass
basis (or vice versa) based on a site-
specific density The initial design
capacity report must provide supporting
documentation of this calculation. If
such a conversion is made, records must
also be kept of the annual recalculation
of the site-specific density and design
capacity with supporting
documentation.
For example, a landfill may have a
permitted design capacity greater than
2.5 million m3 by volume; but the
landfill may have documented
calculations showing that, based on the
actual waste density, the design
capacity is less than 2.5 million Mg by
mass. Because the design capacity is
less than 2.5 million Mg, the landfill is
below the design capacity cutoff. If such
a landfill changes its compaction
practices such that the density of the
waste placed in the landfill increases,
the calculated design capacity could
become greater than 2.5 million Mg, and
the landfill would then need to submit
an amended design capacity report. If
the revised design capacity is over 2.5
million m3 and 2.5 million Mg, the
landfill must estimate emissions and
must install controls if emissions are
greater than or equal to 50 Mg/yr.
If an existing landfill makes an
operational change (such as a change in
compaction practices), this is not a
"modification" (see the previous
discussion on the definition of
"modification"). Such a landfill will
continue to be subject to the emission
guidelines rather than becoming subject
to the NSPS. The emission guidelines
require the landfill to report any
increase in design capacity that results
in a capacity equal to or greater than 2 5
million Mg and 2.5 million m3. The
control requirements of the emission
guidelines will apply if the design
capacity increases to over 2.5 million
Mg and 2 5 million m3 due to an
operational change and not due to
modification as defined by this rule
The definition of "closed landfill"
and wording in section 60.752(b) are
being revised to delete references to
section 258.60. This reference is not
appropriate for all landfills because
some landfills closed prior to the
October 1993 effective date of part 258
and are not subject to part 258. Section
60 752 (b) (2) (v) (A) is being revised for
clarification to refer to the definition of
' closed landfill" in section 60.751
instead of the requirements of section
258 60.
The definition of "interior well" is
being revised to clarify that an interior
well is located inside the perimeter of
the landfilled waste.
The definition of "radii of influence"
is being added parenthetically in section
60.759(a)(3)(ii) for clarification. This
definition makes it clear that the radii
of influence is the distance from the
well center to a point in the landfill
where the pressure gradient applied by
the blower or compressor approaches
zero.
B. Designation of Affected Facility
Section 60.750(a) of subpart WWW is
being revised slightly to clarify which
landfills are subject to the NSPS. The
promulgated rule stated that "the
provisions of this subpart apply to each
municipal solid waste landfill that
commenced construction,
reconstruction, or modification or began
accepting waste on or after May 30,
1991. The words "or began accepting
waste" have been deleted. This change
makes the applicability consistent with
both the definition of "new source" in
section 111 of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
and the applicability of the emission
guidelines in section 60.32c of subpart
Cc. As stated in section 60.32c(a), the
emission guidelines apply to landfills
that commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction before
May 30, 1991. A landfill that
commenced construction before May 30,
1991, but began accepting waste after
May 1991 should be subject to the
emission guidelines rather than the
NSPS. The change being made
accomplishes this objective and is
consistent with the CAA. The
definitions of "commenced" and
"construction" are contained in section
60.2 of the NSPS General Provisions
(subpart A). A definition for
"modification" is being added to
subpart WWW, and "reconstruction" is
described in section 60.15 of the NSPS
General Provisions.
Section 60.750(b) of subpart WWW is
being revised to clarify that authority for
test methods are retained by the
Administrator and shall not be
transferred to the State This is
consistent with EPA's historical
position on test methods
Under applicability, we are also
clarifying that activities conducted as
part of CERCLA remedial actions or
RCRA corrective actions are not
considered construction, modification,
or reconstruction and would not make
a landfill subject to the NSPS. This is
consistent with the provisions that
changes made to an existing landfill
solely to comply with the emission
guidelines do not make the landfill
subject to the NSPS It is also consistent
with the exemption of facilities subject
to a CERCLA remedial action from
permitting requirements. This provision
is being added to section 60.750 of
subpart WWW as paragraph (c).
Regarding applicability and the
design capacity exemption, the wording
"or" in several places in section 60 752
has been changed to "and" to clarify
that if a landfill design capacity is less
-------
32746 Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16, 1998/Rules and Regulations
than either 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million
m3, the landfill is exempt from all
provisions except the design capacity
report; whereas if the capacity is equal
to or greater than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5
million m3, the additional requirements
of the rule apply. As previously
discussed under the definition of design
capacity, a landfill may calculate design
capacity on either a mass or volume
basis to determine if it qualifies for the
design capacity exemption.
C. Compliance Dates
The compliance time in section
60.752(b) (2) (ii) is being revised to make
it clear that landfills have 30 months to
install a collection and control system
once the landfill becomes affected (i.e.,
the annual report shows NMOC
emissions equal to or greater than 50
Mg/yr). Section 60.752(b)(2)(ii) stated
that a landfill has 18 months to install
a collection and control system after
submitting a design plan to the
Administrator. Section 60.752 (b) (2) (i)
requires landfills to submit a design
plan within 1 year of the annual report
showing NMOC emissions equal to or
greater than 50 Mg/yr Therefore, the
previous language in the rule would
require landfills that submitted a design
plan earlier than 1 year after becoming
affected to install a collection and
control system sooner than landfills that
waited the full 1 year to submit the
design plan The intent was to allow
landfills 30 months after the first report
showing NMOC emissions equal to or
greater than 50 Mg/yr to install controls.
Similarly, in the emission guidelines,
section 60.36c(a) is revised to specify
that installation of collection and
control systems shall be accomplished
within 30 months of the initial report
showing NMOC emissions equal or
exceed 50 Mg/yr rather than within 30
months of the effective date of the State
rule. This is consistent with the timing
in the NSPS, which allows 90 days to
submit an initial report, and 30 months
to install controls if the report shows
that emissions equal or exceed 50 Mg/
yr-
Section 60.755(b) is being revised to
clarify that an affected landfill must
install each well no later than 60 days
after the date on which the initial solid
waste has been in place (1) for five years
or more if the area is active or (2) two
years or more if the area is closed or at
final grade. The only change is to
specify "no later than 60 days after"
instead of "within 60 days "
D Clarification of Title V Permitting
Requirements
The paragraphs on part 70 permitting
requirements are being revised to refer
to both part 70 and 71. In States with
approved part 70 operating permit
programs, sources will apply for part 70
permits; in States without approved part
70 permit programs, EPA will
implement the federal operating permits
program under part 71.
Section 502(a) of the Act requires title
V operating permits for a number of
sources, including, but not limited to,
major sources and sources (including
nonmajor sources) which are subject to
standards or regulations under section
111 or 112. Section 502(a) also states
that the Administrator may exempt
source categories (in whole or in part)
from permitting requirements if the
Administrator determines that
compliance with such requirements is
impracticable, infeasible, or
unnecessarily burdensome on such
categories, but not major sources.
At promulgation of this NSPS and EG
(61 FR 9905, March 12, 1996), landfills
with a design capacity less than 2.5
million Mg in mass or 2.5 million m3 in
volume were exempted from part 70
operating permit requirements based on
the above provisions. Although these
landfills are required to submit a design
capacity report under this NSPS and EG,
no control is required for landfills of
this size. As a result, EPA believes that
it would be unnecessarily burdensome
for landfills, which are not major
sources and which have design
capacities less than 2.5 million Mg or
2.5 million m3, to apply for a title V
permit when the NSPS or EG does not
establish any emission limits or control
requirements for such landfills.
If a MSW landfill is subject to title V
permitting (40 CFR part 70 or part 71)
as a result of this NSPS or EG standard
(i e , a source which meets or exceeds
the design capacity of 2.5 million Mg
and 2 5 million m3) it is not subject to
the requirement to apply for a title V
permit until 90 days after the earlier of
the following dates; (1) the effective date
of this NSPS (March 12, 1996), (2) the
effective date of EPA's approval of a
state's 111 (d) plan, or (3) the date of
commenced construction, modification,
or reconstruction for landfills that
commence construction, modification,
or reconstruction on or after March 12,
1996, even if the design capacity report
is submitted prior to the relevant
deadline. Sentences have been added to
section 60.752 and section 60.32c(c) to
clarify the date the landfill becomes
subject to title V. These dates for
triggering title V applicability are
consistent with the dates that NSPS
sources are required to file design
capacity reports. To maintain
consistency between NSPS sources and
EG sources, EG sources will not become
subject to the requirement to apply for
a title V permit until 90 days after the
effective date of EPA's approval of a
state's 111 (d) plan.
The permit provisions originally
included as sentences within
paragraphs (a) and (b) of section 60.752
have been moved to separate paragraphs
(c) and (d) so that the detailed permit
provisions are in one location. The
wording has also been revised to clarify
that landfills smaller than 2.5 million
Mg or 2.5 million m3 do not require a
part 70 or 71 operating permit unless
they are subject to part 70 or 71 for some
other reason. A landfill of this size
could be a major source, and, if so,
would need to apply for a permit. This
situation was discussed in the preamble
to the promulgated rule (61 FR 9912:,
March 12, 1996). Also, a landfill of this
size could be subject to title V for some
other reason, e.g., subject to another
NSPS or NESHAP.
Sources subject to the title V
permitting program under parts 70 or 71
are required to file applications within
12 months after becoming subject to the
program. Landfills which are subject to
the title V permitting program as a result
of being subject to this NSPS or EG are
required to file title V applications
within 12 months following the
deadline to submit a design capacity
report (which indicates that the landfill
in question is equal to, or greater than,
2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3). In
that the designation of size in the report
triggers title V applicability. EPA
believes that it is appropriate that the
deadline for filing this report initiates
the 12 month time frame for submitting
a title V application As provided in
section 503(c) of the Act, permitting
authorities may establish earlier
deadlines, prior to the 12 month
deadline, for submitting title V
applications. If more than one
requirement causes a source to be
subject to title V permitting, the time
frame for filing a title V application will
be triggered by the requirement which
first caused the source to be subject to
title V.
Section 60.752(d) (formerly the last
sentence in section 60.752(b)) is being
revised. This paragraph stated that after
a landfill is closed and either never
required a control system or has met the
criteria for control system removal, a
title V permit is no longer needed. The
phrase "if the landfill is not otherwise
subject to the requirements of either part
70 or 71" has been added, As previously
discussed, if a landfill is a major source
or is subject to title V for some other
reason (e.g., subject to another NSPS or
NESHAP). it will still require a permit.
Other format changes to this paragraph
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16, 1998/Rules and Regulations 32747
are to improve clarity and do not change
the intent.
Subpart Cc is being amended by
adding paragraphs (c) and (d) to section
60 32c. These paragraphs, which cover
when existing MSW landfills require
part 70 or 71 operating permits, were
excluded from the promulgated
emission guidelines through an
oversight. Part 70 permit provisions
were included in the NSPS, but the
Emission Guidelines inadvertently did
not reference this section of the NSPS.
The inclusion of these paragraphs
makes subpart Cc consistent with
subpart WWW with respect to part 70 or
71 operating permits. Specifically,
paragraph (c) clarifies that an existing
landfill smaller than 2.5 million Mg or
2.5 million m3 does not require a part
70 or 71 operating permit unless it is
subject to part 70 or 71 for some other
reason. Paragraph (c) also clarifies that
an existing landfill equal to or greater
than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3
is subject to part 70 or 71 permitting
requirements whether it is a major
source or not. In addition, paragraph (d)
clarifies that closed landfills that are
only required to have title V permits
due to 40 CFR part 60, subparts WWW
or Cc and are not required to have a
control system or meet the conditions
fo- control system removal are not
required to have part 70 or 71 operating
permits, if they are not otherwise
subject to title V permitting
requirements. As with 40 CFR part 60,
subpart WWW, under 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Cc, the deadline for submitting
a design capacity report initiates the
rune frame for submitting a title V
application. Permitting authorities may,
however, establish earlier dates by
\\ iich applications are required from
these title V sources.
E Equations
Section 60.754(a)(1) is being revised
to clarify that both the equation in
se ction 60 754 (a) (1) (l) and the equation
in section 60.754(a)(1) (ii) may be used
\\ iien the actual year-to-year solid waste
acceptance rate is known for only part
of the life of the landfill. This is the
technically correct way to calculate
emissions and was the intent of the rule
Section 60.754(a)(1) is being amended
b\ the addition of the methane
generation rate constant (k) for
geographical areas with low
precipitation. A k value of 0.02 per year
is provided for the tier 1 calculation for
landfills located in geographical areas
\\ :th a thirty year annual average
precipitation of less than 25 inches, as
measured at the nearest representative
official meteorologic site. Landfills
located in geographical areas with low
precipitation experience slower
decomposition of their waste than
landfills located in geographical areas
with moderate to high rainfall.
Consequently, the gas production rate at
landfills located in drier areas is
reduced. Rather than burden these
landfills with pursuing tier 3 Method 2E
testing and analysis for a site-specific k
value, it is reasonable to allow an
alternative default k value. In reviewing
the information used to estimate the
impacts of the final rule (Docket A-88-
09, Item IV-M-4), a k value of 0.02 per
year for landfills that meet this
description is a reasonably conservative
value consistent with the intent of the
tier 1 analysis.
Sections 60.754 (a) (1) (i) and (ii) are
also being revised to clarify that only
documentation of the nature and
amount of nondegradable waste needs
to be maintained when subtracting the
mass of nondegradable waste from the
total mass of waste when calculating the
NMOC emission rate. The previous
language specified that the
documentation provisions of section
60.758(d)(2) were to be followed;
however, these provisions are related to
segregated areas within the landfill
excluded from collection pursuant to
section 60 759(a) (3) (i) or (ii) because
asbestos or other nondegradable wastes
were disposed in those areas or because
the area is nonproductive. For the
purposes of estimating emissions, only
documentation of the nature and
amount of nondegradable waste needs
to be maintained to justify the
subtraction of the mass of
nondegradable waste.
F Test Methods and Procedures
Section 60.754 (a) (4) (ii) is revised to
clarify that the site-specific methane
generation rate constant is calculated
only once and that this value is to be
used in all subsequent annual NMOC
emission rate calculations.
Section 60.752 (b) (2) (iii) (B) is being
revised to clarify that the initial
performance test required under section
60 8 must be completed no later than
180 days after the initial startup of the
approved control system. The
promulgated regulation already required
under section 60.757(f) that the initial
performance test report must be
submitted within 180 days of start-up of
the collection system. This is being
reiterated in section 60.752(b)(2) (iii) (B)
for clarification.
Section 60.759(a)(3)(ii), which
required the use of the values of k and
CNMOC determined by field testing, if
performed to determine the NMOc
emission rate or radii of influence, is
being revised to also refer to alternative
means for determining k or Cnmoc
allowed by section 60.754(a)(5). The
reference to using Lc values from testing
is deleted because it was incorrect. The
tier procedures do not include testing
for L0. As previously mentioned, the
definition of radii of influence is being
added parenthetically for clarity.
G. Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Determination
Section 60.754(c) is being revised to
clarify that the intent of this provision
was to establish the method by which
prevention of significant deterioration
determinations should be made, not to
require a PSD determination. The
original wording could have been
misinterpreted to require PSD-related
actions. PSD is a separate permit
program that applies to new and
modified sources. The PSD regulations,
not this NSPS, establish whether a PSD
determination is needed. New sources
may be subject to PSD review.
In a July 1, 1994 guidance
memorandum issued by the EPA
(available on the Technology Transfer
Network; see "Pollution Control Projects
(PCP) and New Source Review (NSR)
Applicability" from John S. Seitz,
Director, OAQPS to EPA Regional Air
Division Directors), the EPA provided
guidance for permitting authorities on
the approvability of PCP exclusions for
source categories other than electric
utilities. In the guidance, the EPA
indicated that add-on controls and fuel
switches to less polluting fuels meet the
definition of a PCP and, provided
certain safeguards are met, may qualify
for an exclusion from major NSR. To be
eligible to be excluded from otherwise
applicable major NSR requirements, a
PCP must, on balance, be
"environmentally beneficial." and the
permitting authority must ensure that
the project will not cause or contribute
to a violation of a national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS) or PSD
increment, or adversely affect visibility
or other air quality related value
(AQRV).
A potential exclusion available under
PSD is discussed here for informational
purposes. In the July 1, 1994 guidance
memorandum, the EPA specifically
identified the installation of controls
pursuant to the NSPS and EG rules as
an example of add-on controls that
could be considered a PCP and an
appropriate candidate for a case-by-case
exclusion from major NSR. The EPA
considers installation of controls
pursuant to the NSPS and EG rules for
the control of landfill gases a PCP
because the controls are installed to
comply with the NSPS and will reduce
emissions of NMOC. The EPA also
-------
32748 Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16, 1998/Rules and Regulations
considers the reduction of these
pollutants to represent an
environmental benefit. However, EPA
recognizes that the incidental formation
of nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide
due to the destruction of landfill gas
will occur. Consistent with the 1994
guidance, the permitting authority
should confirm that in each case that
the resultant increase in nitrogen oxides
and carbon monoxide would not cause
or contribute to a violation of the
NAAQS and PSD increment or
adversely affect an AQRV.
Finally, the 1994 guidance did not
void or create an exclusion from any
applicable minor source preconstruction
review requirements in an approved
State Implementation Plan (SIP). Any
minor NSR permitting requirements in a
SIP would continue to apply, regardless
of any exclusion from major NSR that
might be approved for a source under
the PCP exclusion policy.
H. Monitoring
Section 60.756(a) is being revised to
clarify that a temperature measuring
device does not need to be permanently
installed at each wellhead. It is common
for wellheads to have an access port for
temperature measurements so that a
temperature measuring device can be
shared across wellheads for the monthly
temperature monitoring requirement. As
long as the temperature is monitored
monthly, the intent of the regulation is
met
Section 60.756(b)(2) is also being
revised to clarify that the device for
monitoring gas flow need only record
the flow or bypass, not necessarily
measure the rate at which gas is flowing
to the control device.
I. Compliance Provisions
Section 60.755(a)(3) is being revised
to allow an alternative timeline to be
proposed for correcting an exceedance
in collection header pressure at each
well. Consistent with section
60 7 55(c) (4) (v), a sentence is being
added to sections 60.755(a)(3) and
60.755(a)(5) to allow an alternate
timeline to be proposed to the
Administrator for correcting an
exceedance. This revision makes the
sections consistent. Depending on the
remedy selected to correct the problem,
a different timeline may be needed, but
any timeline extending more than 120
days must be approved by the regulatory
agency.
Section 60.755(c)(1) is being revised
slightly to indicate that surface
monitoring of methane shall be
performed along the entire perimeter of
the collection area and along a pattern
that traverses the landfill at 30-meter
intervals. This change makes the
wording consistent with other sections
of the rule (e.g., section 60.753(d)).
J. Recordkeeping and Reporting
Sections 60.757(a)(1) and (b)(1)(i) are
being revised to clarify that subject
landfills that commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction after
May 30, 1991 (date of proposal) but
before the date of promulgation had
until June 10, 1996 (90 days from the
promulgation date) to submit an initial
design capacity report and an initial
NMOC emission rate report to the
Administrator. The previous language
was not clear as to when landfills that
commenced construction, modification,
or reconstruction between proposal and
promulgation would be required to
submit an initial design capacity report
or NMOC emission rate report.
However, it is obvious that the reports
could not be required prior to
promulgation of the regulation.
Therefore, instead of submitting the
reports 90 days after commencing
construction, landfills that were
constructed before promulgation have
90 days after the promulgation date to
submit the reports.
Also paragraphs (a) (1) (i) and (ii) in the
promulgated rule were somewhat
repetitive and contradictory. Paragraph
(a) (1) (iii) reflected an unrealistic
scenario in that this date would always
occur later than the date in paragraphs
(a)(1)(i) and (ii). For this reason, the
previous paragraph (a)(1) (iii) was
unnecessary and confusing. Therefore,
that paragraph has been deleted, and
paragraphs (a) (1) (i) and (ii) have been
revised to state that the report is due on
June 10, 1996 or within 90 days after the
date of commencement of construction,
modification, or reconstruction,
depending on when the construction,
modification, or reconstruction
commenced.
The wording of section 60.757(a) (2) (ii)
is being revised to require calculation of
design capacity submitted as part of the
design capacity report to include
"relevant parameters" rather than the
specific list of parameters in the
promulgated rule. Some of the
previously listed parameters (e.g.,
compaction practices) would not apply
to landfills that calculate design
capacity on a volumetric rather than
mass basis. Other parameters that were
not listed will be needed to perform the
calculation in some cases.
The wording of section 60.757(a) (3),
which requires amended design
capacity reports, is being revised for
clarity and consistency with the
definitions of modification and design
capacity discussed under I.A. It also
clarifies that a report is required only if
capacity increases above 2.5 million Mg
and 2.5 million m3. This was the
original intent, but the original wording
was confusing.
Several paragraphs in section 60.758
are being revised to clarify that the
recordkeeping requirements in
paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) do not
apply if an alternative to the operational
standards, test methods, procedures,
compliance measures, monitoring, or
reporting provisions has been submitted
with the design plan and approved by
the Administrator.
II. Cross-Referencirig and
Typographical Errors
Errors in cross-referencing one section
to another within subpart WWW are
being corrected. Typographical errors
are also being corrected
III. Corrections to Promulgation
Preamble
Tables 3 and 5 in the promulgation
preamble contained typographical
errors. The units for the small size cutoff
(column 1) are stated to be in millions
of megagrams (millions Mg); however,
the values presented are actually in
megagrams These tables are corrected
and provided below for clarification
Table 3—Alternative Design Capacity Exemption Level Options for the Emission Guidelines313
Small size cutoff
(mg)
Baselinec
Number
landfills af-
fected
Annual'
NMOC
emission
reduction
(Mg/yr)
Annuald
methane
emission
reduction
(Mg/yr)
Annual cost
(million $/yr)
NMOC av-
erage cost
eff.
($/Mg)
NMOC in-
cremental
cost eff
($/Mg)
1,145
1,178
1,500
3,000,000
2,500,000
1,000,000
273
312
572
73,356
77,600
97,600
3,220,000
3,370,000
3,990,000
84
89
119
1,145
1,147
1,219
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16. 1998/Rules and Regulations 32749
Table 3—Alternative Design Capacity Exemption Level Options for the Emission Guidelinesab—Continued
Small size cutoff
(mg)
Number
landfills af-
fected
Annualc
NMOC
emission
reduction
(Mg/yr)
Annuald
methane
emission
reduction
(Mg/yr)
Annual cost
(million $/yr)
NMOC av-
erage cost
eff.
($/Mg)
NMOC in-
cremental
cost eff.
($/Mg)
No cutoff'
7,299
142,000
8,270,000
719
5,063
13,514
j Emission rate cutoff level of 50 Mg NMOC/yr.
b All values are fifth year annualized.
' NMOC emission reductions are from a baseline of 145,000 Mg NMOC/yr.
d Methane emission reductions are from a baseline of 8,400,000 Mg methane/yr.
c In the absence of an emission guidelines.
1 No emission rate cutoff and no design capacity exemption level
Table 5.—Alternative Design Capacity Exemption Level Options for the New Source Performance
Standardsab
Small size cutoff
(nng)
Baseline £
Number
landfills af-
fected
Annualc
NMOC
emission
reduction
(Mg/yr)
Annuald
methane
emission
reduction
(Mg/yr)
Annualc cost
(million $/yr)
MNOC av-
erage cost
etf.
($/Mg)
MNOC' in-
cremental
cost eff.
($/Mg)
3,000,000
41
4,900
193,000
4
816
NA
2,500,000
43
4,900
193,000
4
816
NA
1,000,000
89
4,900
193,000
4
816
NA
No cutoffh
872
13,115
881,000
81
6,176
NA
¦' Emission rate cutoff level of 50 Mg NMOC/yr.
h All values are fifth year annualized.
> NMOC emission reductions are from a baseline of 13,400 Mg NMOC/yr.
1 Methane emission reductions are from a baseline of 899,000 Mg methane/yr.
• Due to rounding off to the nearest million dollar, cost values do not appear to change for each option. However, actual costs are slightly less
for a less stringent option.
Because the annual cost does not change enough to show a different cost from one option to the next, incremental cost effectiveness values
are not applicable.
-¦ In the absence of a standard.
>• No emission rate cutoff and no design capacity exemption level.
IV. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
judicial review of the actions taken by
tins final rule is available only on the
filing of a petition for review in the U S
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit within 60 days of
today's publication of this action. Under
sertion 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the
requirements that are subject to today's
document may not be challenged later
in civil or criminal proceedings brought
b\ EPA to enforce these requirements
V. Administrative
A Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements of the previously
promulgated NSPS were submitted to
and approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). A copy
of this Information Collection Request
(1C R) document (OMB control number
1557.03) may be obtained from Sandy
Farmer, OPPE Regulatory Information
Division; U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (2137); 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460 or by calling
(202) 260-2740.
Today's changes to the NSPS should
have no impact on the information
collection burden estimates made
previously The changes consist of new
definitions and clarifications of
requirements; not additional
requirements. Consequently, the ICR has
not been revised.
B Executive Order 12866 Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency
must determine whether a regulatory
action is ' significant" and therefore
subject to Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) review and the
requirements of this Executive Order.
The Order defines "significant
regulatory action" as one that is likely
to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken
or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user fees,
or loan programs, or the rights and
obligation of recipients thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order
Pursuant to the terms of Executive
Order 12866, it has been determined
that this action is not significant '
because none of the listed criteria apply
to this action. Consequently, this action
was not submitted to OMB for review
under Executive Order 12866.
C Regulatory Flexibility
EPA has determined that it is not
necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with
this direct final rule. EPA has also
determined that this direct final rule
amendment will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Today 's action
clarifies the applicability of control
requirements in the Standards of
Performance for New Stationary Sources
and Guidelines for Control of Existing
Sources. Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills and does not include any
-------
32750 Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16, 1998/Rules and Regulations
provisions that create a burden for any
of the regulated entities.
The changes in today's action do not
increase the stringency of the rule or
add additional control requirements.
Nor is the scope of the rule changed so
as to bring any entities not previously
subject to the rule within its scope or
coverage. Today's action does not alter
control, monitoring, recordkeeping, or
reporting requirements of the
promulgated rule.
D. Submission to Congress
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 ef seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. This rule is not a
"major rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
E Executive Order 12875 and Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act
Under the executive order EPA must
consult with representatives of affected
State, local, and Tribal governments.
Under the unfunded mandates reform
act, EPA must prepare a statement to
accompany any rule where the
estimated costs to State, local, or Tribal
governments, or to the private sector,
will be $100 million or more per year
The EPA held consultations and
prepared such a statement at the time of
promulgation of subpart Cc and WWW
(61 FR 9913, March 12, 1996) Today's
changes consist of new definitions and
clarifications and do not impose costs
on government entities or the private
sector. Consequently, a new unfunded
mandates statement has not been
prepared.
F Children's Health Protection
This direct final rule is not subject to
E.O. 13045, entitled "Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it does not
involve decisions on environmental
health risks or safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection, Municipal
solid waste landfills, Air pollution
control
Dated May 28, 1998
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter 1, part 60 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 60—STANDARDS OF
PERFORMANCE FOR NEW
STATIONARY SOURCES
1. The authority citation for part 60
continued to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7414,
7416, 7429, and 7601.
Subpart Cc—[Amended]
2. Amend § 60.32c by adding
paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows:
§ 60.32c Designated facilities.
*****
(c) For purposes of obtaining an
operating permit under title V of the
Act, the owner or operator of a MSW
landfill subject to this subpart with a
design capacity less than 2.5 million
megagrams or 2.5 million cubic meters
is not subject to the requirement to
obtain an operating permit for the
landfill under part 70 or 71 of this
chapter, unless the landfill is otherwise
subject to either part 70 or 71. For
purposes of submitting a timely
application for an operating permit
under part 70 or 71, the owner or
operator of a MSW landfill subject to
this subpart with a design capacity
greater than or equal to 2.5 million
megagrams and 2 5 million cubic meters
on the effective date of EPA approval of
the State's program under section 111 (d)
of the Act, and not otherwise subject to
either part 70 or 71, becomes subject to
the requirements of §§ 70 5(a)(1) (i) or
71.5(a) (1) (i) of this chapter 90 days after
the effective date of such 111 (d)
program approval, even if the design
capacity report is submitted earlier.
(d) When a MSW landfill subject to
this subpart is closed, the owner or
operator is no longer subject to the
requirement to maintain an operating
permit under part 70 or 71 of this
chapter for the landfill if the landfill is
not otherwise subject to the
requirements of either part 70 or 71 and
if either of the following conditions are
met
(1) The landfill was never subject to
the requirement for a control system
under §60.33c(c) of this subpart: or
(2) The owner or operator meets the
conditions for control system removal
specified in § 60.752 (b) (2) (v) of subpart
WWW.
3. Amend § 60.33c by removing in
paragraph (a)(2) the phrase "2.5 million
megagrams or 2.5 million cubic meters"
and adding, in its place "2.5 million
megagrams and 2.5 million cubic
meters."
4. Amend § 60.36c by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 60.36c Compliance times.
(a) Except as provided for under
paragraph (b) of this section, planning,
awarding of contracts, and installation
of MSW landfill air emission collection
and control equipment capable of
meeting the emission guidelines
established under § 60.33c shall be
accomplished within 30 months after
the date the initial NMOC emission rate
report shows NMOC emissions equal or
exceed 50 megagrams per year.
*****
Subpart WWW
5. Amend §60,750 as follows:
a. In paragraph (a), remove the words
"or began accepting waste".
b In paragraph (b), remove the word
"None" and add, in its place
"§ 60.754(a) (5)".
c. Add paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
§60.750 Applicability, designation of
affected facility, and delegation of authority.
*****
(c) Activities required by or
conducted pursuant to a CERCLA,
RCRA, or State remedial action are not
considered construction, reconstruction,
or modification for purposes of this
subpart
6. Amend §60.751 as follows:
a. Remove the last sentence in the
definition of "closed landfill."
b. Revise the definitions of
"controlled landfill," "design capacity,"
and interior well" and add a definition
of "modification" to read as follows.
§60.751 Definitions.
*****
Controlled landfill means any landfill
at which collection and control systems
are required under this subpart as a
result of the nonmethane organic
compounds emission rate. The landfill
is considered controlled at the time a
collection and control system design
plan is submitted in compliance with
§60 752(b)(2)(i).
Design capacity means the maximum
amount of solid waste a landfill can
accept, as indicated in terms of volume
or mass in the most recent permit issued
by the State, local, or Tribal agency
responsible for regulating the landfill,
plus any in-place waste not accounted
for in the most recent permit. If the
owner or operator chooses to convert
the design capacity from volume to
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16, 1998/Rules and Regulations 32751
mass or from mass to volume to
demonstrate its design capacity is less
than 2.5 million megagrams or 2.5
million cubic meters, the calculation
must include a site specific density,
which must be recalculated annually.
*****
Interior well means any well or
similar collection component located
inside the perimeter of the landfill
waste. A perimeter well located outside
the landfilled waste is not an interior
well.
*****
Modification means an increase in the
permitted volume design capacity of the
landfill by either horizontal or vertical
expansion based on its permitted design
capacity as of May 30, 1991.
7. Amend § 60.752 by revising
paragraph (a), the introductory text of
paragraph (b), paragraphs (b)(2)(ii),
(b (2) (iii) (B), and (b) (2) (v) (A), and
adding paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as
foilows:
§ 60.752 Standards for air emissions from
municipal solid waste landfills.
(a) Each owner or operator of an MSW
landfill having a design capacity less
than 2.5 million megagrams by mass or
2 5 million cubic meters by volume
shall submit an initial design capacity
report to the Administrator as provided
in § 60.757(a) The landfill may
calculate design capacity in either
megagrams or cubic meters for
comparison with the exemption values.
Any density conversions shall be
documented and submitted with the
report. Submittal of the initial design
rapacity report shall fulfill the
lequirements of this subpart except as
pi jvided for in paragraphs (a)(1) and
(ai (2) of this section
(1) The owner or operator shall
submit to the Administrator an
amended design capacity report, as
pi ovided for in § 60.757(a) (3).
(2) When an increase in the maximum
design capacity of a landfill exempted
fiom the provisions of §60.752(b)
th-ough §60 759 of this subpart on the
basis of the design capacity exemption
in paragraph (a) of this section results in
a revised maximum design capacity
equal to or greater than 2 5 million
megagrams and 2.5 million cubic
meters, the owner or operator shall
comply with the provision of paragraph
(b) of this section
'b) Each owner or operator of an MSW
landfill having a design capacity equal
to or greater than 2.5 million megagrams
and 2.5 million cubic meters, shall
either comply with paragraph (b)(2) of
this section or calculate an NMOC
emission rate for the landfill using the
procedures specified in § 60 754, The
NMOC emission rate shall be
recalculated annually, except as
provided in § 60.757 (b) (1) (Ii) of this
subpart. The owner or operator of an
MSW landfill subject to this subpart
with a design capacity greater than or
equal to 2.5 million megagrams and 2.5
million cubic meters is subject to part
70 or 71 permitting requirements.
(1) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) Install a collection and control
system that captures the gas generated
within the landfill as required by
paragraphs (b) (2) (ii) (A) or (B) and
(b)(2) (iii) of this section within 30
months after the first annual report in
which the emission rate equals or
exceeds 50 megagrams per year, unless
Tier 2 or Tier 3 sampling demonstrates
that the emission rate is less than 50
megagrams per year, as specified in
§60.757(c)(1) or (2).
(iii) * * *
(A) * * *
(B) A control system designed and
operated to reduce NMOC by 98 weight-
percent, or, when an enclosed
combustion device is used for control,
to either reduce NMOC by 98 weight
percent or reduce the outlet NMOC
concentration to less than 20 parts per
million by volume, dry basis as hexane
at 3 percent oxygen. The reduction
efficiency or parts per million by
volume shall be established by an initial
performance test to be completed no
later than 180 days after the initial
startup of the approved control system
using the test methods specified in
§ 60.754(d)
*****
(v! * * *
(A) The landfill shall be a closed
landfill as defined in §60.751 of this
subpart. A closure report shall be
submitted to the Administrator as
provided in § 60.757(d);
*****
(c) For purposes of obtaining an
operating permit under title V of the
Act, the owner or operator of a MSW
landfill subject to this subpart with a
design capacity less than 2.5 million
megagrams or 2.5 million cubic meters
is not subject to the requirement to
obtain an operating permit for the
landfill under part 70 or 71 of this
chapter, unless the landfill is otherwise
subject to either part 70 or 71. For
purposes of submitting a timely
application for an operating permit
under part 70 or 71, the owner or
operator of a MSW landfill subject to
this subpart with a design capacity
greater than or equal to 2.5 million
megagrams and 2.5 million cubic
meters, and not otherwise subject to
either part 70 or 71, becomes subject to
the requirements of §§ 70.5(a)(l)(i) or
71.5(a) (1) (i) of this chapter, regardless of
when the design capacity report is
actually submitted, no later than:
(1) June 10, 1996 for MSW landfills
that commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction on or
after May 30, 1991 but before March 12,
1996;
(2) Ninety days after the date of
commenced construction, modification,
or reconstruction for MSW landfills that
commence construction, modification,
or reconstruction on or after March 12,
1996,
(d) When a MSW landfill subject to
this subpart is closed, the owner or
operator is no longer subject to the
requirement to maintain an operating
permit under part 70 or 71 of this
chapter for the landfill if the landfill is
not otherwise subject to the
requirements of either part 70 or 71 and
if either of the following conditions are
met;
(1) The landfill was never subject to
the requirement for a control system
under paragraph (b)(2) of this section; or
(2) The owner or operator meets the
conditions for control system removal
specified in paragraph (b) (2) (v) of this
section.
8. Amend § 60.753 by revising the
introductory text of § 60.753 and the
second sentence of paragraph (d) and
the first sentence of paragraph (g) to
read as follows.
§60.753 Operational standards for
collection and control systems.
Each owner or operator of an MSW
landfill with a gas collection and control
system used to comply with the
provisions of § 60.752(b) (2) (ii) of this
subpart shall. * * *
(d) * * * To determine if this level is
exceeded, the owner or operator shall
conduct surface testing around the
perimeter of the collection area and
along a pattern that traverses the landfill
at 30 meter intervals and where visual
observations indicate elevated
concentrations of landfill gas, such as
distressed vegetation and cracks or
seeps in the cover * * *
*****
(g) If monitoring demonstrates that the
operational requirements in paragraphs
(b), (c), or (d) of this section are not met,
corrective action shall be taken as
specified in § 60.755(a)(3) through (5) or
§ 60.755(c) of this subpart. * * *
9. Amend §60.754 as follows:
a. In the last sentences of paragraph
(a)(l)(i) and (a) (1)(ii) remove the phrase
"if the documentation provisions of
§ 60 758(d)(2) are followed" and add, in
-------
32752 Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16, 1998/Rules and Regulations
its place, "if documentation of the
nature and amount of such wastes is
maintained";
b. In paragraph (a) (4) (ii) remove the
last sentence and add in its place, "The
calculation of the methane generation
rate constant is performed only once,
and the value obtained from this test
shall be used in all subsequent annual
NMOC emission rate calculations.";
c. In paragraphs (a)(5) and (b)(3)
remove the phrase "as provided in
§60 752(b)(2) (i)(B)";
d. In paragraph (d), remove the words
"Method 25" and add, in its place
"Method 25C";
e. Revise the introductory text of
paragraph (a)(1) and revise paragraph (c)
to read as follows:
§ 60.754 Test methods and procedures.
(a)(1) The landfill owner or operator
shall calculate the NMOC emission rate
using either the equation provided in
paragraph (a) (1) (i) of this section or the
equation provided in paragraph (a) (1) (ii)
of this section. Both equations may be
used if the actual year-to-year solid
waste acceptance rate is known, as
specified in paragraph (a) (1) (i), for part
of the life of the landfill and the actual
year-to-year solid waste acceptance rate
is unknown, as specified in paragraph
(a) (1) (ii), for part of the life of the
landfill. The values to be used in both
equations are 0.05 per year for k, 170
cubic meters per megagram for Lo, and
4,000 parts per million by volume as
hexane for the Cnmoc- For landfills
located in geographical areas with a
thirty year annual average precipitation
of less than 25 inches, as measured at
the nearest representative official
meteorologic site, the k value to be used
is 0.02 per year.
*,***••*
(c) When calculating emissions for
PSD purposes, the owner or operator of
each MSW landfill subject to the
provisions of this subpart shall estimate
the NMOC emission rate for comparison
to the PSD major source and
significance levels in §§ 51.166 or 52.21
of this chapter using AP-42 or other
approved measurement procedures.
*****
10. Amend § 60.755 as follows:
a In paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(5), add
a sentence at the end of each paragraph
reading An alternative timeline for
correcting the exceedance may be
submitted to the Administrator for
approval.",
b. Revise paragraph (a)(4) to read as
follows:
§60.755 Compliance provisions.
(a) * * *
(4) Owners or operators are not
required to expand the system as
required in paragraph (a) (3) of this
section during the first 180 days after
gas collection system startup.
*****
c. In paragraph (b) introductory text,
in the last sentence, remove the phrase
"within 60 days of the date in which"
and add in its place, "no later than 60
days after the date on which";
d. In paragraph (c)(1), delete the
phrase "and along a serpentine pattern
spaced 30 meters apart (or a site-specific
established spacing)" and add in its
place, "and along a pattern that
traverses the landfill at 30 meter
intervals (or a site-specific established
spacing)"
11. Amend § 60.756 as follows:
a. In paragraph (a) introductory text,
remove the phrase "or other
temperature measuring device" and
add, in its place, "other temperature
measuring device, or an access port for
temperature measurements";
b. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the
phrase "an accuracy of" and add in its
place, "a minimum accuracy of';
c. In paragraph (b)(2), introductory
text, remove the phrase "A gas flow rate
measuring device that provides a
measurement of gas flow" and add, in
its place, "A device that records flow";
12. Amend §60.757 by revising
paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), (b)(1)(i)
and (g) introductory text to read as
follows:
§60.757 Reporting requirements.
*****
(a) * * *
(1) The initial design capacity report
shall fulfill the requirements of the
notification of the date construction is
commenced as required by §60 7(a)(1)
and shall be submitted no later than
(1) June 10, 1996, for landfills that
commenced construction, modification,
or reconstruction on or after May 30,
1991 but before March 12, 1996 or
(ii) Ninety days after the date of
commenced construction, modification,
or reconstruction for landfills that
commence construction, modification,
or reconstruction on or after March 12,
1996.
(2) The initial design capacity report
shall contain the following information:
(i) A map or plot of the landfill,
providing the size and location of the
landfill, and identifying all areas where
solid waste may be landfilled according
to the permit issued by the State, local,
or tribal agency responsible for
regulating the landfill.
(ii) The maximum design capacity of
the landfill Where the maximum design
capacity is specified in the permit
issued by the State, local, or tribal
agency responsible for regulating the
landfill, a copy of the permit specifying
the maximum design capacity may be
submitted as part of the report. If the
maximum design capacity of the landfill
is not specified in the permit, the
maximum design capacity shall be
calculated using good engineering
practices. The calculations shall be
provided, along with the relevant
parameters as part of the report. The
State, Tribal, local agency or
Administrator may request other
reasonable information as may be
necessary to verify the maximum design
capacity of the landfill.
(3) An amended design capacity
report shall be submitted to the
Administrator providing notification of
an increase in the design capacity of the
landfill, within 90 days of an increase
in the maximum design capacity of the
landfill to or above 2.5 million
megagrams and 2.5 million cubic
meters. This increase in design capacity
may result from an increase in the
permitted volume of the landfill or an
increase in the density as documented
in the annual recalculation required in
§ 60.758(f).
(b) * * *
(1) * * .
(i) The initial NMOC emission rate
report may be combined with the initial
design capacity report required in
paragraph (a) of this section and shall be
submitted no later than indicated in
paragraphs (b) (1) (i) (A) and (B) of this
section. Subsequent NMOC emission
rate reports shall be submitted annually
thereafter, except as provided for in
paragraphs (b) (1) (ii) and (b)(3) of this
section.
(A) June 10, 1996, for landfills that
commenced construction, modification,
or reconstruction on or after May 30,
1991. but before March 12, 1990, or
(B) Ninety days after the date of
commenced construction, modification,
or reconstruction for landfills that
commence construction, modification,
or reconstruction on or after March 12,
1996
*****
(g) Each owner or operator seeking to
comply with § 60.752(b)(2)(iii) shall
include the following information with
the initial performance test report
required under § 60.8:
*****
13. Amend § 60.758 as follows:
a. Remove the introductory text;
b. At the beginning of paragraphs (a),
(b) introductory text, (c) introductory
text, (d) introductory text, and (e). add
the phrase "Except as provided in
§ 60.752(b)(2)(i) (B),";
-------
Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 115/Tuesday, June 16, 1998/Rules and Regulations 32753
c. In paragraph (a), remove the phrase
"on-site records of the maximum design
capacity" and add, in its place "on-site
records of the design capacity report
which triggered § 60.752(b)";
d. Add paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
§60.758 Recordkeeping Requirements.
*****
(f) Landfill owners or operators who
convert design capacity from volume to
mass or mass to volume to demonstrate
that landfill design capacity is less than
2.5 million megagrams or 2.5 million
cubic meters, as provided in the
definition of "design capacity", shall
keep readily accessible, on-site records
of the annual recalculation of site-
specific density, design capacity, and
the supporting documentation Off-site
records may be maintained if they are
retrievable within 4 hours. Either paper
copy or electronic formats are
acceptable.
14. Amend § 60.759 as follows.
a. In paragraph (a) (3) (iii), remove the
sentence "The values for k, Lo, and
CnmOC determined in field testing shall
be used, if field testing has been
performed in determining the NMOC
emission rate or the radii of influence."
and add, in its place, the sentence "The
\alues for k and CnmOC determined in
fit Id testing shall be used, if field testing
has been performed in determining the
NMOC emission rate or the radii of
influence (the distance from the well
center to a point in the landfill where
the pressure gradient applied by the
blower or compressor approaches
zero)."
b. In paragraph (a)(3)(iii), remove the
sentence "If field testing has not been
performed, the default values for k. Lo.
and CnmOC provided in §60 754(a)(1)
shall be used" and add. in its place, the
sentence If field testing has not been
performed, the default values for k Lo
and CnmOC provided in § 60 754(a)(1)
or the alternative values from
§ 60.754(a)(5) shall be used.
[FR Doc 98-15007 Filed 6-15-98. 8 45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 180,185 and 186
IOPP-300663; FRL-5793-5]
RIN 2070-AB78
Quizalofop-p ethyl ester; Pesticide
Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes
tolerances for combined residues of
quizalofop-p ethyl ester [ethyl (R)-{2-[4-
((6-chloroquinoxalin-2-yl)oxy)phenoxyl]
propanoate), and its acid metabolite
quizalofop-p [(/?)-(2-[4-((6-
chloroquinoxalin-2-
yl)oxy)phenoxyl] propionate) and the S
enantiomers of the ester and the acid, all
expressed as quizalofop-p ethyl ester in
or on canola seed, canola meal,
peppermint tops and spearmint tops.
DuPont Agricultural Products requested
the tolerances for canola and the
Interregional Research Project Number 4
(IR-4) requested the tolerances for
peppermint and spearmint These
tolerances were requested under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act,
as amended by the Food Quality
Protection Act of 1996 (Pub. L 104-170).
DATES: This regulation is effective June
16, 1998. Objections and requests for
hearings must be received by EPA on or
before August 17, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Written objections and
hearing requests, identified by the
docket control number, [OPP-300663],
must be submitted to: Hearing Clerk
(1900), Environmental Protection
Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Fees
accompanying objections and hearing
requests shall be labeled "Tolerance
Petition Fees" and forwarded to: EPA
Headquarters Accounting Operations
Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), P.O Box
360277M. Pittsburgh, PA 15251 A copy
of any objections and hearing requests
filed with the Hearing Clerk identified
by the docket control number, [OPP-
300663], must also be submitted to:
Public Information and Records
Integrity Branch. Information Resources
and Services Division (7502C), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental
Protection Agency. 401 M St . SW.,
Washington, DC 20460 In person, bring
a copy of objections and hearing
requests to Rm. 119, CM #2, 1921
Jefferson Davis Hwy , Arlington, VA.
A copy of objections and hearing
requests filed with the Hearing Clerk
may also be submitted electronically by
sending electronic mail (e-mail) to: opp-
docket@epamail.epa.gov. Copies of
objections and hearing requests must be
submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the
use of special characters and any form
of encryption. Copies of objections and
hearing requests will also be accepted
on disks in WordPerfect 5.1/6.1 file
format or ASCII file format. All copies
of objections and hearing requests in
electronic form must be identified by
the docket control number [OPP-
300663], No Confidential Business
Information (CBI) should be submitted
through e-mail. Electronic copies of
objections and hearing requests on this
rule may be filed online at many Federal
Depository Libraries.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By
mail: Sidney Jackson, Registration
Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington,
DC 20460. Office location, telephone
number, and e-mail address: Crystal
Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy.,
Arlington, VA, (703) 305-7610; e-mail:
jackson.sidney@epamail.epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
Federal Register published on October
29, 1997 (62 FR 56176 (mint)) (FRL-
5749-7) and December 17, 1997, 62 FR
66080 (canola)) (FRL-5758-3), EPA,
issued notices pursuant to section 408
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C 346a(e)
announcing the filing of pesticide
petitions (PP) 6E4652 and 5F4545 for
tolerances by the IR-4 and DuPont
Agricultural Products, Wilmington,
Delaware. These notices included a
summary of the petitions prepared by
DuPont Agricultural Products,
Wilmington, Delaware, the registrant.
There were no comments received in
response to these notices of filing.
The petitions requested that 40 CFR
180.441 be amended by establishing
tolerances for combined residues of the
herbicide quizalofop-p ethyl ester [ethyl
OR)- (2- [4- ((6-chloroquinoxalin-2-
yl)oxy)phenoxyl] propanoate), and its
acid metabolite quizalofop-p [(/?)-(2-[4-
((6-chloroquinoxalin-2-yl)oxy)phenoxyl]
propionate) and the S enantiomers of
the ester and the acid, all expressed as
quizalofop-p ethyl ester, in or on canola
seed at 1 0 part per million (ppm).
canola meal at 1.5 ppm, and peppermint
tops and spearmint tops at 2 0 ppm
I. Risk Assessment and Statutory
Findings
New section 408(b) (2) (A) (i) of the
FFDCA allows EPA to establish a
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide
chemical residue in or on a food) only
if EPA determines that the tolerance is
"safe." Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) defines
"safe" to mean that "there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will
result from aggregate exposure to the
pesticide chemical residue, including
all anticipated dietary exposures and all
other exposures for which there is
reliable information " This includes
exposure through drinking water and in
residential settings, but does not include
occupational exposure. Section
408(b)(2)(C) requires EPA to give special
consideration to exposure of infants and
-------
APPENDIX B
APPLICABLE TEST METHOD NOT ATTACHED TO THE REGULATIONS
METHOD 21
Method 21 is published in 40 CFR Part 60. Appendix A (test methods) of 40 CFR Part 60 can be
found on the internet at http://www.epa.gov/docs/epacfr40/chapt-I.info/subch-C/40P0060.
-------
Pt. 60, App. A, Meth. 21
Conversion Factors for Concentration—
Continued
From
To
Multiply by
PP*n (NOJ
fo/scf
1.194 x 10-7
7.5.1 Calculation of Emission Rate Using Oxygen
Correction Both the O2 concentration and the pollutant
concentration must be on a dry basis. Calculate the pollut-
ant emission rate, as follows:
20.9
E=CdFd 209. ^ 20-6
%02
where:
E=Mass emission rate of pollutant, ng/J (lb/106 Btu).
7.5.2 Calculation of Emission Rate Using Carbon Di-
oxide Correction The CO2 concentration and the pollut-
ant concentration may be on either a dry basis or a wet
basis, but both concentrations must be on the same basis
for the calculations. Calculate the pollutant emission rate
using Equation 20-7 or 20-8:
100
E=CdFc Eq. 20-7
%COz
100
E=CwFc Eq 20-8
%C02w
where'
Cw^Pollutant concentration measured on a moist sample
basis, ftg/sm3 (Ib/scf).
%C02w=Measured CO2 concentration measured on a
moist sample basis, percent.
8. Bibliography
1. Curtis, F A Method for Analyzing NO* Cylinder
Gases-Specific Ion Electrode Procedure, Monograph
available from Emission Measurement Laboratory, ESED,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, October 1978.
2. Sigsby. John E., F M. Black, T. A Bellar, and D
L. Klosterman ChemilumiDescent Method for Analysis of
Nitrogen Compounds in Mobile Source Emissions (NO,
NO2, and NH3) "Environmental Science and Tech-
nology," 7.51-54. January 1973.
3. Shigehara, R.T, R.M. Neulicht, and W S. Smith.
Validating Orsat Analysis Data from Fossil Fuel-Fired
Units. Emission Measurement Branch, Emission Stand-
ards and Engineering Division, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, U S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Tnangle Park, NC 27711. June 1975.
Method 21—Determination of Volatile Organic
Compounds Leaks
1. Applicability• and Principle
1.1 Applicability. This method applies to the deter-
mination of volatile organic compound (VOC) leaks from
process equipment. These sources include, but are not
limited to, valves, flanges and other connections, pumps
and compressors, pressure relief devices, process drains,
open-ended valves, pump and compressor seal system
degassing vents, accumulator vessel vents, agitator seals,
and access door seals.
1.2 Principle. A portable instrument is used to detect
VOC leaks from individual sources. The instrument detec-
tor type is not specified, but it must meet the specifica-
tions and performance criteria contained in Section 3. A
leak definition concentration based on a reference
compound is specified in each applicable regulation. This
procedure is intended to locate and classify leaks only,
and is not to be used as a direct measure of mass emis-
sion rates from individual sources.
2. Definitions
2.1 Leak Definition Concentration. The local VOC
concentration at the surface of a leak source that indicates
that a VOC emission (leak) is present The leak definition
is an instrument meter reading based on a reference
compound.
2.2 Reference Compound. The VOC species selected
as an instrument calibration basis for specification of the
leak definition concentration. (For example* If a leak defi-
nition concentration is 10,000 ppmv as methane, then any
source emission that results in a local concentration that
yields a meter reading of 10,000 on an instrument cali-
brated with methane would be classified as a leak. In this
example, the leak definition is 10,000 ppmv, and the ref-
erence compound is methane.)
2.3 Calibration Gas. The VOC compound used to ad-
just the instrument meter reading to a known value. The
calibration gas is usually the reference compound at a
concentration approximately equal to the leak definition
concentration.
2.4 No Detectable Emission. Any VOC concentration
at a potential leak source (adjusted for local VOC ambient
concentration) that is less than a value corresponding to
the instrument readability specification of section 3.1 1(c)
indicates that a leak is not present.
2.5 Response Factor. The ratio of the known con-
centration of a VOC compound to the observed meter
reading when measured using an instrument calibrated
with the reference compound specified in the application
regulanon
2.6 Calibration Precision, The degree of agreement
between measurements of the same known value, ex-
pressed as the relative percentage of the average dif-
ference between the meter readings and the known con-
centration to the known concentration.
2 7 Response Time. The time interval from a step
change in VOC concentration at the input of the sampling
system to the time at which 90 percent of the correspond-
ing final value is reached as displayed on the instrument
readout meter.
3. Apparatus
3.1 Monitoring Instrument
3.1.1 Specifications.
a. The VOC instrument detector shall respond to the
compounds being processed Detector types which may
meet this requirement include, but are not limited to, cata-
lytic oxidation, flame ionization, infrared absorption, and
photoiomzation.
b. Both the linear response range and the measurable
range of the instrument for each of the VOC to be meas-
ured, and for the VOC calibration gas that is used for
calibration, shall encompass the leak definition concentra-
tion specified in the regulanon. A dilution probe assembly
may be used to bring the VOC concentration within both
188
-------
Pt. 60, App. A, Meth. 21
ranges; however, the specifications for instrument re-
sponse time and sample probe diameter shall still be met
c. The scale of the instrument meter shall be readable
to ±2.5 percent of the specified leak definition concentra-
tion when performing a no detectable emission survey.
d. The instrument shall be equipped with an electrically
driven pump to insure that a sample is provided to the de-
tector at a constant flow rate The nonunai sample flow
rate, as measured at the sample probe tip, shall be 0.10
to 3.0 liters per minute when the probe is fitted with a
glass wool plug or filter that may be used to prevent
plugging of the instrument
e. The instrument shall be intrinsically safe as denned
by the applicable U S.A. standards (e.g.. National Electric
Code by the National Fire Prevention Association) for op-
eration in any explosive atmospheres that may be encoun-
tered in its use The instrument shall, at a minimum, be
intrinsically safe for Class 1, Division 1 conditions, and
Gass 2, Division 1 conditions, as defined by the example
Code The instrument shall not be operated with any safe-
ty device, such as an exhaust flame arrestor, removed.
f. "The instrument shall be equipped with a probe or
probe extension for sampling not to exceed V* in. in out-
side diameter, with a single end opening for admission of
sample
3.1 2 Performance Criteria.
(a) The instrument response factors for each of the
VOC to be measured shall be less than 10 When no in-
strument is available that meets this specification when
calibrated with the reference VOC specified in the appli-
cable regulation, the available instrument may be cali-
brated with one of the VOC to be measured, or any other
VOC. so long as the instrument then has a response factor
of less than 10 for each of the VOC to be measured.
(b) The instrument response time shall be equal to or
less than 30 seconds. The instrument pump, dilution
probe (if any), sample probe, and probe filter, that will
be used during testing, shall all be in place during the re-
sponse time determination
c. The calibration precision must be equal to or less
than 20 percent of the calibration gas value.
d. The evaluation procedure for each parameter is given
in Section 4.4
3.1.3 Performance Evaluation Requirements
a. A response factor must be determined for each
compound that is to be measured, either by testing or
from reference sources. The response factor tests are re-
quired before placing the analyzer into service, but do not
have to be repeated at subsequent intervals
b. The calibration precision test must be completed
prior to placing the analyzer into service, and at subse-
quent 3-month intervals or at the next use whichever is
later.
c. The response time test is required prior to placing
the instrument into service. If a modification to the sam-
ple pumping system or flow configuration is made that
would change the response time, a new test is required
prior to further use
3.2 Calibration Gases. The monitoring instrument is
calibrated m terms of parts per million by volume (ppmv)
of the reference compound specified in the applicable reg-
ulation. The calibration gases required for monitoring and
instrument performance evaluation are a zero gas (air, less
than 10 ppmv VOC) and a calibration gas in air mixture
approximately equal to the leak definition specified in the
regulation. If cylinder calibration gas mixtures are used,
they must be analyzed and certified by the manufacturer
to be within ±2 percent accuracy, and a shelf life must
be specified. Cylinder standards must be either reanalyzed
or replaced at the end of the specified shelf life. Alter-
nately, calibration gases may be prepared by the user ac-
cording to any accepted gaseous standards preparation
procedure that will yield a mixture accurate to within ±2
percent. Prepared standards must be replaced each day of
use unless it can be demonstrated that degradation does
not occur during storage.
Calibrations may be performed using a compound other
than the refcrnce compound if a conversion factor is de-
termined for that alternative compound so that the result-
ing meter readings during source surveys can be con-
verted to reference compound results.
4. Procedures
4 1 Pretest Preparations. Perform the instrument eval-
uation procedures given in Section 4.4 if the evaluation
requirements of Section 3.1 3 have not been met.
4.2 Calibration Procedures. Assemble and start up the
VOC analyzer according to the manufacturer's instruc-
tions. After the appropriate warmup period and zero inter-
nal calibration procedure, introduce the calibration gas
into the instrument sample probe. Adjust the instrument
meter readout to correspond to the calibration gas value.
Note. If the meter readout cannot be adjusted to the
proper value, a malfunction of the analyzer is indicated
and corrective actions are necessary before use.
4.3 Individual Source Surveys.
4.3.1 Type I—Leak Definition Based on Concentra-
tion Place the probe inlet at the surface of the component
interface where leakage could occur. Move the probe
along the interface periphery while observing the instru-
ment readout. If an increased meter reading is observed,
slowly sample the interface where leakage is indicated
until the maximum meter reading is obtained. Leave the
probe inlet at this maximum reading location for approxi-
mately two times the instrument response time. If the
maximum observed meter reading is greater than the leak
definition in the applicable regulation, record and report
the results as specified in the regulation reporting require-
ments Examples of the application of this general tech-
nique to specific equipment types are:
a. Valves—The most common source of leaks from
valves is at the seal between the stem and housing. Place
the probe at the interface where the stem exits the pack-
ing gland and sample the stem circumference. Also, place
the probe at the interface of the packing gland take-up
flange seat and sample the periphery. In addition, survey
valve housings of multipart assembly at the surface of all
interfaces where a leak could occur
b. Flanges and Other Connections—For welded flanges,
place the probe at the outer edge of the flange-gasket
interface and sample the circumference of the flange.
Sample other types of nonpermanent joints (such as
threaded connections) with a similar traverse.
c. Pumps and Compressors—Conduct a circumferential
traverse at the outer surface of the pump or compressor
shaft and seal interface If the source is a rotating shaft,
position the probe inlet within 1 cm of the shaft-seal
interface for the survey If the housing configuration pre-
vents a complete traverse of the shaft periphery, sample
all accessible portions. Sample all other joints on the
pump or compressor housing where leakage could occur.
d. Pressure Relief Devices—The configuration of most
pressure relief devices prevents sampling at the sealing
seat interface For those devices equipped with an en-
189
-------
Pt. 60, App. A, Meth. 21
closed extension, or horn, place the probe inlet at approxi-
mately the center of the exhaust area to the atmosphere.
e. Process Drains—For open drains, place the probe
inlet at approximately the center of the area open to the
atmosphere. For covered drains, place the probe at the
surface of the cover interface and conduct a peripheral
traverse.
f. Open-Ended Lines or Valves—Place the probe inlet
at approximately the center of the opening to the atmos-
phere.
g. Seal System Degassing Vents and Accumulator
Vents—Place the probe inlet at approximately the center
of the opening to the atmosphere.
h. Access Door Seals—Place the probe inlet at the sur-
face of the door seal interface and conduct a peripheral
traverse
4 3 2 Type II—"No Detectable Emission".
Determine the local ambient concentration around the
source by moving the probe inlet randomly upwind and
downwind at a distance of one to two meters from the
source If an interference exists with this determination
due to a nearby emission or leak, the local ambient con-
centration may be determined at distances closer to the
source, but in no case shall the distance be less than 25
centimeters. Then move the probe inlet to the surface of
the source and determine the concentration described in
4.3.1. The difference between these concentrations deter-
mines whether there are no detectable emissions Record
and report the results as specified by the regulation.
For those cases where the regulation requires a specific
device installation, or that specified vents be ducted or
piped to a control device, the existence of these condi-
tions shall be visually confirmed. When the regulation
also requires that no detectable emissions exist, visual ob-
servations and sampling surveys are required. Examples
of this technique are:
(a) Pump or Compressor Seals—If applicable, deter-
mine the type of shaft seal. Preform a survey of the local
area ambient VOC concentration and determine if detect-
able emissions exist as described above.
(b) Seal System Degassing Vents, Accumulator Vessel
Vents, Pressure Relief Devices—If applicable, observe
whether or not the applicable ducting or piping exists.
Also, determine if any sources exist in the ducting or pip-
ing where emissions could occur prior to the control de-
vice If the required ducting or piping exists and there are
no sources where the emissions could be vented to the at-
mosphere prior to the control device, then it is presumed
that no detectable emissions are present. If there are
sources in the ducting or piping where emissions could be
vented or sources where leaks could occur, the sampling
surveys described in this paragraph shall be used to deter-
mine if detectable emissions exist.
4.3.3 Altemanve Screening Procedure A screening
procedure based on the formation of bubbles in a soap so-
lution that is sprayed on a potential leak source may be
used for those sources that do not have continuously mov-
ing parts, that do not have surface temperatures greater
than the boiling point or less than the freezing point of
the soap solution, that do not have open areas to the at-
mosphere that the soap solution cannot bridge, or that do
not exhibit evidence of liquid leakage. Sources that have
these conditions present must be surveyed using the in-
strument techniques of 4.3.1 or 4.3 2
Spray a soap solution over all potential leak sources.
The soap solution may be a commercially available leak
detection solution or may be prepared using concentrated
detergent and water. A pressure sprayer or a squeeze bot-
tle may be used to dispense the solution. Observe the po-
tential leak sites to determine if any bubbles are formed
If no bubbles arc observed, the source is presumed to
have no detectable emissions or leaks as applicable. If
any bubbles are observed, the instrument techniques of
4.3.1 or 4.3.2 shall be used to determine if a leak exists,
or if the source has detectable emissions, as applicable.
4.4 Instrument Evaluation Procedures. At the beginning
of the instrument performance evaluation test, assemble
and start up the instrument according to the manufactur-
er's instructions for recommended warmup period and
preliminary adjustments.
4.4.1 Response Factor. Calibrate the instrument with
the reference compound as specified in the applicable reg-
ulation For each organic species that is to be measured
during individual source surveys, obtain or prepare a
known standard in air at a concentration of approximately
80 percent of the applicable leak definition unless limited
by volatility or explosivity In these cases, prepare a
standard at 90 percent of the saturation concentration, or
70 percent of the lower explosive limit, respecnvely In-
troduce this mixture to the analyzer and record the ob-
served meter reading Introduce zero air until a stable
reading is obtained. Make a total of three measurements
by alternating between the known mixture and zero air.
Calculate the response factor for each repetition and the
average response factor.
Alternatively, if response factors have been published
for the compounds of interest for the instrument or detec-
tor type, the response factor determination is not required,
and existing results may be referenced Examples of pub-
lished response factors for flame ionization and catalytic
oxidation detectors are included in Bibliography.
4 4.2 Calibration Precision. Make a total of three meas-
urements by alternately using zero gas and the specified
calibration gas. Record the meter readings Calculate the
average algebraic difference between the meter readings
and the known value. Divide this average difference by
the known calibration value and mutiply by 100 to ex-
press the resulting calibration precision as a. percentage
4 4.3 Response Time. Introduce zero gas into the in-
strument sample probe. When the meter reading has sta-
bilized, switch quickly to the specified calibration gas.
Measure the time from switching to when 90 percent of
the final stable reading is attained. Perform this test se-
quence three times and record the results Calculate the
average response time.
5. Bibliography
1. DuBose, DA., and GE Harris. Response Factors
of VOC Analyzers at a Meter Reading of 10,000 ppmv
for Selected Organic Compounds U S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Tnangle Park, NC. Publica-
tion No. EPA 600/2-81-051. September 1981
2. Brown, G E., et al Response Factors of VOC Ana-
lyzers Calibrated with Methane for Selected Organic
Compounds U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Re-
search Tnangle Park, NC. Publication No. EPA 600/2-
81-022. May 1981.
3. DuBose, D.A., et al Response of Portable VOC
Analyzers to Chemical Mixtures U S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. Publication
No. EPA 600/2-81-110 September 1981.
190
-------
APPENDIX C
PART 60, SUBPART A
(GENERAL PROVISIONS)
The General Provisions of 40 CFR Part 60 can be found on the internet at
http://www.epa.gov/docs/epacfr40/chapt-I.info/subch-C/40P0060.
-------
Subpart A—General Provisions
§60.1 Applicability.
(a) Except as provided in subparts B and C, the
provisions of this part apply to the owner or oper-
ator of any stationary source which contains an af-
fected facility, the construction or modification of
which is commenced after the date of publication
in this part of any standard (or, if earlier, the date
of publication of any proposed standard) applica-
ble to that facility.
(b) Any new or revised standard of performance
promulgated pursuant to section 111(b) of the Act
shall apply to the owner or operator of any sta-
tionary source which contains an affected facility,
the construction or modification of which is com-
menced after the date of publication in this part of
such new or revised standard (or, if earlier, the
date of publication of any proposed standard) ap-
plicable to that facility.
(c) In addition to complying with the provisions
of this part, the owner or operator of an affected
facility may he required to obtain an operating
permit issued to stationary sources by an author-
ized State air pollution control agency or by the
Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency (EPA) pursuant to Title V of the
Clean Air Act (Act) as amended November 15,
1990 (42 U.S.C. 7661). For more information
about obtaining an operating permit see part 70 of
this chapter.
[40 FR 53346, Nov. 17, 1975, as amended at 55 FR
51382, Dec. 13, 1990, 59 FR 12427, Mar 16, 1994)
§60.2 Definitions.
The terms used in this part are defined in the
Act or m this section as follows:
Act means the Clean Air Act (42 USC. 7401
et seq.)
Administrator means the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency or his author-
ized representative.
Affected facility means, with reference to a sta-
tionary source, any apparatus to which a standard
is applicable.
Alternative method means any method of sam-
pling mid analyzing for an air pollutant which is
not a reference or equivalent method but which
has been demonstrated to the Administrator's sat-
isfaction to, in specific cases, produce results ade-
quate for his determination of compliance.
Approved permit program means a State permit
program approved by the Administrator as meeting
Ae requirements of part 70 of this chapter or a
Federal permit program established in this chapter
pursuant to Title V of the Act (42 U.S.C. 7661).
Capital expenditure means an expenditure for a
physical or operational change to an existing facil-
ity which exceeds the product of the applicable
"annual asset guideline repair allowance percent-
age" specified in the latest edition of Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) Publication 534 and the
existing facility's basis, as defined by section 1012
of the Internal Revenue Code. However, the total
expenditure for a physical or operational change to
an existing facility must not be reduced by any
"excluded additions" as defined in IRS Publica-
tion 534, as would be done for tax purposes.
Clean coal technology demonstration project
means a project using funds appropriated under
the heading 'Department of Energy-Clean Coal
Technology", up to a total amount of
$2,500,000,000 for commercial demonstrations of
clean coal technology, or similar projects funded
through appropriations for the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency.
Commenced means, with respect to the defini-
tion of new source in section 111(a)(2) of the Act,
that an owner or operator has undertaken a contin-
uous program of construction or modification or
that an owner or operator has entered into a con-
tractual obligation to undertake and complete,
within a reasonable time, a continuous program of
construction or modification.
Construction means fabrication, erection, or in-
stallation of an affected facility.
Continuous monitoring system means the total
equipment, required under the emission monitoring
sections in applicable subparts, used to sample and
condition (if applicable), to analyze, and to pro-
vide a permanent record of emissions or process
parameters.
Electric utility steam generating unit means any
steam electric generating unit that is constructed
for the purpose of supplying more than one-third
of its potential electric output capacity and more
than 25 MW electrical output to any utility power
distribution system for sale. Any steam supplied to
a steam distribution system for the purpose of pro-
viding steam to a steam-electric generator that
would produce electrical energy for sale is also
considered in determining the electrical energy
output capacity of the affected facility.
Equivalent method means any method of sam-
pling and analyzing for an air pollutant which has
been demonstrated to the Administrator's satisfac-
tion to have a consistent and quantitatively known
relationship to the reference method, under speci-
fied conditions.
Excess Emissions and Monitoring Systems Per-
formance Report is a report that must be submitted
periodically by a source in order to provide data
on its compliance with stated emission limits and
operating parameters, and on the performance of
its monitoring systems.
Existing facility means, with reference to a sta-
tionary source, any apparatus of the type for which
1
-------
§60.2
a standard is promulgated in this part, and the con-
struction or modification of which was com-
menced before the date of proposal of that stand-
ard; or any apparatus which could be altered in
such a way as to be of that type.
Isokinetic sampling means sampling in which
the linear velocity of the gas entering the sampling
nozzle is equal to that of the undisturbed gas
stream at the sample point.
Issuance of a part 70 permit will occur, if the
State is the permitting authority, in accordance
with the requirements of part 70 of this chapter
and the applicable, approved State permit program.
When the EPA is the permitting authority, issu-
ance of a Title V permit occurs immediately after
the EPA takes final action on the final permit.
Malfunction means any sudden, infrequent, and
not reasonably preventable failure of air pollution
control equipment, process equipment, or a proc-
ess to operate in a normal or usual manner. Fail-
ures that are caused in part by poor maintenance
or careless operation are not malfunctions.
Modification means any physical change in, or
change in the method of operation of, an existing
facility which increases the amount of any air pol-
lutant (to which a standard applies) emitted into
the atmosphere by that facility or which results in
the emission of any air pollutant (to which a
standard applies) into the atmosphere not pre-
viously emitted.
Monitoring device means the total equipment,
required under the monitoring of operations sec-
tions in applicable subparts, used to measure and
record (if applicable) process parameters.
Nitrogen oxides means all oxides of nitrogen
except nitrous oxide, as measured by test methods
set forth in this pan.
One-hour period means any 60-minute period
commencing on the hour.
Opacity means the degree to which emissions
reduce the transmission of light and obscure the
view of an object in the background.
Owner or operator means any person who
owns, leases, operates, controls, or supervises an
affected facility or a stationary source of which an
affected facility is a part.
Part 70 permit means any permit issued, re-
newed, or revised pursuant to pan 70 of this chap-
ter.
Particulate matter means any finely divided
solid or liquid material, other than uncombined
water, as measured by the reference methods spec-
ified under each applicable subpart, or an equiva-
lent or alternative method.
Permit program means a comprehensive State
operating permit system established pursuant to
title V of the Act (42 U.S.C. 7661) and regulations
codified in part 70 of this chapter and applicable
State regulations, or a comprehensive Federal op-
erating permit system established pursuant to title
V of the Act and regulations codified in this chap-
ter.
Permitting authority means:
(1) The State air pollution control agency, local
agency, other State agency, or other agency au-
thorized by the Administrator to cany out a permit
program under part 70 of this chapter; or
(2) The Administrator, in the case of EPA-im-
plemented permit programs under title V of the
Act (42 U.S.C. 7661).
Proportional sampling means sampling at a rate
that produces a constant ratio of sampling rate to
stack gas flow rate.
Reactivation of a very clean coal-fired electric
utility steam generating unit means any physical
change or change in the method of operation asso-
ciated with the commencement of commercial op-
erations by a coal-fired utility unit after a period
of discontinued operation where the unit:
(1) Has not been in operation for the two-year
period pnor to the enactment of the Gean Air Act
Amendments of 1990, and the emissions from
such unit continue to be carried in the permitting
authority's emissions inventory at the time of en-
actment;
(2) Was equipped prior to shut-down with a
continuous system of emissions control that
achieves a removal efficiency for sulfur dioxide of
no less than 85 percent and a removal efficiency
for particulates of no less than 98 percent;
(3) Is equipped with low-NO* burners prior to
the time of commencement of operations follow-
ing reactivation; and
(4) Is otherwise in compliance with the require-
ments of the Clean Air Act.
Reference method means any method of sam-
pling and analyzing for an air pollutant as speci-
fied in the applicable subpart.
Repowering means replacement of an existing
coal-fired boiler with one of the following clean
coal technologies: atmospheric or pressurized flu-
idized bed combustion, integrated gasification
combined cycle, magnetohydrodynamics, direct
and indirect coal-fired turbines, integrated gasifi-
cation fuel cells, or as determined by the Adminis-
trator, in consultation with the Secretary of En-
ergy, a derivative of one or more of these tech-
nologies, and any other technology capable of con-
trolling multiple combustion emissions simulta-
neously with improved boiler or generation effi-
ciency and with significantly greater waste reduc-
tion relative to the performance of technology in
widespread commercial use as of November 15,
1990. Repowering shall also include any oil and/
or gas-fired unit which has been awarded clean
coal technology demonstration funding as of Janu-
ary 1, 1991, by the Department of Energy.
2
-------
Run means the net period of time during which
an emission sample is collected. Unless otherwise
specified, a ran may be either intermittent or con-
tinuous within the limits of good engineering prac-
tice.
Shutdown means the cessation of operation of
an affected facility for any purpose.
Six-minute period means any one of the 10
equal parts of a one-hour period.
Standard means a standard of performance pro-
posed or promulgated under this part.
Standard conditions means a temperature of 293
K (68*F) and a pressure of 101.3 kilopascals
(29.92 in Hg).
Startup means the setting in operation of an af-
fected facility for any purpose.
State means all non-Federal authorities, includ-
ing local agencies, interstate associations, and
State-wide programs, that have delegated authority
to implement: (1) The provisions of this part; and/
or (2) the permit program established under part
70 of this chapter. The term State shall have its
conventional meaning where clear from the con-
text.
Stationary source means any building, structure,
facility, or installation which emits or may emit
any air pollutant.
Title V permit means any permit issued, re-
newed, or revised pursuant to Federal or State reg-
ulations established to implement title V of the
Act (42 U.S.C. 7661). A title V permit issued by
a State permitting authority is called a part 70 per-
mit in this part.
Volatile Organic Compound means any organic
compound which participates in atmospheric pho-
tochemical reactions; or which is measured by a
reference method, an equivalent method, an alter-
native method, or which is determined by proce-
dures specified under any subpart.
[44 FR 55173, Sept 25, 1979, as amended ai 45 FR
5617, Jan 23, 1980; 45 FR 85415, Dec, 24, 1980, 54 FR
6662, Feb. 14, 1989; 55 FR 51382, Dec. 13, 1990; 57 FR
32338, July 21, 1992, 59 FR 12427, Mar 16, 1994]
§ 60.3 Units and abbreviations.
Used in this part are abbreviations and symbols
of units of measure. These are defined as follows:
(a) System International (SI) units of measure:
A—ampere
g—gram
Hz—hertz
J—-joule
K—degree Kelvin
kg—kilogram
m—meter
m3—cubic meter
mg—milligram—10 -3 gram
mm—millimeter—10-3 meter
Mg—megagram—106 gram
mol—mole
§60.3
N—oewtoD
ng—nanogram—10 -9 gram
nm—nanometer—10-9 meter
Pa—pascal
s—second
V—volt
W—watt
fl—ohm
Hg—microgram—10*6 gram
(b) Other units of measure:
Bru—British thermal unit
°C—degree Celsius (centigrade)
cal—calorie
cfm—cubic feet per minute
cu ft—cubic feet
dcf—dry cubic feet
dcm—dry cubic meter
dscf—dry cubic feet at standard conditions
dscm—dry cubic meter at standard conditions
eq—equivalent
°F—degree Fahrenheit
ft—feet
gal—gallon
gr—grain
g-eq—gram equivalent
hr—hour
in—inch
k—1,000
1—liter
lpm—liter per minute
lb—pound
meq—milliequivalent
min—minute
ml—milliliter
mol. wt.—molecular weight
ppb—parts per billion
ppm—parts per million
psia—pounds per square inch absolute
psig—pounds per square inch gage
°R—degree Rankine
scf—cubic feet at standard conditions
scfh—¦cubic feet per hour at standard conditions
scm—cubic meter at standard conditions
sec—second
sq ft—square feet
std—at standard conditions
(c) Chemical nomenclature:
CdS—cadmium sulfide
CO—carbon monoxide
CO2—carbon dioxide
HC1—hydrochloric acid
Hg—mercury
H2O—water
HiS—hydrogen sulfide
H2SO4—sulfuric acid
Nj—nitrogen
NO—nitnc oxide
NO2—nitrogen dioxide
NO*—nitrogen oxides
02—oxygen
502—sulfur dioxide
503—sulfur trioxide
SO*—sulfur oxides
(d) Miscellaneous:
3
-------
§60.4
A.S.T.M.—American Society for Testing and Materials
[42 FR 37000, July 19, 1977; 42 FR 38178, July 27,
1977]
§ 60.4 Address.
(a) All requests, reports, applications, submit-
tals, and other communications to the Adminis-
trator pursuant to this part shall be submitted in
duplicate to the appropriate Regional Office of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to the at-
tention of the Director of the Division indicated in
the following list of EPA Regional Offices.
Region I (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont), Director, Air
Management Division, U S. Environmental Protection
Agency, John F Kennedy Federal Building, Boston,
MA 02203.
Region D (New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, Virgin
Islands), Director, Air and Waste Management Divi*
sion, U.S Environmental Protection Agency, Federal
Office Building, 26 Federal Plaza (Foley Square), New
York, NY 10278
Region HI (Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland,
Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia), Director, Air
and Waste Management Division, U.S Environmental
Protection Agency, Curtis Building, Sixth and Walnut
Streets, Philadelphia, PA 19106.
Region IV (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mis-
sissippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee),
Director, Air and Waste Management Division, U S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 345 Courtland
Street, NE , Atlanta, GA 30365
Region V (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio,
Wisconsin), Director, Air Management Division, U S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 230 South Dearborn
Street, Chicago. IL 60604.
Region VI (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Okla-
homa, Texas); Director; Air, Pesacides, and Toxics Di-
vision, U.S Environmental Protection Agency, 1445
Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202.
Region VII (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska), Director,
Air and Toxics Division, U S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS
66101.
Region VIH (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Utah, Wyoming), Director, Air and Waste
Management Division, U S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1860 Lincoln Street, Denver, CO 80295.
Region IX (Amencan Samoa, Arizona, California, Guam,
Hawaii, Nevada), Director, Air and Waste Management
Division, US Environmental Protection Agency, 215
Fremont Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
Region X (Alaska, Oregon, Idaho, Washington), Director,
Air and Waste Management Division, U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,
WA 98101
(b) Section 111(c) directs the Administrator to
delegate to each State, when appropriate, the au-
thority to implement and enforce standards of per-
formance for new stationary sources located in
such State. All information required to be submit-
ted to EPA under paragraph (a) of this section,
must also be submitted to the appropriate State
Agency of any State to which this authority has
been delegated (provided, that each specific dele-
gation may except sources from a certain Federal
or State reporting requirement). The appropriate
mailing address for those States whose delegation
request has been approved is as follows:
(A) [Reservedl
(B) State of Alabama, Air Pollution Control Division,
Air Pollution Control Commission, 645 S. McDonough
Street, Montgomery, AL 36104.
(C) State of Alaska, Department of Environmental Con-
servation, Pouch O, Juneau, AK 99811
(D) Arizona:
Arizona Department of Health Services, 1740 West
Adams Street, Phoenix, AZ 85007.
Mancopa County Department of Health Services, Bureau
of Air Pollution Control, 1825 East Roosevelt Street,
Phoenix, AZ 85006.
Pima County Health Department. Air Quality Control
District, 151 West Congress, Tucson, AZ 85701
Pima County Air Pollution Control District, 151 West
Congress Street, Tucson, AZ 85701.
(1) The following table lists the specific source and pol-
lutant categories that have been delegated to the air pollu-
tion control agencies m Arizona. A star (*) is used to in-
dicate each category that has been delegated.
E.GRAPHICS EC01JN92,000
E.-GRAPHICS EC01JN92.001
(E) State of Arkansas: Chief, Division of Air Pollution
Control, Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and
Ecology, 8001 National Drive, P.O Box 9583, Little
Rock, AR 72209.
(F) California.
Amador County Air Pollution Control District, P O Box
430, 810 Court Street, Jackson, CA 95642
Bay Area Air Pollunon Control District, 939 Elbs Street,
San Francisco, CA 94109.
Butte County Air Pollution Control District, P.O Box
1229, 316 Nelson Avenue, Oroville, CA 95965
Calaveras County Air Pollution Control District, Govern-
ment Center, El Dorado Road, San Andreas, CA 95249
Colusa County Air Polluoon Control District, 751 Fre-
mont Street, Colusa, CA 95952
El Dorado Aii Pollution Control District, 330 Fair Lane,
Placerville, CA 95667
Fresno County Air Pollution Control District, 1221 Fulton
Mall, Fresno, CA 93721
Glenn County Air Pollution Control District, P.O. Box
351, 720 North Colusa Street, Willows, CA 95988
Great Basin Unified Air Polluoon Control District, 157
Short Street, Suite 6, Bishop, CA 93514
Imperial County Air Pollution Control District, County
Services Building, 939 West Main Street, El Centro,
CA 92243
Kern County Air Pollution Control District, 1601 H
Street, Suite 250, Bakersfield, CA 93301
Kings County Air Pollution Control District, 330 Campus
Drive, Hanford, CA 93230
Lake County Air Pollution Control District, 255 North
Forbes Street, Lakeport, CA 95453
Lassen County Air Pollution Control District, 175 Russell
Avenue, Susanville, CA 96130
Madera County Air Pollution Control District, 135 W
Yosemite Avenue, Madera, CA 93637.
4
-------
§60.4
Mariposa County Air Pollution Control District, Box 5,
Manposa, CA 95338
Mendocino County Air Pollution Control District, County
Courthouse, Ukiah, CA 95482.
Merced County Air Pollution Control District, P.O. Box
471, 240 East 15th Street, Merced, CA 95340
Modoc County Air Pollution Control District, 202 West
4th Street, Alturas, CA 96101
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control, 1164 Mon-
roe Street, Suite 10, Salinas, CA 93906
Nevada County Air Pollution Control District, H.E.W
Complex, Nevada City, CA 95959
North Coast Unified Air Quality Management District,
5630 South Broadway, Eureka, CA 95501
Northern Sonoma County Air Pollution Control District,
134 "A" Avenue, Auburn, CA 95448
Placer County Air Pollution Control District, 11491 "B"
Avenue, Auburn, CA 95603
Plumas County Air Pollution Control District, P.O. Box
480, Quincy, CA 95971
Sacramento County Air Pollution Control District, 3701
Branch Center Road, Sacramento, CA 95827.
San Bernardino County Air Pollution Control District,
15579-8th, Victorville, CA 92392
San Diego County Air Pollution Control District, 9150
Chesapeake Drive, San Diego, CA 92123.
San Joaquin County Air Pollution Control District, 1601
E. Hazelton Street (P.O. Box 2009) Stockton, CA
95201.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District,
P.O Box 637, San Luis Obispo, CA 93406
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 315
Canuno del Rimedio, Santa Barbara, CA 93110
Shasta County Air Pollution Control District, 2650 Hos-
pital Lane, Redding, CA 96001
Sierra County Air Pollution Control District, P 0 Box
286, Dowmeville, CA 95936
Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District, 525 South
Foothill Drive, Yreka, CA 96097
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 9150 Flair
Drive, El Monte, CA 91731
Stanislaus County Air Pollution Control District, 1030
Scenic Drive, Modesto, CA 95350
Sutter County Air Pollution Control District, Sutter Coun-
ty Office Building, 142 Garden Highway, Yuba City,
CA 95991
Tehama County Air Pollution Control District, P O. Box
38, 1760 Walnut Street, Red Bluff, CA 96080
Tulare County Air Pollution Control District, County
Civic Center, Visalia, CA 93277
Tuolumne County Air Polluaon Control District, 9 North
Washington Street, Sonora, CA 95370
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 800 South
Victoria Avenue, Ventura, CA 93009
Yolo-Solano Air Pollution Control District, P O. Box
1006, 323 First Street, #5, Woodland, CA 95695
(1) The following table lists the specific source and pol-
lutant categories that have been delegated to the air pollu-
tion control agencies in California. A star (*) is used to
indicate each category that has been delegated.
E:GRAPHICS EC01JN92.002
E:GRAPHICS EC01JN92.003
(G) State of Colorado, Department of Health, Air Pol-
lution Control Division, 4210 East 11th Avenue, Denver,
CO 80220.
Editorial Note: For a table listing Region VIII's
NSPS delegation status, see paragraph (c) of this section.
(H) State of Connecticut, Bureau of Air Management,
Department of Environmental Protection, State Office
Building, 165 Capitol Avenue, Hartford, CT 06106.
(I) State of Delaware, Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Control, 89 Kings High-
way, P.O. Box 1401, Dover, DE 19901
(J) District of Columbia, Department of Consumer and
Regulatory Affairs, 5000 Overlook Avenue SW., Wash-
ington DC 20032.
(K) Bureau of Air Quality Management, Department of
Environmental Regulation, Twin Towers Office Building,
2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, FL 32301.
(L) State of Georgia, Environmental Protection Divi-
sion, Department of Natural Resources, 270 Washington
Street, SW„ Atlanta, GA 30334
(M) Hawaii Department of Health, 1250 Punchbowl
Street, Honolulu, HI 96813
Hawaii Department of Health (mailing address), Post Of-
fice Box 3378, Honolulu, HI 96801
(N) State of Idaho, Department of Health and Welfare,
Statehouse, Boise, ID 83701
(O) [Reserved]
(P) State of Indiana, Indiana Department of Environ-
mental Management, 105 South Meridian Street, P.O.
Box 6015, Indianapolis, IN 46206
(Q) State of Iowa: Iowa Department of Natural Re-
sources, Environmental Protection Division, Henry A.
Wallace Building, 900 East Grand, Des Moines, IO
50319.
(R) State of Kansas: Kansas Department of Health and
Environment, Bureau of Air Quality and Radiauon Con-
trol, Forbes Field, Topeka, KS 66620
(S) Division of Air Pollution Control, Department for
Natural Resources and Environmental Protection, U S.
127, Frankfort, KY 40601.
(T) State of Louisiana. Program Administrator, Air
Quality Division, Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality, P.O. Box 44096, Baton Rouge, LA 70804
(U) State of Maine, Bureau of Air Quality Control, De-
partment of Environmental Protection, State House, Sta-
uon No. 17, Augusta, ME 04333.
(V) State of Maryland: Bureau of Air Quality and
Noise Control, Maryland State Department of Health and
Mental Hygiene, 201 West Preston Street, Baltimore, MD
21201.
(W) Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Division of Air
Quality Control, Department of Environmental Protection,
One Winter Street, 7th floor, Boston, MA 02108
(X) State of Michigan, Air Pollution Control Division,
Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Stevens T.
Mason Building, 8th Floor, Lansing, MI 48926.
(Y) Minnesota PoHuuon Control Agency, Division of
Air Quality, 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155
(Z) Bureau of Pollution Control, Department of Natural
Resources, P O. Box 10385, Jackson, MS 39209.
(AA) State of Missouri: Missouri Department of Natu-
ral Resources, Division of Environmental Quality, P O.
Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102
(BB) State of Montana, Department of Health and En-
vironmental Services, Air Quality Bureau, Cogswell
Building, Helena, MT 59601.
Editorial Note: For a table listing Region VIII's
NSPS delegation status, see paragraph (c) of this section.
5
-------
§60.4
(CC) State of Nebraska, Nebraska Department of Envi-
ronmental Control, P.O. Box 94877, State House Station,
Lincoln, NE 68509.
Lincoln-Lancaster County Health Department, Division of
Environmental Health, 2200 St. Marys Avenue, Lin-
coln, NE 68502
(DD) Nevada:
Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Re-
sources, Division of Environmental Protection, 201
South Fall Street, Carson City, NV 89710.
Clark County County District Health Department, Air
Pollution Control Division, 625 Shadow Lane, Las
Vegas, NV 89106
Washoe County District Health Department, Division of
Environmental Protection, 10 Kirroan Avenue, Reno,
NV 89502.
(1) The following table lists the specific source and pol-
lutant categories that have been delegated to the air pollu-
tion control agencies in Nevada. A star (*) is used to in-
dicate each category that has been delegated
E:GRAPH1CS EC01JN9Z004
E:GRAPHICS EC01JN92.005
(EE) State of New Hampshire, Air Resources Division,
Department of Environmental Services, 64 North Main
Street, Caller Box 2033, Concord, NH 03302-2033.
(FF) State of New Jersey: New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection, Division of Environmental
Quality, Enforcement Element, John Fitch Plaza, CN-027,
Trenton, NJ 08625.
(1) The following table lists the specific source and
pollutant categories that have been delegated to the states
in Region n. The (X) symbol is used to indicate each cat-
egory that has been delegated.
Subpart
State
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Fossit-Fuei Ftred Steam Generators for Which Construction
Commenced After August 17, 1971 (Steam Generators and
Lignite Fired Steam Generators)
Electric Utility Steam Generating Units for Which Construction
Commenced After September 18, 1978
Industrial-Commercial-lnstituttonal Steam Generating Units
Incinerators
Portland Cement Plants
Nrtrtc Acid Plants
Sulfunc Acid Plants
Asphalt Concrete Plants
Petroleum Refineries—(All Categories)
Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquids Constructed After June
11, 1973, and pnor to May 19, 1970.
Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquids Constructed After May
18, 1970
Secondary Lead Smelters
Secondary Brass and Bronze Ingot Production Plants
Iron and Steel Plants
Sewage Treatment Plants
Primary Copper Smelters
Primary Zinc Smelters
Primary Lead Smelters
Primary AJummum Reduction Plants
Phosphate Fertilizer industry' Wet Process Phosphonc Acid
Plants.
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry' Superphosphoric Acid Plants
Phosphate Fertilizer industry: Diammonium Phosphate Plants
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry: Tnple Superphosphate Plants ....
Phosphate Fertilizer Industry- Granular Tnple Superphosphate
Coal Preparation Plants
Ferroaliy Production Facilities
Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces
Electric Arc Furnaces and Argon-Oxygen Decarbunzation Ves-
sels in Steel Plants
Kraft Pulp Mills
Glass Manufactunng Plants
Grain Elevators
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
Stationary Gas Tuifcines
Lime Plants
Lead Acid Battery Manufactunng Plants
Metallic Mineral Processing Plants
Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations
Phosphate Rock Plants
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
6
-------
§60.4
Subpart
State
New Jersey New York Puerto Rico V'SSiS
Ammonium Sulfate Manufacturing Plants
Graphic Art Industry Publication Rotogravure Pnnting
Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label Surface Coating Oper-
ations
Industnai Surface Coating: Large Appliances
Metal Coil Surface Coating
Asphalt Processing and Asphalt Roofing Manufacture
Equipment Leaks of Volatile Organic Compounds in Synthetic
Organic Chemical Manufacturing industry.
Beverage Can Surface Coating Industry
Bulk Gasoline Terminals
Flexible Vinyl and Urethane Coating and Pnnting
Equipment Leaks of VOC in Petroleum Refinenes
Synthetic Fiber Production Facilities
Petroleum Dry Cleamers
Equipment Leaks of VOC from Onshore Natural Gas Process-
ing Plants
Onshore Natural Gas Processing Plants; SO2 Emissions
Nonmetallic Mineral Processing Plants
Wool Fiberglass Insulation Manufactunng Plants
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(GG) State of New Mexico: Director, New Mexico En-
vironmental Improvement Division, Health and Environ-
ment Department, 1190 St. Francis Dnve, Santa Fe, NM
87503.
(i) The City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo County: Di-
rector, The Albuquerque Environmental Health Depart-
ment, The City of Albuquerque, P.O. Box 1293, Albu-
querque, NM 87103.
(HH) New York: New York State Department of Envi-
ronmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road Albany, New
York 12233, artenoon: Division of Ajr Resources.
(II) North Carolina Environmental Management Com-
mission, Department of Natural and Economic Resources,
Division of Environmental Management, P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, NC 27611. Attention: Air Quality Section.
(JJ) State of North Dakota, State Department of Health
and Consolidated Laboratories, Division of Environmental
Engineering. State Capitol, Bismarck, ND 58505.
EDrroRiAL Note- For a table listing Region Vm's
NSPS delegation status, see paragraph (c) of this section.
(KK) State of Ohio.
(i) Medina, Summit and Portage Counties; Director,
Akron Regional Air Quality Management District, 177
South Broadway, Akron, OH 44308.
(ii) Stark County, Director, Air Pollution Control Divi-
sion, Canton City Health Department, City Hall Annex
Second Floor, 218 Cleveland Avenue SW., Canton, OH
44702.
(iii) Butler, Clermont, Hamilton and Warren Counties;
Director, Southwestern Ohio Air Pollution Control Agen-
cy, 2400 Beekman Street, Cmcmnau, OH 45214
(iv) Cuyahoga County Commissioner, Division of Air
Pollution Control Department of Public Health and Wel-
fare, 2735 Broadway Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44115.
(v) Belmont, Carroll, Columbiana, Harrison, Jefferson,
and Monroe Counties- Director, North Ohio Valley Air
Authority (NOVAA), 814 Adams Street, Steubenville, OH
43952.
(vi) Dark, Darke, Greene, Miami, Montgomery, and
Preble Counties: Supervisor, Regional Air Pollution Con-
trol Agency (RAPCA), Montgomery County Health De-
partment, 451 West Third Street, Dayton, OH 45402.
(vii) Lucas County and the City of Rossford (in Wood
County): Director, Toledo Environmental Services Agen-
cy, 26 Main Street, Toledo, OH 43605.
(viii) Adams, Brown, Lawrence, and Scioto Counties;
Engineer-Director, Air Division, Portsmouth City Health
Department, 740 Second Street, Portsmouth, OH 45662.
(ix) Allen, Ashland, Auglaize, Crawford, Defiance,
Erie, Fulton, Hancock Hardin, Henry, Huron, Marion,
Mercer, Ottawa, Paulding, Putnam, Richland, Sandusky,
Seneca, Van Wert, Williams, Wood (except City of
Rossford), and Wyandot Counties: Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency, Northwest District Air Pollution Unit
1035 Dezlac Grove Drive, Bowling Green, OH 43402
(x) Ashtabula, Holmes, Lorain, and Wayne Counties:
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Northeast Distnct
Office, Air Pollution Unit, 2110 East Aurora Road,
Twinsburg, OH 44087.
(xi) Athens, Coshocton, Gallia, Guernsey, Hocking,
Jackson, Meigs, Morgan, Muskingum, Noble, Perry, Pike,
Ross, Tuscarawas, Vinton, and Washington Counties:
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Southeast District
Office, Air Pollution Unit, 2195 Front Street, Logan, OH
43138.
(xii) Champaign, Clinton, Highland, Logan, and Shelby
Counties: Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, South-
west District Office, Air Pollution Unit, East Fourth
Street, Dayton, OH 45402.
(xiii) Delaware, Fairfield, Fayette, Franklin, Knox,
Licking, Madison, Morrow, Pickaway, and Union Coun-
ties: Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Central Dis-
trict Office, Air Pollution Unit, P.O. Box 1049, Colum-
bus, OH 43266-0149
(xiv) Geauga and Lake Counties: Lake County General
Health District, Air Pollution Control, 105 Main Street,
Painesville, OH 44077.
7
-------
§60.4
(xv) Mahoning and Trumbull Counties: Mahoning-
Trumbull Air Pollution Control Agency, 9 West Front
Street, Youngstown, OH 44503.
(LL) Slate of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State Department
of Health, Air Quality Service, P.O. Box 53551, Okla-
homa City, OK 73152.
(i) Oklahoma City and County: Director, Oklahoma
City-County Health Department, 921 Northeast 23rd
Street, Oklahoma City, OK 73105.
(ii) Tulsa County: Tulsa City-County Health Depart-
ment. 4616 Hast Fifteenth Street, Tulsa, OK 74112.
(MM) State of Oregon, Department of Environmental
Quality, Yeon Building, 522 S.W. Fifth, Portland, OR
97204
(i)—(viii) [Reserved]
(ix) Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority, 225 North
Fifth. Suite 501, Springfield. OR 97477
(NN) (a) City of Philadelphia. Philadelphia Department
of Public Health, Air Management Services, 500 S. Broad
Street, Philadelphia, PA 19146
(b) Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Department of En-
vironmental Resources, Post Office Box 2063, Hamsburg,
PA 17120.
(c) Allegheny County Allegheny County Health De-
partment, Bureau of Air Pollution Control, 301 Thirty-
ninth Street. Pittsburgh, PA 15201.
(OO) State of Rhode Island, Division of Air and Haz-
ardous Materials, Department of Environmental Manage-
ment, 291 Promenade Street, Providence, RI 02908
(PP) State of South Carolina, Office of Environmental
Quality Control, Department of Health and Environmental
Control, 2600 Bull Street, Columbia, SC 29201.
(QQ) State of South Dakota, Department of Water and
Natural Resources, Office of Air Quality and Solid
Waste, Joe Foss Building, 523 East Capitol, Pierre, SD
57501—3181.
Editorial Note: For a table listing Region vm's
NSPS delegation status, see paragragh (c) of this section
(RR) Division of Air Pollution Control, Tennessee De-
partment of Public Health, 256 Capitol Hill Building,
Nashville, TN 37219
Knox County Department of Air Pollution, City/County
Building, Room L222, 400 Main Avenue, Knoxville,
TN 37902
Air Pollution Control Bureau, Metropolitan Health De-
partment, 311 23rd Avenue North, Nashville, TN
37203.
(SS) Stale of Texas, Texas Air Control Board, 6330
Highway 290 East, Austin, TX 78723.
(TT) State of Utah, Department of Health, Bureau of
Air Quality, 288 North 1460 West, P.O. Box 16690, Salt
Lake City, UT 84113—0690
Editorial Note: For a table lisnng Region VIII's
NSPS delegation status, see paragraph (c) of this section.
(UU) State of Vermont, Air Pollution Control Division,
Agency of Natural Resources, Building 3 South, 103
South Main Street, Waterbury, VT 05676.
(W) Commonwealth of Virginia, Virginia State Air
Pollution Control Board, Room 1106, Ninth Street Office
Building, Richmond, VA 23219.
(WW)(i) Washington: Washington Department
of Ecology, Post Office Box 47600, Olympia, WA
98504.
(ii) Benton-Franklin Counties Clean Air Author-
ity (BFCCAA), 650 George Washington Way,
Richland, WA 99352.
(iii) Northwest Air Pollution Authority
(NWAPA), 302 Pine Street, #207, Mt. Vernon,
WA 98273-3852.
(iv) Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority
(OAPCA), 909 Sleater-Kinney Rd. SE - Suite 1,
Lacey, WA 98503.
(v) Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Authority
(PSAPCA), 110 Union Street, Suite 500, Seattle,
WA 98101.
(vi) Southwest Air Pollution Control Authority
(SWAPCA), 1308 N.E. 134th Street, Suite D,
Vancouver, WA 98685-2747.
(vii) Spokane County Air Pollution Control Au-
thority (SCAPCA), West 1101 College Avenue,
Health Building, Room 403, Spokane, WA 99201.
(viii) [Reserved]
(ix) The following is a table indicating the dele-
gation status of the New Source Performance
Standards for the State of Washington.
8
-------
Delegation of Authority—New Source performance Standards State of Washington
Subpart
Description
WDOE 1
BFCCAA 2
NWAPCAJ
OAPCA*
PSAPCA1
SWAPCA 6
SCAPCA1
A
General Provisions
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
D
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
Da
Db
01/01/93
01/01/93
Dc
Small Industnal-CommerciaMnstitutional Steam Generating Units ....
E
Incinerators
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
Ea
Municipal Waste Combustion
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
F
Portland Cement Plants
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
G
Nitric Acid Plants
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
H
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
1
J
Petroleum Refineries
K
Petroleum Liquid Storage Vessels 6/11/73-5/19/78
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
Ka
Petroleum Liquid Storage Vessels After 5/18/70-7/23/84
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
Kb
Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels After 7/23/84 . ..
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
L
Secondary Lead Smelters
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
M
Brass & Bronze Ingot Production Plants
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
N
Iron & Steel Plants- BOPF Particulate
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
Na
Iron & Steel Plants BOPF, Hot Metal & Skimming Stations
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
0
Sewage Treatment Plants
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
P
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
Q
R
Primary Lead Smelters
S
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
T
Wet Process Phosphoric Acid Plants
U
Superphosphoric Acid Plants
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
V
Diammomum Phosphate Plants
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
W
Triple Superphosphate Plants
01/01/93
01/01/93
0T/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
X
Granular Triple Superphosphate Storage Facilities
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
Y
Coal Preparation Plants
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
Z
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
AA
Steel Plant Electric Arc Furnaces 10/21/74-8/17/03
Steel Plant Electric Arc Furnaces & Argon-Oxygen Decarbunzation
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
Vessels after 8/7/83.
BB
Kraft Pulp Mills
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
CC
Glass Manufacturing Plants
01/01/93
DO
Grain Elevators
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
EE
Surface Coating of Metal Fumrture
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
GG
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
HH
Lime Manufacturing plants
KK
Lead-Acid Battery Manufacturing Plant
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
LL
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
MM
Automobile & Light Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations .
NN
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
PP
Ammonium Sulfate Manufacture
01/01/93
QQ
Graphic Arts Industry. Publication Rotogravure Printing
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
-------
Delegation of Authority—New Source Performance Standards State of Washington—Continued
Description
WD0E>
BFCCAA"
NWAPCA1
OAPCA"
PSAPCA'
SWAPCA*
SCAPCA'
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/83
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/B1/B3
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/83
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/83
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/33
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01S3
01/01/93
01/D1A3
01/01/93
01/01/B3
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01 AS
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/83
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01A3
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/83
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/31/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
01/01/93
Pressure Sensitive Tape & Label Surface Coating Operations ..
Industrial Surface Coating: Large Appliances ...
Metal Co/I Surface CoaKng
Asphalt Processing & Asphalt Roofing Manufacturer
SOCMI Etfulpmenl Leaks (VOC) ...
Beverage Can Surface Coating Operations
Bu& Gasoime Terminals ,
Residential Wood Heaters ... ................................... .
Rubber Tire Manufacturing
Polymer Manufacturing Industry (VOC)
Flexible Vmyl and Urethane Coaling and Printing
Equipment Leaks of VOC In Petroleum Refineries
Syndetic Fiber Production Facilities ..................... <
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Air Oxidation Unit Processes .....,
Petroleum Dry Cleaners
VOC Emissions from Onshore Natural Gas Production
Onshore Natural Gas Production (S02)... . ............
VOC Emissions from SOCMI Distillation Facilities ...
Nonmetaltic Mineral Processing Plants
Wool Fiberglass Insulation Manufacturing Plants
VOC Emissions from Petroleum Refinery Wastewater Systems
Magnetic Tape Coating Facilities
Surface Coating of Plastic Parts for Business Machines
Catcmers & Dryers In Mineral Industries
Polymeric Coating o# Support Substrates Facilities
'WDOE—State of Washington Department of Ecology
3 BFCCAA—Benton Franklm Counties Clean Air Authority
3 NWAPCA—Northwest Air Pollution Control Authority
4OAPCA—Olympic Air Pollution Control Authority.
5 PSAPCA—Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency
•SWAPCA—Southwest Air Pollution Control Authority.
7 SCAPCA—Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority.
-------
(XX) State of West Virginia: Air Pollution Control
Commission, 1558 Washington Street East, Charleston,
WV 25311.
(YY) Wisconsin—Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources, P 0. Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707.
(ZZ) State of Wyoming, Department of Environmental
Quality, Air Quality Division, Herschler Building, 122
West 25th Street, Cheyenne, WY 82002.
Editorial Note: For a table listing Region vm's
NSPS delegation status, see paragraph (c) of this section.
(AAA) Territory of Guam: Guam Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Post Office Box 2999, Agana, Guam
96910.
(1) The following table lists the specific source and
pollutant categories that have been delegated to the air
§60.4
pollution control agency in Guam. A star (*) is used to
indicate each category that has been delegated
E:GRAPHICS EC01JN92.006
E:GRAPHICS EC01JN92.007
(BBB) Commonwealth of Puerto Rico: Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board, P.O. Box
11488, Santurce, PR 00910, Attention1. Air Quality Area
Director (see table under §60.4(bXFF)(l)).
(CCC) U.S. Virgin Islands: U S. Virgin Islands Depart-
ment of Conservation and Cultural Affairs, P.O. Box 578,
Charlotte Amalie, Sl Thomas, VI 00801
(c) The following is a table indicating the dele-
gation status of New Source Performance Stand-
ards for Region VIII.
Delegation Status of New Source Performance Standards
({NSPS) for Region VIII]
Subpart
A General Provisions
D Fossil Fueled Fired Steam Generators
Da Electric Utility Steam Generators
Db Industnal-CommerciaMnstrtutional Steam Generators .
Dc Industnal-CommerciaMnstitutional Steam Generators .
E Incinerators
Ea Municipal Waste Combustors
F Portland Cement Plants
Nitric Acid Plants
SuHunc Acid Plants
Asphalt Concrete Plants
Petroleum Refmenes
Petroleum Storage Vessels (6/11/73-5/19/70)
Petroleum Storage Vessels (5/18/78-7/23/04)
G
H
I
J
K
Ka
Kb Petroleum Storage Vessels (after 7/23/04)
L Secondary Lead Smelters
M Secondary Brass & Bronze Production Plants
N Primary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Process Furnaces (after 6/
11/73)
Na Secondary Emissions from Basic Oxygen Process Furnaces
(after 1/20/83)
O Sewage Treatment Plants
P Pnmary Copper Smelters
Q Pnmary Zinc Smelters
R Pnma7 Lead Smelter
S Pnmary Aluminum Reduction Plants
T Phosphate Fertilizer Industry Wet Process Phosphoric Plants
U Phosphate Fertilizer Industry Superphosphoric Acid Plants
V Phosphate Fertilizer Industry Diammonium Phosphate Plants
W Phosphate Fertilizer Industry Tnple Superphosphate Plants
X Phosphate Fertilizer Industry- Granular Tnple Superphosphate
Storage Facilities
Y Coal Preparation Plants
Z Ferroalloy Production Facilities
AA Steel Plants- Electric Arc Furnaces (10/21/74—8/17/83)
AAa Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces and Argon-Oxygen
Decartourizahon Vessels (after 8/7/03)
BB Kraft Pulp Mills
CC Glass Manufacturing Plants
DD Gram Elevators
EE Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
GG Stationary Gas Turbines
HH Lime Manufacturing Plants
KK Lead Acid Battery Plants
LL Metallic Mineral Processing Plants
MM Automobile & Light Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations
NN Phosphate Rock Plants
PP Ammonium Sulfate Manufacturing
QQ Graphic Arts Industry: Publication Rotogravure Printing
RR Pressure Sensitive Tape & Label Surface Coating
State
CO
MT>
ND'
SD1
UT1
WY
(*)
o
C)
(*)
C)
C)
n
o
C)
C)
C)
C)
(*)
o
C)
C)
C)
(*)
c)
(*)
(*)
n
(*)
C)
o
o
o
(')
(*)
d
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
c)
(*)
o
C)
(*)
D
o
(*)
(*)
C)
C)
D
<*)
(•)
(*)
o
r>
n
o
n
(•)
(*)
o
n
n
c)
(*)
(*)
c)
(*)
(*)
(*)
<•>
(*)
n
o
(*)
(*)
o
(*>
(*)
<•)
c)
(•)
(*)
o
c)
c)
(•)
n
(*)
n
o
(*)
o
o
n
o
(*)
d
o
(*)
(*)
(•)
c>
c)
c)
c)
(•)
c)
o
0
o
o
(•)
n
o
o
o
(•)
c)
(*)
o
o
(•)
o
n
n
o
(•)
n
o
<*)
n
(*)
n
n
n
o
(•)
c)
o
o
o
(*)
o
o
c)
(*)
(•)
(*)
<*)
<*)
o
(•)
D
c)
c)
<*)
(*)
o
(*)
(*)
n
<*)
(•)
o
(*)
(*)
c)
(*)
o
(*)
c)
n
(•)
o
o
n
n
o
o
o
c)
(*)
o
(•)
(*)
n
(•)
0
(*)
n
o
(*)
(•)
o
n
(*)
(*)
(•)
c)
n
c)
(*)
o
(*)
o
o
c)
o
o
(•)
0
o
<*)
o
(')
n
o
(*)
l9\
c)
o
n
\ )
o
\ )
o
\ )
o
\ l
n
\ )
d
n
o
n
n
n
o
o
o
c)
o
(*)
o
0
o
(*)
li
-------
§60.5
Delegation Status of New Source Performance Standards—Continued
[(NSPS) tor Region VIII]
Subpart
State
CO
MT*
NO1
SD>
UT1
WY
BBB
ODD
FFF
GGG
HHH
SS Industnal Surface Coating: Large Appliances
TT Metal Coil Surface Coating
UU Asphalt Processing & Asphalt Roofing Manufacture
W Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing; Equipment Leaks
of VOC
WW Beverage Can Surface Coating Industry
XX Bulk Gasoline Terminals
AAA Residential Wood Heaters
Rubber Tires
VOC Emissions from Polymer Manufacturing Industry
Flexible Vinyl & Urethane Coating & Pnnting
Equipment Leaks of VOC in Petroleum Refineries ....
Synthetic Fiber Production
HI VOC Emissions from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufac-
turing Industry Air Oxidation Unit Processes
JJJ Petroleum Dry Cleaners
KKK Equipment Leaks of VOC from Onshore Natural Gas Process-
ing Plants
LLL Onshore Natural Gas Processing. S02 Emissions
NNN VOC Emissions from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manu-
factunng Industry Distillation Operations
OOO Nionmetalltc Mineral Processing Plants
PPP Wool Fiberglass Insulation Manufacturing Plants
OOO VOC Emissions from Petroleum Refinery Wastewater Sys-
tems
SSS Magnetic Tape Industry
TTT Plastic Parts for Business Machine Coatings
VW Polymenc Coating of Supporting Substrates
o
n
n
r)
c)
n
c)
n
c)
n
c)
o
n
o
o
o
o
n
n
(*)
n
n
o
o
o
<*)
c)
o
o
(*)
<*)
o
(*)
(')
(*)
(*)
(*)
r>
o
o
(*)
o
o
n
o
n
o
' Indicates approval of New Source Performance Standards as pari of the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
(*) Indicates approval of state regulation.
[40 FR 18169, Apr. 25, 1975]
Editorial Note For Federal Register citations
affecting § 60 4 see the List of CFR Sections Affected ap-
pearing in the Finding Aids section of this volume.
§60.5 Determination of construction
or modification.
(a) When requested to do so by an owner or op-
erator, the Administrator will make a determina-
tion of whether action taken or intended to be
taken by such owner or operator constitutes con-
struction (including reconstruction) or modification
or the commencement thereof within the meaning
of this part.
(b) The Administrator will respond to any re-
quest for a determination under paragraph (a) of
this section within 30 days of receipt of such re-
quest
[40 FR 58418, Dec. 16, 1975]
§ 60.6 Review of plans.
(a) When requested to do so by an owner or op-
erator, the Administrator will review plans for
construction or modification for the purpose of
providing technical advice to the owner or opera-
tor.
(b)(1) A separate request shall be submitted for
each construction or modification project.
(2) Each request shall identify the location of
such project, and be accompanied by technical in-
formation describing the proposed nature, size, de-
sign, and method of operation of each affected fa-
cility involved in such project, including informa-
tion on any equipment to be used for measurement
or control of emissions.
(c) Neither a request for plans review nor ad-
vice furnished by the Administrator in response to
such request shall (1) relieve an owner or operator
of legal responsibility for compliance with any
provision of this part or of any applicable State or
local requirement, or (2) prevent the Administrator
from implementing or enforcing any provision of
this part or taking any other action authorized by
the Act.
[36 FR 24877, Dec. 23, 1971, as amended at 39 FR 9314,
Mar. 8, 1974]
§60.7 Notification and record keeping.
(a) Any owner or operator subject to the provi-
sions of this part shall furnish the Administrator
written notification as follows:
(1) A notification of the date construction (or
reconstruction as defined under §60.15) of an af-
12
-------
§60.7
fected facility is commenced postmarked no later
than 30 days after such date. This requirement
shall not apply in the case of mass-produced fa-
cilities which are purchased in completed form.
(2) A notification of the anticipated date of ini-
tial startup of an affected facility postmarked not
more than 60 days nor less than 30 days prior to
such date.
(3) A notification of the actual date of initial
startup of an affected facility postmarked within
15 days after such date.
(4) A notification of any physical or operational
change to an existing facility which may increase
the emission rate of any air pollutant to which a
standard applies, unless that change is specifically
exempted under an applicable subpart or in
§60.14(e) This notice shall be postmarked 60
days or as soon as practicable before the change
is commenced and shall include information de-
scribing the precise nature of the change, present
and proposed emission control systems, productive
capacity of the facility before and after the change,
and the expected completion date of the change.
The Administrator may request additional relevant
information subsequent to this notice.
(5) A notification of the date upon which dem-
onstration of the continuous monitoring system
performance commences in accordance with
§60.13(c). Notification shall be postmarked not
less than 30 days prior to such date.
(6) A notification of the anticipated date for
conducting the opacity observations required by
§60.11(e)(1) of this part. The notification shall
also include, if appropriate, a request for the Ad-
ministrator to provide a visible emissions reader
during a performance test. The notification shall
be postmarked not less than 30 days prior to such
date.
(7) A notification that continuous opacity mon-
itoring system data results will be used to deter-
mine compliance with the applicable opacity
standard during a performance test required by
§ 60.8 in lieu of Method 9 observation data as al-
lowed by § 60.11(e)(5) of this part. This notifica-
tion shall be postmarked not less than 30 days
prior to the date of the performance test.
(b) Any owner or operator subject to the provi-
sions of this part shall maintain records of the oc-
currence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or
malfunction in the operation of an affected facil-
ity; any malfunction of the air pollution control
equipment; or any periods during which a continu-
ous monitoring system or monitoring device is in-
operative.
(c) Each owner or operator required to install a
continuous monitoring system (CMS) or monitor-
ing device shall submit an excess emissions and
monitoring systems performance report (excess
emissions are defined in applicable subparts) and/
or a summary report form (see paragraph (d) of
this section) to the Administrator semiannually,
except when: more frequent reporting is specifi-
cally required by an applicable subpart; or the
CMS data are to be used directly for compliance
determination, in which case quarterly reports shall
be submitted; or the Administrator, on a case-by-
case basis, determines that more frequent reporting
is necessary to accurately assess the compliance
status of the source. All reports shall be post-
marked by the 30th day following the end of each
calendar half (or quarter, as appropriate). Written
reports of excess emissions shall include the fol-
lowing information:
(1) The magnitude of excess emissions com-
puted in accordance with §60.13(h), any conver-
sion factors) used, and the date and time of com-
mencement and completion of each time period of
excess emissions. The process operating time dur-
ing the reporting period.
(2) Specific identification of each period of ex-
cess emissions that occurs during startups, shut-
downs, and malfunctions of the affected facility.
The nature and cause of any malfunction (if
known), the corrective action taken or preventative
measures adopted.
(3) The date and time identifying each period
during which the continuous monitoring system
was inoperative except for zero and span checks
and the nature of the system repairs or adjust-
ments.
(4) When no excess emissions have occurred or
the continuous monitoring system(s) have not been
inoperative, repaired, or adjusted, such information
shall be stated in the report.
(d) The summary report form shall contain the
information and be in the format shown in figure
1 unless otherwise specified by the Administrator
One summary report form shall be submitted for
each pollutant monitored at each affected facility.
(1) If the total duration of excess emissions for
the reporting period is less than 1 percent of the
total operating time for the reporting period and
CMS downtime for the reporting period is less
than 5 percent of the total operating time for the
reporting period, only the summary report form
shall be submitted and the excess emission report
described in § 60.7(c) need not be submitted unless
requested by the Administrator.
(2) If the total duration of excess emissions for
the repotting period is 1 percent or greater of the
total operating time for the reporting period or the
total CMS downtime for the reporting period is 5
percent or greater of the total operating time for
the reporting period, the summary report form and
the excess emission report described in § 60.7(c)
shall both be submitted.
13
-------
§60.7
Figure 1—Summary Report—Gaseous and Emission Limitation
Opacity Excess Emission and Monitoring
System Performance
Pollutant (Circle One—S02/N0x/TRS/HjS/C0/0pacity)
Repotting period dates: From to
Company:
Address:
Monitor Manufacturer and Model No.
Date of Latest CMS Certification or Audit
Process Unit(s) Description:
Total source operating time in reporting period1
Emission data summary1
CMS performance summary'
1. Duration of excess emissions in reporting period
due to:
a. Startup/shutdown
b. Control equipment problems
c. Process problems
d. Other known causes
e. Unknown causes
2. Total duration of excess emission
3. Total duration of excess emissions x (100) [Total
source operating time].
1. CMS downtime « reporting period due to:
a. Monitor equipment malfunctions
b. Non-Monitor equipment malfunctions
c. Quality assurance calibration
d. Other known causes
e. Unknown causes
2 Total CMS Downtime
3. [Total CMS Downtime] x (100) [Total source op-
erating time].
%'
1 For opacity, record ail times in minutes. For gases, record all times in hours.
2 For the reporting period: If the total duration of excess emissions is 1 percent or greater of the total operating time or the total
CMS downtime is 5 percent or greater of the total operating time, both the summary report form and the excess emission report
described in §60 7(c) shall be submitted.
On a separate page, describe any changes since last
quarter in CMS, process or controls I certify that the in-
foimation contained in this report is true, accurate, and
complete.
Name
Signature
Title
Date
(e)(1) Notwithstanding the frequency of report-
ing requirements specified in paragraph (c) of this
section, an owner or operator who is required by
an applicable subpart to submit excess emissions
and monitoring systems performance reports (and
summary reports) on a quarterly (or more fre-
quent) basis may reduce the frequency of reporting
for that standard to semiannual if the following
conditions are met.
(1) For 1 full year (e.g., 4 quarterly or 12
monthly reporting periods) the affected facility's
excess emissions and monitoring systems reports
submitted to comply with a standard under this
part continually demonstrate that the facility is in
compliance with the applicable standard;
(ii) The owner or operator continues to comply
with all recordkeeping and monitoring require-
ments specified in this subpart and the applicable
standard; and
(iii) The Administrator does not object to a re-
duced frequency of reporting for the affected facil-
ity, as provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this section.
(2) The frequency of reporting of excess emis-
sions and monitoring systems performance (and
summary) reports may be reduced only after the
owner or operator notifies the Administrator in
writing of his or her intention to make such a
change and the Administrator does not object to
the intended change. In deciding whether to ap-
prove a reduced frequency of reporting, the Ad-
ministrator may review information concerning the
source's entire previous performance history dur-
ing the required recordkeeping period prior to the
intended change, including performance test re-
sults, monitoring data, and evaluations of an
owner or operator's conformance with operation
and maintenance requirements. Such information
may be used by the Administrator to make a judg-
ment about the source's potential for noncompli-
ance in the future. If the Administrator dis-
approves the owner or operator's request to reduce
the frequency of reporting, the Administrator will
notify the owner or operator in writing within 45
days after receiving notice of the owner or opera-
tor's intention. The notification from the Adminis-
trator to the owner or operator will specify the
grounds on which the disapproval is based. In the
absence of a notice of disapproval within 45 days,
approval is automatically granted.
(3) As soon as monitoring data indicate that the
affected facility is not in compliance with any
emission limitation or operating parameter speci-
fied in the applicable standard, the frequency of
reporting shall revert to the frequency specified in
the applicable standard, and the owner or operator
shall submit an excess emissions and monitoring
systems performance report (and summary report,
if required) at the next appropriate reporting pe-
riod following the noncomplying event. After
demonstrating compliance with the applicable
standard for another full year, the owner or opera-
tor may again request approval from the Adminis-
trator to reduce the frequency of reporting for that
14
-------
§60.8
standard as provided for in paragraphs (e)(1) and
(e)(2) of this section.
(f) Any owner or operator subject to the provi-
sions of this part shall maintain a file of all meas-
urements, including continuous monitoring system,
monitoring device, and performance testing meas-
urements; all continuous monitoring system per-
formance evaluations; all continuous monitoring
system or monitoring device calibration checks;
adjustments and maintenance performed on these
systems or devices; and all other information re-
quired by this pan recorded in a permanent form
suitable for inspection. The file shall be retained
for at least two years following the date of such
measurements, maintenance, reports, and records.
Cg) If notification substantially similar to that in
paragraph (a) of this section is required by any
other State or local agency, sending the Adminis-
trator a copy of that notification will satisfy the re-
quirements of paragraph (a) of this section.
(h) Individual subparts of this part may include
specific provisions which clarify or make inap-
plicable the provisions set forth in this section.
[36 FR 24877, Dec. 28, 1971, as amended at 40 FR
46254, Oct. 6, 1975 ; 40 FR 58418, Dec. 16, 1975; 45 FR
5617, Jan. 23, 1980; 48 FR 48335, Oct. 18, 1983; 50 FR
53113, Dec 27, 1985; 52 FR 9781, Mar. 26, 1987; 55 FR
51382, Dec. 13, 1990; 59 FR 12428, Mar. 16, 1994; 59
FR 47265, Sep 15, 1994]
§60.8 Performance tests.
(a) Within 60 days after achieving the maxi-
mum production rate at which the affected facility
will be operated, but not later than 180 days after
initial startup of such facility and at such other
times as may be required by the Administrator
under section 114 of the Act, the owner or opera-
tor of such facility shall conduct performance
test(s) and furnish the Administrator a written re-
port of the results of such performance test(s).
(b) Performance tests shall be conducted and
data reduced in accordance with the test methods
and procedures contained in each applicable sub-
part unless the Administrator (1) specifies or ap-
proves, in specific cases, the use of a reference
method with minor changes in methodology, (2)
approves the use of an equivalent method, (3) ap-
proves the use of an alternative method the results
of which he has determined to be adequate for in-
dicating whether a specific source is in compli-
ance, (4) waives the requirement for performance
tests because the owner or operator of a source
has demonstrated by other means to the Adminis-
trator's satisfaction that the affected facility is in
compliance with the standard, or (5) approves
shorter sampling times and smaller sample vol-
umes when necessitated by process variables or
other factors. Nothing in this paragraph shall be
construed to abrogate the Administrator's authority
to require testing under section 114 of the Act.
(c) Performance tests shall be conducted under
such conditions as the Administrator shall specify
to the plant operator based on representative per-
formance of the affected facility. The owner or op-
erator shall make available to the Administrator
such records as may be necessary to determine the
conditions of the performance tests. Operations
during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunc-
tion shall not constitute representative conditions
for the purpose of a performance test nor shall
emissions in excess of the level of the applicable
emission limit during periods of startup, shutdown,
and malfunction be considered a violation of the
applicable emission limit unless otherwise speci-
fied in the applicable standard.
(d) The owner or operator of an affected facility
shall provide the Administrator at least 30 days
prior notice of any performance test, except as
specified under other subparts, to afford the Ad-
ministrator the opportunity to have an observer
present.
(e) The owner or operator of an affected facility
shall provide, or cause to be provided, perform-
ance testing facilities as follows:
(1) Sampling ports adequate for test methods
applicable to such facility. This includes (i) con-
structing the air pollution control system such that
volumetric flow rates and pollutant emission rates
can be accurately determined by applicable test
methods and procedures and (ii) providing a stack
or duct free of cyclonic flow during performance
tests, as demonstrated by applicable test methods
and procedures.
(2) Safe sampling platform(s).
(3) Safe access to sampling platform(s).
(4) Utilities for sampling and testing equipment
(f) Unless otherwise specified in the applicable
subpart, each performance test shall consist of
three separate runs using the applicable test meth-
od. Each run shall be conducted for the time and
under the conditions specified in the applicable
standard. For the purpose of determining compli-
ance with an applicable standard, the arithmetic
means of results of the three runs shall apply. In
the event that a sample is accidentally lost or con-
ditions occur in which one of the three runs must
be disconnnued because of forced shutdown, fail-
ure of an irreplaceable portion of the sample train,
extreme meteorological conditions, or other cir-
cumstances, beyond the owner or operator's con-
trol, compliance may, upon the Administrator's
approval, be determined using the arithmetic mean
of the results of the two other runs.
[36 FR 24877, Dec 23, 1971, as amended at 39 FR 9314,
Mar 8, 1974; 42 FR 57126, Nov 1, 1977; 44 FR 33612,
June 11, 1979; 54 FR 6662, Feb 14, 1989; 54 FR 21344,
May 17, 1989]
15
-------
§60.9
§ 60.9 Availability of information.
The availability to the public of information
provided to, or otherwise obtained by, the Admin-
istrator under this part shall be governed by part
2 of this chapter. (Information submitted volun-
tarily to the Administrator for the purposes of
IS 60.5 and 60.6 is governed by §§2.201 through
2.213 of this chapter and not by §2.301 of this
chapter.)
§60.10 State authority.
The provisions of this part shall not be con-
strued in any manner to preclude any State or po-
litical subdivision thereof from:
(a) Adopting and enforcing any emission stand-
ard or limitation applicable to an affected facility,
provided that such emission standard or limitation
is not less stringent than the standard applicable to
such facility.
(b) Requiring the owner or operator of an af-
fected facility to obtain permits, licenses, or ap-
provals prior to initiating construction, modifica-
tion, or operation of such facility.
§ 60.11 Compliance with standards and
maintenance requirements.
(a) Compliance with standards in this part, other
than opacity standards, shall be determined only
by performance tests established by 160.8, unless
otherwise specified in the applicable standard.
(b) Compliance with opacity standards in this
part shall be determined by conducting observa-
tions in accordance with Reference Method 9 in
appendix A of this part, any alternative method
that is approved by the Administrator, or as pro-
vided in paragraph (e)(5) of this section. For pur-
poses of determining initial compliance, the mini-
mum total time of observations shall be 3 hours
(30 6-minute averages) for the performance test or
other set of observations (meaning those fugitive-
type emission sources subject only to an opacity
standard).
(c) The opacity standards set forth in this part
shall apply at all times except during periods of
startup, shutdown, malfunction, and as otherwise
provided in the applicable standard.
(d) At all times, including periods of startup,
shutdown, and malfunction, owners and operators
shall, to the extent practicable, maintain and oper-
ate any affected facility including associated air
pollution control equipment in a manner consistent
with good air pollution control practice for mini-
mizing emissions. Determination of whether ac-
ceptable operating and maintenance procedures are
being used will be based on information available
to the Administrator which may include, but is not
limited to, monitoring results, opacity observa-
tions, review of operating and maintenance proce-
dures, and inspection of the source.
(e)(1) For the purpose of demonstrating initial
compliance, opacity observations shall be con-
ducted concurrently with the initial performance
test required in §60.8 unless one of the following
conditions apply. If no performance test under
§60.8 is required, then opacity observations shall
be conducted within 60 days after achieving the
maximum production rate at which the affected fa-
cility will be operated but no later than 180 days
after initial startup of the facility. If visibility or
other conditions prevent the opacity observations
from being conducted concurrently with the initial
performance test required under § 60.8, the source
owner or operator shall reschedule die opacity ob-
servations as soon after the initial performance test
as possible, but not later than 30 days thereafter,
and shall advise die Administrator of the resched-
uled date. In these cases, the 30-day prior notifica-
tion to the Administrator required in § 60.7(a)(6)
shall be waived. The rescheduled opacity observa-
tions shall be conducted (to the extent possible)
under the same operating conditions that existed
during the initial performance test conducted under
160.8. The visible emissions observer shall deter-
mine whether visibility or other conditions prevent
the opacity observations from being made concur-
rently with the initial performance test in accord-
ance with procedures contained in Reference
Method 9 of appendix B of this part. Opacity
readings of portions of plumes which contain con-
densed, uncombmed water vapor shall not be used
for purposes of determing compliance with opacity
standards. The owner or operator of an affected fa-
cility shall make available, upon request by the
Administrator, such records as may be necessary
to determine the conditions under which the visual
observations were made and shall provide evi-
dence indicating proof of current visible observer
emission certification. Except as provided in para-
graph (e)(5) of this section, the results of continu-
ous monitoring by transmissometer which indicate
that the opacity at the time visual observations
were made was not in excess of the standard are
probative but not conclusive evidence of the actual
opacity of an emission, provided that the source
shall meet the burden of proving that the instru-
ment used meets (at the time of the alleged viola-
tion) Performance Specification I in appendix B
of this part, has been properly maintained and (at
the time of the alleged violation) that the resulting
data have not been altered in any way.
(2) Except as provided' in paragraph (e)(3) of
this section, the owner or operator of an affected
facility to which an opacity standard in this part
applies shall conduct opacity observations in ac-
cordance with paragraph (b) of this section, shall
record the opacity of emissions, and shall report to
the Administrator the opacity results along with
the results of the initial performance test required
16
-------
§60.12
under § 60.8. The inability of an owner or operator
to secure a visible emissions observer shall not be
considered a reason for not conducting the opacity
observations concurrent with the initial perform-
ance test.
(3) The owner or operator of an affected facility
to which an opacity standard in this part applies
may request the Administrator to determine and to
record the opacity of emissions from the affected
facility during the initial performance test and at
such times as may be required. The owner or op-
erator of the affected facility shall report the opac-
ity results. Any request to the Administrator to de-
termine and to record the opacity of emissions
from an affected facility shall be included in the
notification required in § 60.7(a)(6). If, for some
reason, the Administrator cannot determine and
record the opacity of emissions from the affected
facility during the performance test, then the pro-
visions of paragraph (e)(1) of this section shall
apply.
(4) An owner or operator of an affected facility
using a continuous opacity monitor (transmis-
someter) shall record the monitoring data produced
during the initial performance test required by
§ 60.8 and shall furnish the Administrator a written
report of the monitoring results along with Method
9 and § 60.8 performance test results.
(5) An owner or operator of an affected facility
subject to an opacity standard may submit, for
compliance purposes, continuous opacity monitor-
ing system (COMS) data results produced during
any performance test required under §60.8 in lieu
of Method 9 observation data. If an owner or op-
erator elects to submit COMS data for compliance
with the opacity standard, he shall notify the Ad-
ministrator of that decision, in writing, at least 30
days before any performance test required under
§ 60.8 is conducted. Once the owner or operator of
an affected facility has notified the Administrator
to that effect, the COMS data results will be used
to determine opacity compliance during subse-
quent tests required under §60.8 until the owner
or operator notifies the Administrator, in writing,
to the contrary. For the purpose of determining
compliance with the opacity standard during a per-
formance test required under §60.8 using COMS
data, the minimum total time of COMS data col-
lection shall be averages of all 6-minute continu-
ous periods within the duration of the mass emis-
sion performance test. Results of the COMS opac-
ity determinations shall be submitted along with
the results of the performance test required under
§60.8. The owner or operator of an affected facil-
ity using a COMS for compliance purposes is re-
sponsible for demonstrating that the COMS meets
the requirements specified in § 60.13(c) of this
part, that the COMS has been properly maintained
and operated, and that the resulting data have not
been altered in any way. If COMS data results are
submitted for compliance with the opacity stand-
ard for a period of time during which Method 9
data indicates noncompliance, the Method 9 data
will be used to determine opacity compliance.
(6) Upon receipt from an owner or operator of
the written reports of the results of the perform-
ance tests required by § 60.8, the opacity observa-
tion results and observer certification required by
§60.11(e)(1), and the COMS results, if applicable,
the Administrator will make a finding concerning
compliance with opacity and other applicable
standards. If COMS data results are used to com-
ply with an opacity standard, only those results are
required to be submitted along with the perform-
ance test results required by §60.8. If the Admin-
istrator finds that an affected facility is in compli-
ance with all applicable standards for which per-
formance tests are conducted in accordance with
§60.8 of this part but during the time such per-
formance tests are being conducted fails to meet
any applicable opacity standard, he shall notify the
owner or operator and advise him that he may pe-
tition the Administrator within 10 days of receipt
of notification to make appropriate adjustment to
the opacity standard for the affected facility.
(7) The Administrator will grant such a petition
upon a demonstration by the owner or operator
that the affected facility and associated air pollu-
tion control equipment was operated and main-
tained in a manner to minimize the opacity of
emissions during the performance tests; that the
performance tests were performed under the condi-
tions established by the Administrator; and that the
affected facility and associated air pollution con-
trol equipment were incapable of being adjusted or
operated to meet the applicable opacity standard.
(8) The Administrator will establish an opacity
standard for the affected facility meeting the above
requirements at a level at which the source will be
able, as indicated by the performance and opacity
tests, to meet the opacity standard at all times dur-
ing which the source is meeting the mass or con-
centration emission standard. The Administrator
will promulgate the new opacity standard in the
Federal Register.
(f) Special provisions set forth under an applica-
ble subpart of this part shall supersede any con-
flicting provisions of this section.
[38 FR 28565, Oct 15, 1973, as amended at 39 FR
39873, Nov 12, 1974; 43 FR 8800, Mar. 3, 1978; 45 FR
23379, Apr. 4, 1980; 48 FR 48335, Oct. 18, 1983; 50 FR
53113, Dec. 27, 1985; 51 FR 1790, Jan 15, 1986; 52 FR
9781, Mar. 26, 1987]
§60.12 Circumvention.
No owner or operator subject to the provisions
of this part shall build, erect, install, or use any ar-
ticle, machine, equipment or process, the use of
17
-------
§60.13
which conceals an emission which would other-
wise constitute a violation of an applicable stand-
aid. Such concealment includes, but is not limited
to, the use of gaseous diluents to achieve compli-
ance with an opacity standard or with a standard
which is based on the concentration of a pollutant
in the gases discharged to the atmosphere.
[39 FR 9314, Mar. 8, 1974]
§60.13 Monitoring requirements.
(a) For the purposes of this section, all continu-
ous monitoring systems required under applicable
subparts shall be subject to the provisions of this
section upon promulgation of performance speci-
fications for continuous monitoring systems under
appendix B to this part and, if the continuous
monitoring system is used to demonstrate compli-
ance with emission limits on a continuous basis,
appendix F to this part, unless otherwise specified
in an applicable subpart or by the Administrator.
Appendix F is applicable December 4, 1987.
(b) All continuous monitoring systems and mon-
itoring devices shall be installed and operational
prior to conducting performance tests under § 60.8.
Verification of operational status shall, as a mini-
mum, include completion of the manufacturer's
written requirements or recommendations for in-
stallation, operation, and calibration of the device
(c) If the owner or operator of an affected facil-
ity elects to submit continous opacity monitonng
system (COMS) data for compliance with the
opacity standard as provided under §60.11(e)(5),
he shall conduct a performance evaluation of the
COMS as specified in Performance Specification
1, appendix B, of this part before the performance
test required under §60.8 is conducted. Otherwise,
the owner or operator of an affected facility shall
conduct a performance evaluation of the COMS or
continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS)
during any performance test required under §60.8
or within 30 days thereafter in accordance with the
applicable performance specification in appendix
B of this part. The owner or operator of an af-
fected facility shall conduct COMS or CEMS per-
formance evaluations at such other times as may
be required by the Administrator under section
114 of the Act.
(1) The owner or operator of an affected facility
using a COMS to determine opacity compliance
during any performance test required under §60.8
and as described in § 60.11 (e)(5) shall furnish the
Administrator two or, upon request, more copies
of a written report of the results of the COMS per-
formance evaluation described in paragraph (c) of
this section at least 10 days before the perform-
ance test required under § 60.8 is conducted.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(1) of
this section, the owner or operator of an affected
facility shall furnish the Administrator within 60
days of completion two or, upon request, more
copies of a written report of the results of the per-
formance evaluation.
(d)(1) Owners and operators of all continuous
emission monitoring systems installed in accord-
ance with the provisions of this part shall check
the zero (or low-level value between 0 and 20 per-
cent of span value) and span (50 to 100 percent
of span value) calibration drifts at least once daily
in accordance with a written procedure. The zero
and span shall, as a minimum, be adjusted when-
ever the 24-hour zero drift or 24-hour span drift
exceeds two times the limits of the applicable per-
formance specifications in appendix B. The system
must allow the amount of excess zero and span
dnft measured at the 24-hour interval checks to be
recorded and quantified, whenever specified. For
continuous monitoring systems measuring opacity
of emissions, the optical surfaces exposed to the
effluent gases shall be cleaned prior to performing
the zero and span drift adjustments except that for
systems using automaxic zero adjustments. The op-
tical surfaces shall be cleaned when the cumu-
lative automatic zero compensation exceeds 4 per-
cent opacity.
(2) Unless otherwise approved by the Adminis-
trator, the following procedures shall be followed
for continuous monitoring systems measuring
opacity of emissions. Minimum procedures shall
include a method for producing a simulated zero
opacity condition and an upscale (span) opacity
condition using a certified neutral density filter or
other related technique to produce a known obscu-
ration of the light beam. Such procedures shall
provide a system check of the analyzer internal
optical surfaces and all electronic circuitry includ-
ing the lamp and photodetector assembly.
(e) Except for system breakdowns, repairs, cali-
bration checks, and zero and span adjustments re-
quired under paragraph (d) of this section, all con-
tinuous monitoring systems shall be in continuous
operation and shall meet minimum frequency of
operation requirements as follows:
(1) All continuous monitoring systems ref-
erenced by paragraph (c) of this section for meas-
uring opacity of emissions shall complete a mini-
mum of one cycle of sampling and analyzing for
each successive 10-second period and one cycle of
data recording for each successive 6-minute pe-
riod.
(2) All continuous monitoring systems ref-
erenced by paragraph (c) of this section for meas-
uring emissions, except opacity, shall complete a
minimum of one cycle of operation (sampling,
analyzing, and data recording) for each successive
15-minute period.
(0 All continuous monitoring systems or mon-
itoring devices shall be installed such that rep-
resentative measurements of emissions or process
18
-------
§60.13
parameters from the affected facility are obtained.
Additional procedures for location of continuous
monitoring systems contained in the applicable
Performance Specifications of appendix B of this
part shall be used.
(g) When the effluents from a single affected
facility or two or more affected facilities subject
to the same emission standards are combined be-
fore being released to the atmosphere, the owner
or operator may install applicable continuous mon-
itoring systems on each effluent or on the com-
bined effluent. When the affected facilities are not
subject to the same emission standards, separate
continuous monitoring systems shall be installed
on each effluent. When the effluent from one af-
fected facility is released to the atmosphere
through more than one point, the owner or opera-
tor shall install an applicable continuous monitor-
ing system on each separate effluent unless the in-
stallation of fewer systems is approved by the Ad-
ministrator. When more than one continuous mon-
itoring system is used to measure the emissions
from one affected facility (e.g., multiple breech-
ings, multiple outlets), the owner or operator shall
report the results as required from each continuous
monitoring system.
(h) Owners or operators of all continuous mon-
itoring systems for measurement of opacity shall
reduce all data to 6-minute averages and for con-
tinuous monitoring systems other than opacity to
1-hour averages for time periods as defined in
§60.2. Six-minute opacity averages shall be cal-
culated from 36 or more data points equally
spaced over each 6-minute period. For continuous
monitoring systems other than opacity, 1-hour
averages shall be computed from four or more
data points equally spaced over each 1-hour pe-
riod. Data recorder during periods of continuous
monitoring system breakdowns, repair-, calibration
checks, and zero and span adjustments shall not be
included in the data averages computed under this
paragraph. An arithmetic or integrated average of
all data may be used. The data may be recorded
in reduced or nonreduced form (e.g., ppm pollut-
ant and percent O2 or ng/J of pollutant). All ex-
cess emissions shall be converted into units of the
standard using the applicable conversion proce-
dures specified in subparts. After conversion into
units of the standard, the data may be rounded to
the same number of significant digits as used in
the applicable subparts to specify the emission
limit (e.g., rounded to the nearest 1 percent opac-
ity).
(i) After receipt and consideration of written ap-
plication, the Administrator may approve alter-
natives to any monitoring procedures or require-
ments of this part including, but not limited to the
following:
(1) Alternative monitoring requirements when
installation of a continuous monitoring system or
monitoring device specified by this part would not
provide accurate measurements due to liquid water
or other interferences caused by substances with
the effluent gases.
(2) Alternative monitoring requirements when
the affected facility is infrequently operated.
(3) Alternative monitoring requirements to ac-
commodate continuous monitoring systems that re-
quire additional measurements to correct for stack
moisture conditions.
(4) Alternative locations for installing continu-
ous monitoring systems or monitoring devices
when the owner or operator can demonstrate that
installation at alternate locations will enable accu-
rate and representative measurements.
(5) Alternative methods of converting pollutant
concentration measurements to units of the stand-
ards.
(6) Alternative procedures for performing daily
checks of zero and span drift that do not involve
use of span gases or test cells.
(7) Alternatives to the A.S.T.M. test methods or
sampling procedures specified by any subpart.
(8) Alternative continuous monitoring systems
that do not meet the design or performance re-
quirements in Performance Specification 1, appen-
dix B, but adequately demonstrate a definite and
consistent relationship between its measurements
and the measurements of opacity by a system
complying with the requirements in Performance
Specification 1. The Administrator may require
that such demonstration be performed for each af-
fected facility.
(9) Alternative monitoring requirements when
the effluent from a single affected facility or the
combined effluent from two or more affected fa-
cilities are released to the atmosphere through
more than one point.
(j) An alternative to the relative accuracy test
specified in Performance Specification 2 of appen-
dix B may be requested as follows:
(1) An alternative to the reference method tests
for determining relative accuracy is available for
sources with emission rates demonstrated to be
less than SO percent of the applicable standard. A
source owner or operator may petition the Admin-
istrator to waive the relative accuracy test in sec-
tion 7 of Performance Specification 2 and sub-
stitute the procedures in section 10 if the results
of a performance test conducted according to the
requirements in § 60.8 of this subpart or other tests
performed following the criteria in § 60.8 dem-
onstrate that the emission rate of the pollutant of
interest in the units of the applicable standard is
less than 50 percent of the applicable standard. For
sources subject to standards expressed as control
efficiency levels, a source owner or operator may
19
-------
§60.14
petition the Administrator to waive the relative ac-
curacy test and substitute the procedures in section
10 of Performance Specification 2 if the control
device exhaust emission rate is less than SO per-
cent of the level needed to meet the control effi-
ciency requirement. The alternative procedures do
not apply if the continuous emission monitoring
system is used to determine compliance continu-
ously with the applicable standard. The petition to
waive the relative accuracy test shall include a de-
tailed description of the procedures to be applied.
Included shall be location and procedure for con-
ducting the alternative, the concentration or re-
sponse levels of the alternative RA materials, and
the other equipment checks included in the alter-
native procedure. The Administrator will review
the petition for completeness and applicability.
The determination to grant a waiver will depend
on the intended use of the CEMS data (e.g., data
collection purposes other than NSPS) and may re-
quire specifications more stringent than in Per-
formance Specification 2 (e.g., the applicable
emission limit is more stringent than NSPS).
(2) The waiver of a CEMS relative accuracy
test will be reviewed and may be rescinded at
such time following successful completion of the
alternative RA procedure that the CEMS data indi-
cate the source emissions approaching the level of
the applicable standard. The criterion for review-
ing the waiver is the collection of CEMS data
showing that emissions have exceeded 70 percent
of the applicable standard for seven, consecutive,
averaging periods as specified by the applicable
regulation(s) For sources subject to standards ex-
pressed as control efficiency levels, the criterion
for reviewing the waiver is the collection of
CEMS data showing that exhaust emissions have
exceeded 70 percent of the level needed to meet
the control efficiency requirement for seven, con-
secutive, averaging periods as specified by the ap-
plicable regulation(s) [e.g., § 60.45(g) (2) and (3),
160.73(e), and § 60.84(e)], It is the responsibility
of the source operator to maintain records and de-
termine the level of emissions relative to the cri-
terion on the waiver of relative accuracy testing.
If this criterion is exceeded, the owner or operator
must notify the Administrator within 10 days of
such occurrence and include a description of the
nature and cause of the increasing emissions. The
Administrator will review the notification and may
rescind the waiver and require the owner or opera-
tor to conduct a relative accuracy test of the
CEMS as specified in section 7 of Performance
Specification 2.
[40 FR 46255, Oct. 6, 1975; 40 FR 59205, Dec. 22, 1975,
as amended at 41 FR 35185, Aug. 20, 1976; 48 FR
13326, Mar. 30, 1983; 48 FR 23610, May 25, 1983 ; 48
FR 32986, July 20, 1983 , 52 FR 9782, Mar 26, 1987;
52 FR 17555, May 11, 1987; 52 FR 21007, June 4, 1987]
§60.14 Modification.
(a) Except as provided under paragraphs (e) and
(f) of this section, any physical or operational
change to an existing facility which results in an
increase in the emission rate to the atmosphere of
any pollutant to which a standard applies shall be
considered a modification within the meaning of
section 111 of the Act. Upon modification, an ex-
isting facility shall become an affected facility for
each pollutant to which a standard applies and for
which there is an increase in the emission rate to
the atmosphere.
(b) Emission rate shall be expressed as kg/hr of
any pollutant discharged into the atmosphere for
which a standard is applicable. The Administrator
shall use the following to determine emission rate:
(1) Emission factors as specified in the latest
issue of "Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors," EPA Publication No. AP-42, or other
emission factors determined by the Administrator
to be superior to AP-42 emission factors, in cases
where utilization of emission factors demonstrate
that the emission level resulting from the physical
or operational change will either clearly increase
or clearly not increase.
(2) Material balances, continuous monitor data,
or manual emission tests in cases where utilization
of emission factors as referenced in paragraph
(b)(1) of this section does not demonstrate to the
Administrator's satisfaction whether the emission
level resulting from the physical or operational
change will either clearly increase or clearly not
increase, or where an owner or operator dem-
onstrates to the Administrator's satisfaction that
there are reasonable grounds to dispute the result
obtained by the Administrator utilizing emission
factors as referenced in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section. When the emission rate is based on results
from manual emission tests or continuous monitor-
ing systems, the procedures specified in appendix
C of this part shall be used to determine whether
an increase in emission rate has occurred. Tests
shall be conducted under such conditions as the
Administrator shall specify to the owner or opera-
tor based on representative performance of the fa-
cility. At least three valid test nins must be con-
ducted before and at least three after the physical
or operational change. All operating parameters
which may affect emissions must be held constant
to the maximum feasible degree for all test runs.
(c) The addition of an affected facility to a sta-
tionary source as an expansion to that source or as
a replacement for an existing facility shall not by
itself bring within the applicability of this part any
other facility within that source.
(d) [Reserved]
(e) The following shall not, by themselves, be
considered modifications under this part;
20
-------
§60.15
(1) Maintenance, repair, and replacement which
the Administrator determines to be routine for a
source category, subject to the provisions of para-
graph (c) of this section and § 60.15.
(2) An increase in production rate of an existing
facility, if that increase can be accomplished with-
out a capital expenditure on that facility.
(3) An increase in the hours of operation.
(4) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material if,
prior to the date any standard under this part be-
comes applicable to that source type, as provided
by §60.1, the existing facility was designed to ac-
commodate that alternative use. A facility shall be
considered to be designed to accommodate an al-
ternative fuel or raw material if that use could be
accomplished under the facility's construction
specifications as amended prior to the change.
Conversion to coal required for energy consider-
ations, as specified in section 111(a)(8) of the Act,
shall not be considered a modification.
(5) The addition or use of any system or device
whose primary function is the reduction of air pol-
lutants, except when an emission control system is
removed or is replaced by a system which the Ad-
ministrator determines to be less environmentally
beneficial.
(6) The relocation or change in ownership of an
existing facility
(f) Special provisions set forth under an applica-
ble subpart of this pan shall supersede any con-
flicting provisions of this section.
(g) Within 180 days of the completion of any
physical or operational change subject to the con-
trol measures specified in paragraph (a) of this
section, compliance with all applicable standards
must be achieved.
(h) No physical change, or change in the meth-
od of operation, at an existing electric utility steam
generating unit shall be treated as a modification
for the purposes of this section provided that such
change does not increase the maximum hourly
emissions of any pollutant regulated under this
section above the maximum hourly emissions
achievable at that unit during the 5 years prior to
the change.
(i) Repowering projects that are awarded fund-
ing from the Department of Energy as permanent
clean coal technology demonstration projects (or
similar projects funded by EPA) are exempt from
the requirements of this section provided that such
change does not increase the maximum hourly
emissions of any pollutant regulated under this
section above the maximum hourly emissions
achievable at that unit during the five years prior
to the change.
(j)(l) Repowering projects that qualify for an
extension under section 409(b) of the Clean Air
Act are exempt from the requirements of this sec-
tion, provided that such change does not increase
the actual hourly emissions of any pollutant regu-
lated under this section above the actual hourly
emissions achievable at that unit during the 5
years prior to the change.
(2) This exemption shall not apply to any new
unit that:
(i) Is designated as a replacement for an exist-
ing unit;
(ii) Qualifies under section 409(b) of the Clean
Air Act for an extension of an emission limitation
compliance date under section 405 of the Clean
Air Act; and
(iii) Is located at a different site than the exist-
ing unit.
(k) The installation, operation, cessation, or re-
moval of a temporary clean coal technology dem-
onstration project is exempt from the requirements
of this section. A temporary clean coal control
technology demonstration project, for the purposes
of this section is a clean coal technology dem-
onstration project that is operated for a period of
5 years or less, and which complies with the State
implementation plan for the State in which the
project is located and other requirements necessary
to attain and maintain the national ambient air
quality standards during the project and after it is
terminated.
(1) The reactivation of a very clean coal-fired
electric utility steam generating unit is exempt
from the requirements of this section.
[40 FR 58419, Dec. 16, 1975, amended at 43 FR 34347,
Aug. 3, 1978; 45 FR 5617, Jan. 23. i 980; 57 FR 32339,
Juiy 21, 1992]
§60.15 Reconstruction.
(a) An existing facility, upon reconstruction, be-
comes an affected facility, irrespective of any
change in emission rate.
(b) "Reconstruction" means the replacement of
components of an existing facility to such an ex-
tent that;
(1) The fixed capital cost of the new compo-
nents exceeds 50 percent of the fixed capital cost
that would be required to construct a comparable
entirely new facility, and
(2) It is technologically and economically fea-
sible to meet the applicable standards set forth in
this part.
(c) "Fixed capital cost" means the capital need-
ed to provide all the depreciable components.
(d) If an owner or operator of an existing facil-
ity proposes to replace components, and the fixed
capital cost of the new components exceeds 50
percent of the fixed capital cost that would be re-
quired to construct a comparable entirely new fa-
cility, he shall notify the Administrator of the pro-
posed replacements. The notice must be post-
marked 60 days (or as soon as practicable) before
21
-------
§60.16
construction of the replacements is commenced
and must include the following information:
(1) Name and address of the owner or operator.
(2) The location of the existing facility.
(3) A brief description of the existing facility
and the components which are to be replaced.
(4) A description of the existing air pollution
control equipment and the proposed air pollution
control equipment.
(5) An estimate of the fixed capital cost of the
replacements and of constructing a comparable en-
tirely new facility.
(6) The estimated life of the existing facility
after the replacements.
(7) A discussion of any economic or technical
limitations the facility may have in complying
with the applicable standards of performance after
the proposed replacements.
(e) "Hie Administrator will determine, within 30
days of the receipt of the notice required by para-
graph (d) of this section and any additional infor-
mation he may reasonably require, whether the
proposed replacement constitutes reconstruction.
(f) The Administrator's determination under
paragraph (e) shall be based on:
(1) The fixed capital cost of the replacements in
comparison to the fixed capital cost that would be
required to construct a comparable entirely new
facility;
(2) The estimated life of the facility after the re-
placements compared to the life of a comparable
entirely new facility;
(3) The extent to which the components being
replaced cause or contribute to the emissions from
the facility; and
(4) Any economic or technical limitations on
compliance with applicable standards of perform-
ance which are inherent in the proposed replace-
ments.
(g) Individual subparts of this pan may include
specific provisions which refine and delimit the
concept of reconstruction set forth in this section.
[40 FR 58420. Dec. 16, 1975]
§60.16 Priority list.
Prioritized Major Source Categories
Prioritized Major Source Categories—
Continued
Prior-
ity
Num-
tier1
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
Pnor-
ty
Num-
ber
Source Category
Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry
(SOCMI) and Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Ves-
sels and Handling Equipment
(a) SOCMI unrt processes
(b) Volatile organic liquid (VOL) storage vessels and
handling equipment
(c) SOCMI fugitive sources
(d) SOCMI secondary sources
Industrial Surface Coating: Cans
Petroleum Refineries: Fugitive Sources
Source Category
4. Industrial Surface Coating: Paper
5. Dry Cleaning
(a) Perchloroethylene
(b) Petroleum solvent
Graphic Arts
Polymers and Resins* Acrylic Resins
Mineral Wool (Deleted)
Stationary Internal Combustion Engines
Industrial Surface Coating: Fabric
Industnal-Commercial-lnstitutional Steam Generating
Units.
Incineration: Non-Municipal (Deleted)
Non-Metallic Mineral Processing
Metallic Mineral Processing
Secondary Copper (Deleted)
Phosphate Rock Preparation
Foundnes: Steel and Gray Iron
Polymers and Resins Polyethylene
Charcoal Production
Synthetic Rubber
(a) Tire manufacture
(b) SBR production
Vegetable Oil
Industrial Surface Coating: Metal Coil
Petroleum Transportation and Marketing
By-Product Coke Ovens
Synthetic Fibers
Plywood Manufacture
Industrial Surface Coating: Automobiles
Industrial Surface Coating: Large Appliances
Crude Oil and Natural Gas Production
Secondary Aluminum
Potash (Deleted)
Lightweight Aggregate Industry: Ctay, Shale, and
Slate2
Glass
Gypsum
Sodium Carbonate
Secondary Zinc (Deleted)
Polymers and Resins: Phenolic
Polymers and Restns: Urea-Melamine
Ammonia (Deleted)
Polymers and Resins. Polystyrene
Polymers and Resins: ABS-SAN Resins
Fiberglass
Polymers and Resins* Polypropylene
Textile Processing
Asphalt Processing and Asphalt Roofing Manufacture
Bnck and Related Clay Products
Ceramic Clay Manufacturing (Deleted)
Ammonium Nitrate Fertilizer
Castabie Refractories (Deleted)
Borax and Boric Acid (Deleted)
Polymers and Resins: Polyester Resins
Ammonium Sulfate
Starch
Perlrte
Phosphonc Acid Thermal Process (Deleted)
Uranium Refining
Animal Feed Defluorination (Deleted)
Urea (for fertilizer and polymers)
Detergent (Deleted)
Other Source Categones
Lead aod battery manufacture3
Organic solvent cleaning 3
Industrial surface coating- metai furniture3
Stationary gas turbines4
22
-------
§60.17
Prioritized Major Source Categories—
Continued
Prior-
ity
Source Category
ber1
Municipal solid waste landfills4
1 Low numbers have highest priority, e.g .No 1 is high po
onty, No. 59 is low priority
a Formerly titled "Sintering: Clay and Ry Ash"
3 Minor source category, but included on list since an NSPS
is being developed for that source category.
4 Not pnontized, since an NSPS for this major source cat-
egory has already been promulgated
[47 FR 951, Jan. 8, 1982, as amended at 47 FR 31876,
July 23, 1982; 51 FR 42796, Nov. 25, 1986; 52 FR
11428, Apr. 8, 1987; 61 FR 9919, Mar 12, 1996]
§60.17 Incorporations by reference.
The materials listed below are incorporated by
reference in the corresponding sections noted.
These incorporations by reference were approved
by the Director of the Federal Register on the date
listed. These materials are incorporated as they
exist on the date of the approval, and a notice of
any change in these materials will be published in
the Federal Register. The materials are avail-
able for purchase at the corresponding address
noted below, and all are available for inspection at
the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Cap-
itol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC and
at the Library (MD-35), U.S. EPA, Research Tri-
angle Park, NC.
(~) The following materials are available for
purchase from at least one of the following ad-
dresses: American Society for Testing and Mate-
rials (ASTM), 1916 Race Street, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103; or the University Microfilms
International, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor,
MI 48106.
(1) ASTM D388-77, Standard Specificadon for Classi-
fication of Coals by Rank, mcorporaoon by reference
(IBR) approved for §§60 41(f); 60 45(f)(4)(i), (ii), (vi),
60.41a, 6041b; 60 41c; 60.25(b), (c)
(2) ASTM D317S-73, Standard Test Methods for Car-
bon and Hydrogen in the Analysis Sample of Coal and
Coke, IBR approved January 27, 1983 for §60 45(f)(5)(i)
(3) ASTM D3176-74, Standard Method for Ultimate
Analysis of Coal and Coke, IBR approved January 27,
1983, for § 60.45(f)(5)(i); appendix A to part 60, Method
19.
(4) ASTM D1137-53 (Reapproved 1975), Standard
Method for Analysis of Natural Gases and Related Types
of Gaseous Mixtures by the Mass Spectrometer, IBR ap-
proved January 27, 1983 for §60 45(0(5X0-
(5) ASTM D1945-64 (Reapproved 1976), Standard
Method for Analysis of Natural Gas by Gas Chroma-
tography, IBR approved January 27, 1983 for
860.45(0(5X0.
(~) ASTM DI946-77, Standard Method for Analysis of
Reformed Gas by Gas Chromatography, IBR approved for
§§60 45(0(5X0. 60.18(0, 60 614(d)(2)(ii), 60614
-------
§60.17
(25) ASTM D3173-73, Standard Test Method for
Moisture in the Analysis Sample of Coal and Coke, [BR
approved January 27, 1983, for appendix A to part 60,
Method 19.
(26) ASTM D3177-75, Standard Test Methods for
Total Sulfur m the Analysis Sample of Coal and Coke,
IBR approved January 27, 1983, for appendix A to part
60, Method 19.
(27) ASTM D20I3-72, Standard Method of Preparing
Coal Samples for Analysis, IBR approved January 27,
1983, for appendix A to part 60, Method 19.
(28) ASTM D270-65 (Reapproved 1975), Standard
Method of Sampling Petroleum and Petroleum Products,
IBR approved January 27, 1983, for appendix A to part
60, Method 19
(29) ASTM D737-85, Standard Test Method for Air
Permeability of Textile Fabncs, IBR approved January
27, 1983 for §61.23(a)
(30) ASTM Dl475-60 (Reapproved 1980), Standard
Test Method for Density of Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and
Related Products, IBR approved January 27, 1983 for
§60 435(d)(1), appendix A to part 60, Method 24, par.
2.1, and Method 24A, par. 2.2.
(31) ASTM D2369-81, Standard Test Method for
Volatile Content of Coatings, IBR approved January 27,
1983 for appendix A to part 60. Method 24.
(32) ASTM D3792-79, Standard Method for Water
Content of Water-Reducible Paints by Direct Injection
Into a Gas Chromatograph, IBR approved January 27,
1983 for appendix A to part 60, Method 24, par. 2.3.
(33) ASTM D4017-81, Standard Test Method for
Water in Paints and Paint Materials by the Karl Fischer
Titration Method, IBR approved January 27, 1983 for ap-
pendix A to part 60, Method 24, par 2.4
(34) ASTM El 69-63 (Reapproved 1977), General
Techniques of Ultraviolet Quantitative Analysis, IBR ap-
proved for § 60 485(d), § 60 593(b), and § 60 632(f).
(35) ASTM E168-67 (Reapproved 1977), General
Techniques of Infrared Quantitative Analysis, IBR ap-
proved for § 60 485(d), § 60.593(b), and § 60.632(f).
(36) ASTM E260-73, General Gas Chromatography
Procedures, IBR approved for § 60.485(d), § 60.593(b),
and §60 632(f)
(37) ASTM D2879-83, Test Method for Vapor Pres-
sure—Temperature Relationship and Initial Decomposi-
tion Temperature of Liquids by Isoteniscope, IBR ap-
proved Apnl 8, 1987 for §§60 485(e), 60.1 llb(fX3),
60.116b(e)(3)(ii), and 60 116b(f)(2)(i)
(38) ASTM D2382-76, Heat of Combustion of Hydro-
carbon Fuels by Bomb Calorimeter [High-Precision Meth-
od], IBR approved for §§60.18(f), 60.485(g),
60.614
-------
§60.18
(I) AO AC Method 9, Official Methods of Analysis of
the Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 11th edi-
tion, 1970, pp. 11-12, IBR approved January 27, 1983 for
5§60.204(dX2). 60.214(dX2), 60.224(d)(2), 60.234(d)(2),
60.244(f)(2).
(c) The following material is available for pur-
chase from the American Petroleum Institute, 1220
L Street NW., Washington, DC 20005.
(1) API Publication 2517, Evaporation Loss from Ex-
ternal Floating Roof Tanks, Second Edition, February
1980, IBR approved January 27, 1983, for §§60 lll(i),
60.llla(f). 60.11 la(f)(]) and 60.116b(e)(2)(i)
(d) The following material is available for pur-
chase from the Technical Association of the Pulp
and Paper Industry (TAPP1), Dunwoody Park, At-
lanta, GA 30341.
(1) TAPP1 Method T624 os-68, IBR approved January
27, 1983 for § 60.285(d)(4)
(e) The following material is available for pur-
chase from the Water Pollution Control Federation
(WPCF), 2626 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Wash-
ington, DC 20037.
(1) Method 209A, Total Residue Dried at 103-105 °C,
in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 15th Edition, 1980, IBR approved February
25, 1985 for §60 683(b)
(f) The following materia] is available for pur-
chase from the following address: Underwriter's
Laboratories, Inc. (UL), 333 Pfingsten Road,
Northbrook, IL 60062.
(1) UL 103, Sixth Edition revised as of September 3,
1986, Standard for Chimneys, Factory-built, Residennal
Type and Building Heating Appliance.
(g) The following material is available for pur-
chase from the following address: West Coast
Lumber Inspection Bureau, 6980 SW. Barnes
Road, Portland, OR 97223.
(1) Wesi Coast Lumber Standard Grading Rules No.
16, pages 5-21 and 90 and 91, September 3, 1970, re-
vised 1984.
(h) The following material is available for pur-
chase from the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME), 345 East 47th Street, New
York, NY 10017.
(1) ASME QRO-1-1994, Standard for the Qual-
ification and Certification of Resource Recovery
Facility Operators, IBR approved for § 60.56a
(2) ASME PTC 4.1-1964 (Reaffirmed 1991),
Power Test Codes: Test Code for Steam Generat-
ing Units (with 1968 and 1969 Addenda), IBR ap-
proved for §§ 60.46b and 60.58a(h)(6)(ii).
(3) ASME Interim Supplement 19.5 on Instru-
ments and Apparatus: Application, Part II of Fluid
Meters, 6th Edition (1971), IBR approved for
§ 60.58a(h)(6)(ii).
(i) Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,
Physical/Chemical Methods," EPA Publication
SW-846 Third Edition (November 1986), as
amended by Updates 1 (July, 1992), II (September
1994), DA (August, 1993), and IIB (January,
1995). Test Method are incorporated by reference
for appendix A to part 60, Method 29, pais. 2.2.1;
2.3.1; 2.5; 3.3.12.1; 3.3.12.2; 3.3.13; 3.3.14; 5.4.3;
6.2; 6.3; 7.2.1; 7.2.3; and Table 29-2. The Third
Edition of SW-846 and Updates I, II, IIA, and IIB
(document number 955-001-00000-1) are avail-
able from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
20402, (202) 512-1800. Copies may be obtained
from the Library of the U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20460.
(j) Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 16th edition, 1985. Method
303F Determination of Mercury by the Cold
Vapor Technique. This document may be obtained
from the American Public Health Association,
1015 18th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036,
and is incorporated by reference for Method 29,
pars 5.4.3; 6.3; and 7.2.3 of appendix A to part
60.
[48 FR 3735, Jan. 27, 1983]
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations af-
fecting §60.17, see the List of CFR Sections Affected in
the Finding Aids section of this volume.
Effective Date Note: At 60 FR 65414, Dec. 19,
1995, §60.17 was amended by revising paragraphs (h)(1),
(2) and (3) without establishing an effective date. For the
convenience of the user, the existing text continues to be
carried within the body of the section and the new text
is set forth below:
$60.17 Incorporations by reference.
*****
(h) * * *
(1) ASME QRO-1-1994, Standard for the Qualification
and Certification of Resource Recovery Facility Opera-
tors, IBR approved for §§ 60.56a, 60.54b(a) and
60 54b(b).
(2) ASME PTC 4.1-1964 (Reaffirmed 1991), Power
Test Codes'. Test Code for Steam Generating Units (with
1968 and 1969 Addenda), IBR approved for §§ 60.46b,
60.58a(hX6)(ii), and 60 58b(i)(6)(ii).
(3) ASME Interim Supplement 19.5 on Instruments and
Apparatus: Application, Part Q of Fluid Meters, 6th Edi-
tion (1971), IBR approved for §§60.58a(h)(6)(ii) and
60 58b(iX6Xii).
*****
§60.18 General control device require-
ments.
(a) Introduction. This section contains require-
ments for control devices used to comply with ap-
plicable subparts of parts 60 and 61. The require-
ments are placed here for administrative conven-
25
-------
§60.19
ience and oniy apply to facilities covered by sub-
parts referring to this section.
(b) Flares. Paragraphs (c) through (f) apply to
flares.
(c)(1) Flares shall be designed for and operated
with no visible emissions as determined by the
methods specified in paragraph (0, except for peri-
ods not to exceed a total of 5 minutes during any
2 consecutive hours.
(2) Flares shall be operated with a flame present
at all times, as determined by the methods speci-
fied in paragraph (f).
(3) Flares shall be used only with the net heat-
ing value of the gas being combusted being 11.2
MJ/scm (300 Btu/scf) or greater if the flare is
steam-assisted or air-assisted; or with the net heat-
ing value of the gas being combusted being 7.45
MJ/scm (200 Btu/scf) or greater if the flare is non-
assisted. The net heating value of the gas being
combusted shall be determined by the methods
specified in paragraph (0-
(4)(i) Steam-assisted and nonassisted flares shall
be designed for and operated with an exit velocity,
as determined by the methods specified in para-
graph (0(4), less than 18.3 m/sec (60 ft/sec), ex-
cept as provided in paragraphs (b)(4) (ii) and (iii).
(ii) Steam-assisted and nonassisted flares de-
signed for and operated with an exit velocity, as
determined by the methods specified in paragraph
(f)(4), equal to or greater than 18.3 m/sec (60 ft/
sec) but less than 122 m/sec (400 ft/sec) are al-
lowed if the net heating value of the gas being
combusted is greater than 37.3 MJ/scm (1,000
Btu/scf).
(iii) Steam-assisted and nonassisted flares de-
signed for and operated with an exit velocity, as
determined by the methods specified in paragraph
(0(4), less than the velocity, Vma,, as determined
by the method specified in paragraph (f)(5), and
less than 122 m/scc (400 ft/sec) are allowed.
(5) Air-assisted flares shall be designed and op-
erated with an exit velocity less than the velocity,
Vmax, as determined by the method specified in
paragraph (0(6).
(6) Flares used to comply with this section shall
be steam-assisted, air-assisted, or nonassisted.
(d) Owners or operators of flares used to com-
ply with the provisions of this subpart shall mon-
itor these control devices to ensure that they are
operated and maintained in conformance with their
designs. Applicable subparts will provide provi-
sions stating how owners or operators of flares
shall monitor these control devices.
(e) Flares used to comply with provisions of
this subpart shall be operated at all times when
emissions may be vented to them.
(0(1) Reference Method 22 shall be used to de-
termine the compliance of flares with the visible
emission provisions of this subpart. The observa-
tion period is 2 hours and shall be used according
to Method 22.
(2) The presence of a flare pilot flame shall be
monitored using a thermocouple or any other
equivalent device to detect the presence of a
flame.
(3) The net heating value of the gas being com-
busted in a flare shall be calculated using the fol-
lowing equation:
E:GRAPHICS EC01JN92.008
where:
H-r=Net beanng value of the sample, MJ/scm; where the
net enthalpy per mole of offgas is based on combus-
tion at 25 °C and 760 mm Hg, but the standard tem-
perature for determining the volume corresponding to
one mole is 20 °C;
E:GRAPHICS EC01JN92.009
C,Concentration of sample component l in ppm on a wet
basis, as measured for organics by Reference Method
18 and measured for hydrogen and carbon monoxide
by ASTM D1946-77 (Incorporated by reference as
specified in §60.17); and
H,=Net heat of combustion of sample component i, kcal.'
g mole at 25 °C and 760 mm Hg. The heats of com-
busnon may be determined using ASTM D2382-76
(incorporated by reference as specified in §60 17) if
published values are not available or cannot be cal-
culated.
(4) The actual exit velocity of a flare shall be
determined by dividing the volumetric flowrate (in
units of standard temperature and pressure), as de-
termined by Reference Methods 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D
as appropriate; by the unobstructed (free) cross
sectional area of the flare tip.
(5) The maximum permitted velocity, Vn^, for
flares complying with paragraph (c)(4)(iii) shall be
determined by the following equation.
Logio (V„„)=(Ht+28.8)/35.7
V,,^u=Maximum permitted velocity, M/sec
28 8=Constant
31.7=Constant
HT=The net heating value as determined in paragraph
(0(3).
(6) The maximum permitted velocity, V^,,, for
air-assisted flares shall be determined by the fol-
lowing equation.
V_„=8 706+0 7084 (Hr)
Vm..=Maximum permitted velocity, m/sec
8.706=Coustant
0.7084=Constant
Hr=The net heanng value as determined in paragraph
(f)(3).
[51 FR 2701, Jan. 21, 1986]
§60.19 General notification and re-
porting requirements.
(a) For the purposes of this part, time periods
specified in days shall be measured in calendar
days, even if the word "calendar" is absent, un-
26
-------
§60.19
less otherwise specified in an applicable require-
ment.
(b) For the purposes of this part, if an explicit
postmark deadline is not specified in an applicable
requirement for the submittal of a notification, ap-
plication, report, or other written communication
to the Administrator, the owner or operator shall
postmark the submittal on or before the number of
days specified in the applicable requirement. For
example, if a notification must be submitted IS
days before a particular event is scheduled to take
place, the notification shall be postmarked on or
before 15 days preceding the event; likewise, if a
notification must be submitted 15 days after a par-
ticular event takes place, the notification shall be
delivered or postmarked on or before 15 days fol-
lowing the end of the event. The use of reliable
non-Government mail earners that provide indica-
tions of verifiable delivery of information required
to be submitted to the Administrator, similar to the
postmark provided by the U.S. Postal Service, or
alternative means of delivery agreed to by the per-
mitting authority, is acceptable
(c) Notwithstanding time periods or postmark
deadlines specified in this part for the submittal of
information to the Administrator by an owner or
operator, or the review of such information by the
Administrator, such time periods or deadlines may
be changed by mutual agreement between the
owner or operator and the Administrator. Proce-
dures governing the implementation of this provi-
sion are specified in paragraph (f) of this section.
(d) If an owner or operator of an affected facil-
ity in a State with delegated authority is required
to submit periodic reports under this part to the
State, and if the State has an established timeline
for the submission of periodic reports that is con-
sistent with the reporting frequency(ies) specified
for such facility under this part, the owner or oper-
ator may change the dates by which periodic re-
ports under this part shall be submitted (without
changing the frequency of reporting) to be consist-
ent with the State's schedule by mutual agreement
between the owner or operator and the State. The
allowance in the previous sentence applies in each
State beginning 1 year after the affected facility is
required to be in compliance with the applicable
subpart in this part. Procedures governing the im-
plementation of this provision are specified in
paragraph (f) of this section
(e) If an owner or operator supervises one or
more stationary sources affected by standards set
under this part and standards set under part 61,
part 63, or both such parts of this chapter, he/she
may arrange by mutual agreement between the
owner or operator and the Administrator (or the
State with an approved permit program) a com-
mon schedule on which periodic reports required
by each applicable standard shall be submitted
throughout the year. The allowance in the previous
sentence applies in each State beginning 1 year
after the stationary source is required to be in
compliance with the applicable subpart in this part,
or 1 year after the stationary source is required to
be in compliance with the applicable 40 CFR part
61 or part 63 of this chapter standard, whichever
is latest. Procedures governing the implementation
of this provision are specified in paragraph (f) of
this section.
(f)(l)(i) Until an adjustment of a time period or
postmark deadline has been approved by the Ad-
ministrator under paragraphs (f)(2) and (f)(3) of
this section, the owner or operator of an affected
facility remains strictly subject to the requirements
of this part.
(ii) An owner or operator shall request the ad-
justment provided for in paragraphs (f)(2) and
(f)(3) of this section each time he or she wishes
to change an applicable time period or postmark
deadline specified in this part.
(2) Notwithstanding time periods or postmark
deadlines specified in this part for the submittal of
information to the Administrator by an owner or
operator, or the review of such information by the
Administrator, such time periods or deadlines may
be changed by mutual agreement between the
owner or operator and the Administrator. An
owner or operator who wishes to request a change
in a time period or postmark deadline for a par-
ticular requirement shall request the adjustment in
writing as soon as practicable before the subject
activity is required to take place. The owner or op-
erator shall include in the request whatever infor-
mation he or she considers useful to convince the
Administrator that an adjustment is warranted.
(3) If, in the Administrator's judgment, an
owner or operator's request for an adjustment to
a particular time period or postmark deadline is
warranted, the Administrator will approve the ad-
justment. The Administrator will notify the owner
or operator in writing of approval or disapproval
of the request for an adjustment within 15 cal-
endar days of receiving sufficient information to
evaluate the request.
(4) If the Administrator is unable to meet a
specified deadline, he or she will notify the owner
or operator of any significant delay and inform the
owner or operator of the amended schedule.
[59 FR 12428, Mar. 16, 1994]
27
-------
APPENDIX D
MSW LANDFILL CONTACTS
-------
APPENDIX D
MSW LANDFILL CONTACTS
D1 EPA Regional MSW Landfill Rule Contacts
D2 State MSW Landfill Rule Contacts
D3 Other Contacts
-------
Appendix D1
EPA Regional MSW Landfill Rule Contacts
-------
EPA Regional MSW Landfill Rule Contacts
Regional Contact
Phone #
Fax#
Jeanne Cosgrove
U.S. EPA
Region I (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont)
John F. Kennedy Federal Bldg.
Boston, MA 02203
617/565-9451
617/565-4940
Christine DeRosa
U.S. EPA
Region II (New Jersey, New .York, Puerto Rico,
Virgin Islands)
290 Broadway
New York, NY 10007-1866
212/637-4022
212/637-3901
James B. Topsale
U.S. EPA
Region III (Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland,
Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia)
1650 Arch Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029
215/814-2190
215/814-2114
Scott Davis
U.S. EPA
Region IV (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,
Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Tennessee)
100 Alabama St., S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30303
404/562-9127
404/562-9095
Charles Hatten
U.S. EPA
Region V (Illinois. Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota,
Ohio, Wisconsin)
77 W. Jackson
Chicago, IL 60604
312/886-6031
312/886-0617
Mick Cote
U.S. EPA
Region VI (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, Texas)
1445 Ross Av., Suite 1200
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
214/665-7219
214/665-7263
Dl-1
-------
EPA Regional MSW Landfill Rule Contacts
Regional Contact
Phone #
Fax#
Ward Burns
U.S. EPA
Region VII (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska)
726 Minnesota Av.
Kansas City, KS 66101
913/551-7960
913/551-7065
Martin Hestmark
U.S. EPA
Region VIII (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Utah, Wyoming)
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2466
303/312-6776
303/312-6409
Patricia Bowlin
U.S. EPA
Region IX (American Samoa, Arizona, California,
Guam, Hawaii, Nevada)
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
415/744-1188
415/744-1076
Catherine Woo
U.S. EPA
Region X (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington)
1200 Sixth Av.
Seattle, WA98101
206/553-1814
206/553-0404
Dl-2
-------
Appendix D2
State MSW Landfill Rule Contacts
-------
State Contacts
Contact
State
Phone #
Fax #
REGION I
Scott Koschwitz
CT
860/424-3427
860/424-4063
Nancy Seidman
MA
617/292-5593
617/556-1046
John Chandler
ME
207/287-2437
207/287-7641
Don Anderson
ME
207/287-2437
207/287-7641
Andy Bodnarik
NH
603/271-1370
603/271-1381
Barbara Morin
RI
401/277-2808
401/277-2017
Harold Garabedian
VT
802/241-3840
802/241-2590
REGION II
John Elstan
NJ
609/292-6710
Tom Lynch
NJ
518/457-2051
Tom Christoffell
NY
518/457-7688
Eduardo Del Rio
PR
787/767-8025
REGION III
Ron Amirikian
DE
302/323-4542
302/323-4561
Ruben Deza
MD
410/631-3240
410-631-3202
Carl York
MD
410/631-3234
410-631-3202
Jayme Graham
PA
412/578-8129
412-578-8058
Allegheny Co.
John Slade
PA
717/783-9476
717/772-2303
Kris Ramamurthy
PA
717/787-9256
717/772-2303
Karen Sabasteanski
VA
804/698-4426
804-698-4510
Lucy Pontiveros
WV
304/558-1220
304-558-1222
REGION IV
Jerold Griffies
AL
334/271-7861
334/271-7950
Larry Brown
AL
334/271-7861
334/271-7950
Cindy Phillips
FL
904/921-9534
-
Venkata Panchakarla
FL
904/488-0114
904/922-6979
Kent Pierce
GA
404/363-7103
404/363-7100
Millie Ellis
KY
502/573-3382
502/573-3787
Mark Wyatt
MS
601/961-5367
601/961-5742
Tom Allen
NC
919/733-1489
919/715-7175
Renee Shealy
sc
803/734-4750
803/734-4556
D2-1
-------
State Contacts
Contact
State
Phone #
Fax#
Malcolm Butler
TN
615/532-0604
615/532-0614
Gene Bradley
TN
615/532-0593
615/532-0614
REGION V
Dick Forbes
IL
217/785-1889
Pat Daniel
IN
317/233-0429
Jerry Trautman
MI
517/373-7059
517-335-3122
Margaret McCourtney
MN
612/297-7894
612-297-8701
Tammy Hi 1 kens
OH
614/644-3596
Steve Dunn
WI
608/267-0566
608-267-0560
REGION VI
Mark McCorkle
AR
501/682-0736
Annette Sharp
LA
504/765-0914
Karen Blackmore
LA
504/765-0130
David Duran
NM
505/827-2950
Angel Martinez
NM
(Albuquerque)
505/768-1961
Joyce Sheedy or
OK
405/290-8247
405/962-2200
Cheryl Bradley
Gus Eghneim
TX
512/239-1965
REGION VII
Catharine Fitsimmons
IA
515/281-8034
515/281-8895
Chuck Layman
KS
913/296-1579
913/296-1545
Paul Myers
MO
573/751-4817
573/751-2706
Susan Fields
NE
402/471-0019
402/471-2909
REGION VIII
Kirsten King
CO
303/692-3212
303/782-0278
Dave Klemp
MT
406/444-0286
406/444-5275
Tom Bachman
ND
701/328-5188
701/328-5200
Jackie Flowers
SD
605/773-5708
605/773-4068
605/773-4035
Carol Neilson
UT
801/536-4000
801/536-4099
Bernie Dailey
WY
307/777-7345
307/777-5616
D2-2
-------
State Contacts
Contact
State
Phone #
Fax #
REGION IX
Renaldo Crooks
CA
916/327-5618
916/327-5621
REGION X
Bill Walker
AK
907/465-5124
Sue Richards
ID
208/334-5898
Kathleen Craig
OR
503/229-6833
Judy Geier
WA
360/407-6850
D2-3
-------
Appendix D3
Other MSW Landfill Contacts
-------
Other MSW Landfill Contacts
Contact
Phone #
Fax #
For information concerning analyses performed in
developing the landfills rule, contact:
Michele Laur
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Waste and Chemical Processes Group
Emission Standards Division (MD-13)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919/541-5256
919/541-0246
For implementation issues, contact:
Mary Ann Warner
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Program Review Group
Information Transfer and Program Integration
Division (MD-12)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919/541-1192
919/541-2664
For information on the Landfill Model, contact:
Susan Thorneloe
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
(MD-63)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
thorneloe.susan@epamail.epa.gov
919/541-2709
919/541-2382
For enforcement and compliance assurance
contact:
Zofia S. Kosim, P.E. (2242A)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Air Enforcement Division/ Office of
Regulatory Enforcement
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
202/564-8733
202/564-0068
D3-1
-------
Other MSW Landfill Contacts (Continued)
Contact
Phone #
Fax #
For Title V permit issues:
Joanna Swanson
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Operating Permits Group
Information Transfer Program Integration Division
(MD-12)
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
919/541-5282
919/541-5509
To order documents/receive general information
on the Landfill Methane Outreach Program,
contact:
LMOP Hotline
Home page: www.epa.gov/landfill
1-888/STAR
YES
703/934-3895
For more specific requests on landfill gas-to-
energy, contact:
Tom Kerr
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W.
6202J
Washington, DC 20460
202/233-9768
204/233-9569
For information on monitoring and sampling
methods contact:
Foston Curtis
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Source Characterization Group
Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division
(MD-19)
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
919/541-1063
919/541-1039
D3-2
-------
APPENDIX E
COLLECTION SYSTEM DESIGN PLANS
-------
APPENDIX E
COLLECTION SYSTEM DESIGN PLANS
All owners and operators of affected landfills are required to submit to the Administrator
a collection and control system design plan prepared by a professional engineer. This appendix
provides a summary of the design plan requirements for all collection systems: active collection
systems that meet the requirements of §60.759 as well as alternate collection systems. It also
provides guidance on what to look for in such plans and case study examples.
Design Plan Requirements
Under §60.752(b)(2), landfill owners/operators subject to control requirements (i.e., those
with a calculated NMOC emission rate >50 Mg/yr) are given the option to:
(a) submit a collection and control system plan conforming to the specifications
provided in §60.759, or
(b) submit a collection and control plan for an alternative design.
The design plan provisions of the rule were intended to provide flexibility and allow
innovation. It is clear that some landfill owners/operators will choose to submit a plan for a
collection system that does not conform to the specifications in §60.759. Because of the many
site-specific factors involved with landfill gas collection system design, alternative systems may
be more appropriate for a given landfill. A wide variety of system designs are possible, such as
vertical wells, combination horizontal and vertical collection systems, horizontal trenches, and
passive systems. All plans will need to be reviewed by the implementing agency on a case-by-
case basis to ensure that they meet the requirements of §60.752(b)(2)(ii).
For active collection systems, the plan must demonstrate that the collection system will:
E-l
-------
(1) be designed to handle, over the intended use period of the gas control or treatment
system equipment, the maximum expected gas flow rate from the entire landfill
area that warrants control;
(2) collect gas from each area, cell, or group of cells in the landfill in which the initial
solid waste has been placed for a period of 5 years or more if active or 2 years or
more if closed or at final grade;
(3) collect gas at a sufficient extraction rate (a rate sufficient to maintain a negative
pressure at all well heads in the collection system without causing air infiltration,
including any well heads connected to the system as a result of expansion or
excess surface emissions, for the life of the blower); and
(4) be designed to minimize off-site migration of subsurface gas.
For passive collection systems, the plan must demonstrate that the collection system will:
(1) be designed to handle, over the intended use period of the gas control or treatment
system equipment, the maximum expected gas flow rate from the entire landfill
area that warrants control;
(2) collect gas from each area, cell, or group of cells in the landfill in which the initial
solid waste has been placed for a period of 5 years or more if active or 2 years or
more if closed or at final grade;
(3) be designed to minimize off-site migration of subsurface gas; and
(4) include landfill liners on the bottom and all sides in all areas in which gas is to be
collected. The liners must be installed as required by the RCRA solid waste rules
under 40 CFR 258.40.
Specifications for Active Collection Systems
Owners or operators seeking to comply with the specifications for active collection
systems in §60.759 must meet the following:
(1) Demonstrate that the siting of active collection wells, horizontal collectors,
surface collectors, or other extraction devices is of sufficient density throughout
all gas producing areas.
E-2
-------
(2) Devices located within the interior and along the perimeter must be certified by a
professional engineer to achieve uniform control of surface gas emissions.
(3) Design plans must address the 13 issues listed in Table E-l.
(4) Collection system siting should be of sufficient density to address landfill gas
migration issues, and augmentation of the system through the use of active or
passive systems at the perimeter or exterior.
(5) The system should control all gas producing areas except those that are excluded
because either (1) they are segregated and shown to contain asbestos or
nondegradable material, (documentation must include nature, location, amount of
asbestos or nondegradeable material deposited, and date of deposition) or (2) they
are nonproductive areas and can be shown to contribute less than 1 percent of the
total amount of NMOC emissions from the landfill (amount, location, and age of
the material must be documented).
(6) To qualify for exclusion based on nonproductivity, emissions must be calculated
for each section proposed for exclusion, and the sum of all such sections must be
compared with the NMOC emission estimate for the entire landfill. Emissions
from each section must be calculated according to the following equation, from
§60.759(a)(3)(ii) of the NSPS:
Qi = 2 k L0 Mj (e"kti) (C^OC) (3.6 x 10"9)
where,
Qi = NMOC emission rate from the i^1 section, Mg/yr
k = methane generation rate constant, year 1
L0 = methane generation potential, m^/Mg solid waste
Mj = mass of the degradable solid waste in the i^ section, Mg
tj = age of the solid waste in the i*h section, years
CnmOC = concentration of NMOCs, ppmv
3.6 x 10"9 = conversion factor
The values for k and CnmOC determined in field testing must be used, if field testing
has been performed in determining the NMOC emission rate or the radii of influence.
The radii of influence is the distance from the well center to a point in the landfill where
the pressure gradient applied by the blower or compressor approaches zero. If field
testing has not been performed, default values for k, L0 and CjsjMOC °f 0-05/year
(0.02/year in arid areas), 170 m^/Mg, and 4,000 ppmv, respectively, must be used as
provided for Tier 1 calculations from § 60.754(a)(1). For landfills located in
E-3
-------
TABLE E-l. LIST OF DESIGN PLAN REQUIREMENTS
Issue Description
1.
Depth(s) of refuse
2.
Refuse gas generation rates and flow characteristics
3.
Cover properties
4.
Gas system expandability
5.
Leachate and condensate management
6.
Accessibility
7.
Compatibility with filling operations
8.
Integration with closure end use
9.
Air intrusion control
10.
Corrosion resistance
11.
Fill settlement
12.
Resistance to the refuse decomposition heat
13.
Topographical map of the surface area and proposed surface monitoring route [required
in § 60.753(d)]
E-4
-------
geographical areas with a 30-year annual average precipitation of less than 25 inches, as
measured at the nearest representative official meteorological site, a k value of 0.02 per
year should be used as provided in the Tier 1 calculations in §60.754(a)(l). Note: The
mass of nondegradable solid waste contained within the given section may be subtracted
from the total mass of the section when estimating emissions provided the nature,
location, age, and amount of the nondegradable material is documented as indicated in
paragraph (5) above.
(7) The gas extraction components must be constructed of polyvinyl chloride (PVC), high
density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe, fiberglass, stainless steel, or other nonporous
corrosion-resistant material.
(8) The extraction components must be of suitable dimensions to: convey projected amounts
of gases; withstand installation, static, and settlement forces; and withstand planned
overburden or traffic loads.
(9) The collection system must be capable of any expansion needed to comply with emission
and migration standards.
(10) Collection devices such as wells and horizontal collectors must be perforated to allow gas
entry without head loss sufficient to impair performance across the intended extent of
control. Perforations must be situated to prevent excessive air infiltration.
(11) Vertical wells cannot endanger underlying liners and must address the occurrence of
water within the landfill.
(12) Holes and trenches must be of sufficient cross-section for proper construction and
completion. For example: the design should call for the centering of pipes and allow for
the placement of gravel backfill.
(13) Collection devices must be constructed of PVC, HDPE pipe, fiberglass, stainless steel, or
other nonporous corrosion-resistant material and must not allow for air intrusion into the
cover, refuse into the collection system, or landfill gas into the atmosphere.
(14) Any gravel used around the pipe perforations should be large enough to prevent
penetration or blockage of the perforations.
(15) The connections for collection devices may be above or below ground, but must include:
a positive closing throttle valve, necessary seals and couplings, access couplings, and at
least one sampling port.
(16) The system must convey the landfill gas to a control system through the collection header
pipe(s). The gas mover equipment must be of a size capable of handing the maximum
gas generation flow rate expected over the intended use period of the equipment.
E-5
-------
(17) For existing systems the maximum flow rate must be determined by existing flow data, or
by using the following equation. New systems must also use the equation.
Two equations are provided for determining the maximum flow rate: one equation for
sites with an unknown year-to-year solid waste acceptance rate, and one equation for sites
with a known year-to-year solid waste acceptance rate. A combination of the equations
can be used if the acceptance rate is known for only part of the life of the landfill.
For sites with unknown year-to-year solid waste acceptance rate:
Qm = 2L0R(e-kc-e-kt)
where,
Qm = maximum expected gas generation flow rate, m^/yr
L0 = methane generation potential, m^/Mg solid waste
R = average annual acceptance rate, Mg/yr
k = methane generation rate constant, year" 1
t = age of the landfill at equipment installation plus the time the owner
or operator intends to use the gas mover equipment or active life of
the landfill, whichever is less. If the equipment is installed after
closure, t is the age of the landfill at installation, years
c = time since closure, years (for an active landfill c = O and e'kc = i)
For sites with known year-to-year solid waste acceptance rate:
n
Qm = 2 2 k L0 Mj (e-kti)
i=l
where,
Qm = maximum expected gas generation flow rate, m^/yr
k = methane generation rate constant, year 1
L0 = methane generation potential, m^/Mg solid waste
Mj = mass of solid waste in the i^1 section, Mg
tj = age of the i^1 section, years
E-6
-------
Review of Plans
In reviewing design plans for active collection systems designed to meet §60.759, it is
important to ensure that adherence to each of the requirements in the section entitled
"Specifications for Active Collection Systems" is adequately demonstrated. In reviewing
alternate plans (for active or passive systems), it is important to ensure that the requirements
listed in the "Design Plan Requirements" section are followed. It is also important to recognize
that the rule includes operational standards along with monitoring and reporting requirements to
ensure that landfill gas is extracted from the landfill at a sufficient rate. Section 60.753 requires
operation of collection systems so that the methane concentration is less than 500 ppmv at all
points around the perimeter of the collection area and along a pattern that traverses the landfill at
30-meter intervals. The design plan must include a topographical map with the proposed
monitoring route. This operational standard ensures that LFG is extracted at a sufficient rate and
off-site migration is minimized. Any undetected flaws in the plan will most likely have to be
corrected after the system is operating to meet the operational standards.
At the same time, sufficient discretion needs to be exercised to avoid the installation of
inadequate collection systems. Failure to recognize an inadequate collection system design could
lead to excessive periods of noncompliance or required replacement of the collection system.
Such an occurrence would be detrimental to the environment and create an unnecessary financial
burden on the landfill owner or operator.
For this reason, an appropriate burden must be placed on the landfill owner/operator to
demonstrate that the operational standards will be achievable with the proposed design. Such
demonstrations should be supported by performance data at that landfill or a similar landfill
when practical. At a minimum, the landfill owner/operator should be required to provide a
written rational and appropriate engineering calculations for the design of systems which do not
adhere to the requirements in §60.759.
E-7
-------
Possible Design for an Active Vertical Collection System (AVCS)
This section presents the design for an AVCS that the EPA believes would satisfy all the
requirements in §60.759. It should be noted that final approval of such a design plan is left to a
State's discretion, and adherence to the specifications presented do not guarantee design plan
approval by a State. Furthermore, other designs may satisfy the criteria in §60.759.
Well Siting: Site active vertical collection wells such that the radius of influence (ROI)
from a collection well includes all gas-producing areas of the landfill that contain solid waste.
The ROI is the radial distance that a well can effectively extract LFG through compacted refuse
without causing air infiltration. A well extracts LFG from compacted refuse by creating a
negative pressure drop in the surrounding refuse. The negative pressure drop is produced by
maintaining a negative gauge pressure within a well using blowers or air compressors. The
pressure drop at a location in the landfill decreases as the distance from the collection well
increases. The ROI for a collection well is defined as the shortest distance radially out from a
collection well to where the pressure drop gradient applied by the blower or compressor
approaches zero.
The interior ROI and perimeter ROI used to determine well placement will be determined
using one of the following:
• Use a single ROI of 30 meters for siting both perimeter and interior wells; or
• Establish a site-specific ROI by following the procedure in EPA Method 2E.
(Method 2E data may already be available if LFG flow rate was tested to perform
Tier 3 NMOC emission rate calculations.)
The ROI will be used to site wells along the perimeter of all gas-producing areas of the
landfill, at a maximum of one ROI from the perimeter boundary. After siting the perimeter
wells, the interior wells will be sited. Both perimeter and interior wells will be spaced no more
than two times the ROI apart. (Well spacing greater than this value will create gaps between the
ROI of adjacent wells. The wells would be unable to collect LFG from these gaps.) Wells will
E-8
-------
be staggered such that all gas-producing areas of the landfill containing solid waste that has been
in the landfill for at least 5 years (for active sites) or 2 years (for sites at closure or final grade)
are covered by the ROI.
Wells do not need to be placed in segmented areas documented as containing (1) asbestos
or nondegradeable material or (2) older, nonproductive areas (provided that they contribute less
than 1 percent of the total NMOC emissions). The documentation will provide the nature,
location, amount of asbestos or nondegradable material deposited in the area, and date of
deposition. This documentation will be provided to the Administrator upon request. The
amount, location, and age of the material in nonproductive areas will also be documented and
provided to the Administrator upon request. A separate NMOC emission estimate will be made
for each section proposed for exclusion, and the sum of all such sections compared to the NMOC
emission estimate for the entire landfill. Emissions from each section will be computed using the
equation presented in item (6) under "Specifications for Active Collection Systems" in this
appendix. [This equation is from §60.759(a)(3)(2) of the rule.]
Well pipe construction: Table E-2 summarizes example well pipe construction. The
landfill gas extraction well will be constructed of either: PVC, HDPE pipe, fiberglass, stainless
steel, or other noncorrosive, nonporous material. Pipe material should be non-corrosive to
minimize maintenance and failures, thereby maximizing the overall effectiveness of the gas
collection system. Materials such as black-iron or galvanized pipe are not recommended because
the collection system must remain operational for at least 15 years. These materials would most
likely corrode within that period and sacrifice the effectiveness of the gas collection system. Pipe
material should also be non-porous so LFG is collected without air infiltration. Porous well
pipes could allow ambient air to be drawn from the landfill surface into the upper section of the
pipe.
The well will be at least 0.075 meters in diameter and of suitable wall-thickness. The
length of the pipe will be at least 75 percent of the depth of the solid waste or the depth to the
water table, whichever is less. Installing a well pipe equal to 75 percent of the refuse depth
prevents collection wells from being extended through landfill liners. Collection wells are
E-9
-------
TABLE E-2. EXAMPLE WELL PIPE SPECIFICATIONS
Parameter
Specification
Material of
construction
Schedule 40 or 80 PVC, HDPE, fiberglass, or stainless steel pipe.
Diameter of pipe
At least 0.075 m (3 in.).
Length of pipe
Pipe length will be 75 percent of the refuse depth or the distance from
the landfill surface to the top of the water table, whichever is less.
Perforations along
pipe length
Perforations will have a diameter of 0.012 m (1/2 in.).
Four perforations will be located in a horizontal row around the pipe
at intervals of 90°.
Well pipes will have perforations along the lower two-thirds of the
well pipe. The top 20 feet of a well pipe will not be perforated.
The horizontal spacing between each row of holes will be 0.1 to 0.2
m (4 to 8 in.) apart.
Placement of pipe in
well hole
The center line (longitudinal axis) of the well pipe will be located on
the center line of the well hole.
E-10
-------
extended only to the top of a water table because pipe extensions below the water level would be
unable to collect LFG.
Perforations or holes are drilled into the well pipe at designated locations. The
perforations allow LFG to be drawn into the pipe over a range of landfill depths. Four
perforations with a diameter of 0.012 m (0.5 in.) will be located in a horizontal row around the
pipe at intervals of 90°. The horizontal spacing between each row of holes will be 0.1 to 0.2 m
(4 to 8 in.). Each well pipe will include perforations along the lower two-thirds of the pipe.
However, no perforations must be present in the top 20 feet of a well pipe. In addition, the
centerline of the pipe will be located on the centerline of the well hole in order to maintain an
equal pressure drop throughout the cross sectional area of the well.
Well hole specifications: Table E-3 summarizes example will hole specifications. A
well drilling rig will be used to dig a hole at least 0.60 meters in diameter in the landfill to a
depth of at least 75 percent of the landfill depth or the depth to the water table. (This
corresponds to the depth of the wells.)
The extraction well will be placed in the center of the hole and the hole will be backfilled
with materials selected to accomplish two objectives:
(1) Allow unrestricted passage of LFG from the landfill through the perforations in a
well pipe; and
(2) Create a sealed barrier near the top of the collection well to prevent air infiltration
into the well.
Gravel with a diameter range of 2 to 7.5 cm (1 to 3 in) is used to fill the bottom of the
well hole where well pipe perforations exist as shown in Figure E-l. Gravel is added to the well
hole to a level 0.3 m (1 ft) above the uppermost perforation on the well pipe. This gravel layer
acts as a filter to prevent refuse from clogging well pipe perforations. On top of the gravel are
three more layers of material. First a layer of backfill consisting of at least 1.2 m (47 in.) is
placed over the gravel. Next is a layer of bentonite clay with a depth of at least 1.0 m (39 in.).
Bentonite clay acts as a seal or cap for the well hole to prevent air infiltration. Finally, a layer of
E-l 1
-------
TABLE E-3. EXAMPLE WELL HOLE SPECIFICATIONS
Parameter
Specification
Diameter of well hole
At least 0.6 m (2 ft) in diameter.
Depth of
well hole
A depth equal to 75 percent of the refuse depth or the distance from
the landfill surface to the top of the water table, whichever is less.
(Same as depth of well pipe.)
Fill material:
Surrounding pipe
perforations
Fill with gravel sized 2 to 7.5 cm (1 to 3 in) in diameter to a level of
0.3 m (1 ft) above the uppermost perforation.
Fill material: Above
pipe perforations
Sequence of adding fill material over the crushed stone:
(1) At least 1.2 m (47 in.) of backfill,
(2) At least 1.0 m (39 in.) of bentonite, and
(3) For the remainder, cover material or material of
permeability equal to the existing cover material.
E-12
-------
cover material or other material of equal permeability to the cover material can be used to fill the
remaining space.
Well head fittings: The wellhead may be connected to the collection header pipes below
or above the landfill surface. The wellhead assembly will include a ball or butterfly valve,
flanges, gaskets, connectors, access couplings and at least one sampling port. The cap and
header pipe will be constructed of PVC, HDPE, fiberglass, stainless steel, or other nonporous
material of suitable wall thickness. A schematic of the gas extraction well and wellhead
assembly is also illustrated in Figure E-l.
Conveyance system: The gas conveyance system transports LFG from the collection
wells to the gas control system. The conveyance system must consist of gas movers and piping
for the gas collection header. Gas movers can be either a fan, blower, or compressor. Piping for
conveying collected LFG may run above or below the landfill surface. The gas mover equipment
will be sized to handle the maximum gas generation flow rate expected over the intended use
period of the gas moving equipment based on flow data (if existing) or the following equation:
Peak Flow [m^/yr] = 2L0 R (e'^c - e~kt)
where,
L0 = methane generation potential, m^/Mg solid waste
R = average annual acceptance rate, Mg/yr
k = methane generation rate constant, year 1
t = age of the landfill at equipment installation plus the time the owner or
operator intends to use the gas mover equipment or expected active life of
the landfill, whichever is less. If the equipment is installed after closure, t
is the age of the landfills at installation, yrs c = time since closure, yrs (for
active landfill c = O and e~kc = 1)
E-l 3
-------
Valve Box and Cover
Sample Port
Compacted Soil
or Refuse
Gas
Collection
Header to Blower
Valve //
0.075 PVC Lateral
1.0 m
Bentonite -
or Concrete
1.2m
Backfill
Material
43
Gravel
0.02m to 0.075m Dia
0.075m PVC
Perforated Pipe
Cap
- 0.6m
Diameter
Figure E-1. Gas Extraction and Well Head Assembly
E-14
-------
An average value will be used for L0. If k has been determined, the value of k
determined from the test will be used; if k has not been determined, an average value will
be used. The average values specified in Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors
(AP-42) (currently 125 m^/Mg for L0 and 0.04 year'l for k) may be used.
Case Studies
While the EPA believes that the AVCS presented above would qualify for approval, it
does not represent the range of approvable systems. The EPA anticipates that variations on some
of the design specifications would also be approvable. This section of the appendix illustrates
some of those variations in the form of case studies.
Based on case studies provided by the Solid Waste Association of North America
(SWANA), three types of collection designs other than that presented for an AVCS can be
anticipated. These include:
(1) alternative vertical well specifications and/or construction;
(2) horizontal collection systems; and
(3) combinations of vertical and horizontal collectors.
Case studies illustrating each of these are provided in this section. Alternative
specifications and/or construction for vertical well collection systems are presented in Case
Studies A through E. Case Study F presents an alternative to the nitrogen monitoring procedures
for determining air infiltration presented in Method 2E. Case Studies G and H present
alternatives to standard vertical collection systems. All of these case studies were provided by
SWANA. The purpose of these case studies is to illustrate the kind of demonstrations that
should be provided by owners or operators submitting collection plans. Additionally, these
demonstrations might be used in combination with other supporting information to demonstrate
the adequacy of these designs for other landfills. The case studies provided in this appendix are
as follows:
E-15
-------
A.
Gas wells with depths less than 75 percent of refuse depth.
B.
Perforations for wells less than 90 feet deep
C.
Alternate gas well perforations
D.
Pile-driven vertical gas well installation
E.
Compacted low permeability
F.
Monitoring vacuum levels as an indicator of air infiltration in arid regions
G.
Horizontal collector design
H.
Design for LF with horizontal collectors and vertical wells
As included in most of these case studies, a key to demonstrating effectiveness of system
designs is showing it can meet the operational standards (i.e., methane concentration less than
500 ppmv around the perimeter of the collection area and along a pattern that traverses the
landfill at 30-meter intervals).
In some cases, the design already exists at that particular landfill and actual data on
performance of the design can be provided. In other cases, it may be necessary to demonstrate
the effectiveness of a design based on data collected at another landfill (such as the case studies
included in this appendix). In these cases, it is important for the owner/operator to demonstrate
similarities between the landfill where supporting data were collected and the landfill where the
design is being proposed.
E-16
-------
Case Study A: Gas Wells With Depths Less Than 75 Percent of Refuse Depth
AVCS Specification: The pipe the lesser of 75 percent of the depth of refuse or the depth
to the water table in length.
Alternative Design: Gas wells with depths less than 75 percent of refuse depth
Location: Palos Verdes Landfill, City of Rolling Hills Estates, CA.
Operated by Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (Districts)
The Districts operate an extensive gas collection system at the Palos Verdes Landfill
(PVLF) which collects approximately 8000 cfm of landfill gas. Parcel 6 of the main site which
extends along the northeast boundary was filled starting in the early 1970's and completed in
October, 1980. The depth of refuse as measured from the top deck of Parcel 6 is approximately
185 feet.
The top deck at the eastern end of Parcel 6 covers an area of approximately 390,000 ft^.
Landfill gas is collected and emissions controlled in this area by fifteen vertical gas collection
wells (approx. 26,000 ft^/well), shown in Figure 1. All but two of the wells, listed in Table 1,
are 60 feet in depth which is approximately 32 percent of the refuse depth. As shown in Table 2,
integrated surface gas emissions, measured along the five routes covering this area, from July
1993 through July 1994 have averaged between 2 and 3 ppm total organic compounds as
methane. These background level concentrations are well below the SCAQMD's stringent
50 ppm average surface gas limit and indicate that the area has excellent gas control.
Clearly, the 75 percent of refuse depth specification should be relaxed to allow for well
installations such as those at PVLF where 32 percent depth of refuse wells have proven effective
in controlling surface gas emissions.
E-17
-------
E-18
-------
Table 1
Parcel 6 - Top Deck Gas Wells
Well Number
Well Depth (ft)
Refuse Depth (ft)
Well Depth as
Percent of
Refuse Depth
70030
60
185
32%
70040
60
185
32%
70050
60
185
32%
70060
60
185
32%
70065
135
185
73%
70070
60
185
32%
70075
78
185
42%
70080
60
185
32%
70090
60
185
32%
70100
60
185
32%
70110
60
185
32%
70120
60
185
32%
70130
60
185
32%
80010
60
185
32%
80020
60
185
32%
Table 2
Parcel 6 ¦ Top Deck Surface Gas Results
Surface Gas
7/93 - 7/94 Avg.
Route No.
TOC (ppm)
95
3
96
3
97
2
98
2
99
2
E-19
-------
Case Study B: Perforations For Wells Less Than 90 Feet Deep
AVCS Specification:
The bottom two-thirds of the pipe should be perforated
Alternative Design:
At least the bottom two-thirds of the pipe should be perforated if
the well is at least 90 feet deep. For wells less than 90 feet deep,
the well perforations should be at least 5 feet in length or 30
percent of the well depth.
Location:
Spadra Landfill, Pomona, CA
Operated by Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (Districts)
Table 1 demonstrates that for this particular well installation, the Districts used an
alternative to the AVCS design of perforating the bottom 66 percent of the gas extraction wells.
SCAQMD requires surface gas route monitoring for methane at Spadra Landfill. As shown in
Table 2, the areas around these gas extraction wells were reading at 4-5 ppm of methane. That is
far below the SCAQMD's 50 ppm regulatory limit, and reflects that these wells are having good
collection, even though they are designed differently than the proposed AVCS design. In
addition, for 1993, the average methane collection percentage in the gas at Spadra Landfill was
approximately 36 percent, but in the five wells in question, 47 percent of the collected gas was
methane.1 (Figure 1 is a map of the area of discussion at the Spadra Landfill.) Most of the other
wells on site meet the AVCS specification of at least 66 percent of the pipe being perforated.
This shows that these wells are performing better than the majority of the wells on site. Most of
the other wells on site meet the AVCS specification of at least 66 percent of the pipe being
perforated.
1 This calculation was based on the monthly readings at each wellhead.
E-20
-------
Table 1
Spadra Landfill Case Study Well Specifications
Well No.
Well Depth
Slotted Length
Corresponding
Surface Gas
Route
03-040
60'
30'
32, 33
03-050
60'
30'
33
15-010
60'
30'
115,118
15-020
60'
30'
118, 117
15-030
60'
30'
117, 116
Table 2
Cooresponding Surface Gas Monitoring Results
Surface Gas Route
Avg CH4 Reading
Over Past Year (ppm)
32
3.5
33
4
115
5
116
4
117
4
] ] 8
4
E-21
-------
9 Ul
Figure 1. Partial Map of Gas Collection System and Surface Gas
Routes at Spadra Landfill
E-22
-------
There are often situations in which perforating the bottom two-thirds of the pipe is not
advisable. For example, a well that is only 30 feet deep would be required by the AVCS design
to have its lower 20 feet slotted or perforated. In an arid region like Southern California, it is not
advisable to be applying a vacuum that is only 10 feet below the surface. Significant air
infiltration could result. However, for a sufficiently deep well, perforating the bottom 66 percent
of the well casing would not pose a threat. Accordingly, the bottom two-thirds specification for
perforations should be specified only for wells that are at least 90 feet deep. For wells less than
90 feet deep, a minimum of 5 feet should always be perforated or 30 percent of the well depth.
This additional alternative design is based on successful field designs implemented in the past.
E-23
-------
Case Study C: Alternate Gas Well Perforations
AVCS Specification: ...with a minimum of four .012 m (1/2 inch) diameter holes,
or other perforations spaced 90 degrees apart every 0.1 to
0.2 m (4 to 8 inch).
Alternative Design: The use of either slots or circular perforations with a minimum
open area/ft. of pipe of 1-2 inch2/ft.
Locations: Palos Verdes Landfill, Rolling Hills Estates, CA.
Spadra Landfill, Pomona, CA.
Operated by Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts
Lopez Canyon Landfill, Lakeview Terrace, CA.
Sheldon-Arleta Landfill, Sun Valley, CA.
Operated by City of Los Angeles
Table 1 presents specifications for a variety of slots and perforations used at landfills in
Southern California as well as the AVCS specifications. The data contained in Table 1 suggest
that the slots used by all the landfills are more than adequate to collect landfill gas in terms of
percent open area of the pipe. The slots used include both vertical and horizontal slots, as shown
in Figure 1. All the landfills in this case study have integrated surface gas measurements of less
than 50 ppm. Therefore, all sites are in compliance with the SCAQMD's stringent site-average
limit of 50 ppm methane. The specifications listed in Table 1 reflect a range of open areas used
between 3.1 to 16 inch2/ft. The AVCS requirements result in an open area of either 1.2 to 2.4
inch2/ft. Accordingly, a reasonable minimum open area/ft. of pipe would be 1 to 2 inch2/ft.
E-24
-------
Table 1
Comparison Between Industry Examples and EPA New Source Performance Standards
Source of
Specification
A
Diameter
B
Width
C
Length
D
Distance
Between
Centers
Orientation
of Slots
Openings
Per Row
Staggered?
Offset in
Row
Open
Area/ft
(sq.in)
Palos Verdes
LF
3" to 4"
1/4"
2"
6"
Vertical
8
Y
8.0
Spadra LF
4" to 6"
1/8"
1"
3/8"
Horizontal
4
N
16.0
Lopez Canyon
LF
4"
1/4"
2"
6"
Vertical
8
Y
8.0
Sheldon-
Arleta LF
6"
1/4"
12"
18"
Vertical
4
N
8.0
EPA required
none
0.5" circle
0.5" circle
4.5"
N/A
4
N
2.4
EPA required
none
0.5" circle
0.5" circle
8.5"
N/A
4
N
1.2
E-25
-------
Cantaritna
Cantartina
Cantatflna
O
Cantartina
Figure 1. Key to Slot Specifications
E-26
-------
Case Study D: Pile Driven Vertical Gas Well Installation
AVCS Specification: A well drilling rig will be used to dig a 0.60 m (24 inch) diameter
hole in the landfill
Alternative Design: Pile driven vertical gas well installation
Location: Calabasas Landfill, Agoura, CA.
Operated by Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (Districts)
The Districts operate an extensive gas collection system at the Calabasas Landfill (CALF)
which collects approximately 6000 cfm of landfill gas. In 1989 and again in 1991, a series of
vertical gas collection wells were installed along one of the site's benches, shown in Figure 1.
Two pile driving installation methodologies were employed. For the 1989 wells, a 20 inch
diameter hollow steel casing with an expendable, slip fit steel point was driven to the designed
depth. A permanent well casing with slotted sections was centered within the pile casing,
backfilled and the pile casing was then removed. For the 1991 wells, a steel casing with a
conical steel point, and slotted section was driven to the design depth. It was left in place and
served as the gas well casing. Both of these pile driven gas well installation techniques offered
advantages over conventional drilling methodologies most important of which being the
elimination of drill spoils.
The pile driven wells have performed well in collecting landfill gas and controlling
surface gas emissions. Table 1 lists well performance data, including gas flow, percent methane,
and percent oxygen, measured in July 1994. Table 2, lists the integrated surface gas monitoring
routes which cover the pile driven gas well area and the one year average of surface gas
concentrations. The one year average surface gas concentrations are well below the SCAQMD's
stringent 50 ppm average surface gas limit and indicate that the area has excellent gas control.
E-27
-------
Figure 1. CALF - Pile Driven Gas Weils (54-000 Series)
E-28
-------
Well No,
54020
54030
54040
54050
54060
54065
54070
54075
54080
54085
54090
54095
54100
54105
54110
54115
54120
54125
54130
54140
Table 1
Calabasas Landfill - Pile Driven Gas Wells (54-000 Series)
Well Data - July 1994
Install Date
Install
Method
Depth (ft)
CH4 (%)
02 (%)
11/9/89
e dr
ven
36.5
52
0
11/9/89
e dr
ven
36
52
11/9/89
e dr
ven
35.5
44
11/9/89
e dr
ven
35.5
56
11/9/89
e dr
ven
36.5
57
10/25/91
e dr
ven
100
55
11/9/89
e dr
ven
36
12
15
11/9/89
e dr
ven
100
48
11/9/89
e dr
ven
36
46
10/29/91
e dr
ven
96
56
11/9/89
e dr
ven
36.5
50
10/29/91
e dr
ven
100
58
11/9/89
e dr
ven
36.5
55
10/29/91
e dr
ven
100
57
11/9/89
e dr
ven
36.5
55
11/1/91
e dr
ven
100
55
11/13/89
e dr
ven
36.5
54
11/1/91
e dr
ven
100
11
16
11/13/89
e dr
ven
36
55
11/13/89
e dr
ven
61
50
Table 2
Integrated Surface Gas Routes Controlled by 54-Series Gas Wells
Surface Gas Rt. No.
June 93 - June 94
Average TOC*
(ppm)
16
12
17
15
18
17
19
9
20
12
21
17
22
12
* TOC = total organic compounds as methane.
E-29
-------
Clearly, pile driven vertical gas well installations offer a viable alternative to
conventional drilling methodologies as evidenced by the CALF wells. This alternative to drilling
is not be excluded by regulation.
E-30
-------
Case Study E: Compacted Low Permeability
AVCS Specification:
... the hole will be backfilled with gravel to a level at least 0.3 m (1
ft.) above the perforated section. A layer of backfill material at
least 1.2 m (4 ft.) thick will be added on top of the gravel. A layer
of bentonite at least 0.9 m (3 ft.) thick will be added on top of the
backfill material, and the remainder of the hole will be backfilled
with cover material or material equal to the permeability to the
existing cover material.
Alternative Design 1.
From the fill surface, a 19 ft. layer of compacted low permeability
cover soil backfill which extends down to the gravel.
Alternative Design 2.
From the fill surface, the uppermost 10 ft. is a layer of compacted
low permeability cover soil backfill that is underlain by a 4 inch
thick lean concrete layer. The concrete layer is in turn underlain by
backfill down to the gravel.
Location:
Puente Hills Landfill, Whittier, CA
Operated by Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (Districts)
The Districts operate an extensive gas collection system at Puente Hills Landfill (PHLF)
which collects approximately 26,000 scfm of landfill gas. Three foot bentonite seals for gas
wells had been consistently used by the Districts for ten years. However, high swelling materials
including bentonites shrink on dehydration and allow short circuiting under applied well
vacuums. Well seal air short circuiting had been identified as a significant problem at Districts
operated landfills.
E-31
-------
Two alternative designs utilizing compacted soil were developed which significantly
reduced air short circuiting. Both well alternatives were implemented in 30 inch diameter bore
wells.
Alternative Design 1
Alternative Design 1 substitutes compacted low permeability cover soil for the bentonite
seal. It stemmed from a study of well seal designs performed by the Districts.1 The seals in the
study each commenced with backfilling the hole with gravel to a level 1 ft. above the perforated
section. Four different designs were developed for the remainder of the fill:
• Bentonite: One foot cap of backfill, underlain by 5 ft. of bentonite-cement grout. The
bentonite-cement grout is underlain by 10 ft. of backfill, which is in turn underlain by 3
ft. of hydrated bentonite pellets extending down to the gravel. Backfill for all seal
designs was cover soil backfill (low permeability marine siltstone).
• Soil backfill: Nineteen feet of backfill extending down to the gravel.
• Compacted soil: Nineteen feet of compacted backfill extending down to the gravel.
Backfill placed in 3 ft. lifts. Each lift wetted with 5 gallons of water. (See Table 5).
• Sand-cement grout: One foot cap of backfill, underlain by 17 ft. of a sand-cement grout,
which is in turn underlain by 1 ft. of backfill extending down to the gravel.
Twenty-eight wells scheduled for construction in early 1991 were selected for the study.
The twenty-eight wells were divided into seven groups of four wells each. Wells in each group
were selected in order to be as close to one another as possible. The four seal designs were then
randomly assigned among the four wells in each group.
Five months after construction, the wells were monitored in a series of ten daily
monitoring to determine short term seal effectiveness. Intermediate term seal effectiveness was
] Cutts, S. P., Huitric, R. L., and Ackman, P. W., "Alternative Landfill Gas Well Seal Designs", SWANA 16th
Annual Landfill Gas Symposium Proceedings. 1993.
E-32
-------
observed by repeating the daily monitoring nine months later. Subsequent routine monthly
monitoring data were analyzed to provide long term results.
Well seal effectiveness was ascertained in terms of three performance parameters:
methane flow, air fraction, and aerobic gas production. Aerobic gas production was quantified in
terms of a composting ratio1. The composting ratio measures apparent aerobic decomposition
gases relative to anaerobic gases. Higher methane flow, lower air fraction, and lower composting
ratio are desirable traits.
Average performance parameter values for the four different seal designs are presented in
Tables 1 through 4.
Results from the controlled short term and intermediate term monitoring programs, as
well as the long term routine monitoring data, consistently show a much higher average methane
collection rate for wells with compacted soil seals, nearly twice that of wells with any of the
other seal designs. Wells with compacted soil seals also have a lower average air fraction than
other wells. Associated with the lower air fraction is a lower level of aerobic activity. The
differences in the performance parameters between the compacted seal and other seals are almost
always significant for all the monitoring programs.
The investigation of alternative seal designs shows significantly better performance for
wells with compacted soil seals than for wells with a bentonite seal design: higher methane flow,
lower air fraction, and lower composting ratio. Compacted soil seals have since been
implemented in all subsequent gas well designs at the Districts.
E-33
-------
Table 1
Bentonite
Controlled Monitoring Programs
Routine Monitoring Data: Long Term
Parameter
Short Term
Intermediate Term
7/92 to 12/92
1/93 to 12/93
1/94 to 7/94
CH4 Flow (cfm)
12.1
15.2
12 8
17.5
12.3
Air Fraction (%)
32.5
39.2
30.2
21.4
30.8
Composting Ratio X 100
6.29
11.3
11.0
5.35
5.36
Table 2
Soil Backfill
Parameter
Controlled Monitoring Programs
Routine Monitoring Data: Long Term
Short Term
Intermediate Term
7/92 to 12/92
1/93 to 12/93
1/94 to 7/94
CH4 Flow (cfm)
11.8
12.2
10.3
11.5
12.3
Air Fraction (%)
40.2
34.9
35 7
22.5
30.0
Composting Ratio X 100
5 76
7.60
127
5.21
7.51
Table 3
Compacted Soil
Controlled Monitoring Programs
Routine Monitoring Data. Long Term
Parameter
Short Term
Intermediate Term
7/92 to 12/92
1/93 to 12/93
1/94 to 7/94
CH4 Flow (cfm)
23 7
17.3
22 8
21 9
18 9
Air Fraction {%)
24 3
26 8
25 5
16.1
20.2
Composting Ratio X 100
2 05
4.99
5 43
4.38
4 43
Table 4
Sand-Cement Grout
Parameter
Controlled Monitoring Programs
Routine Monitoring Data: Long Term
Short Term
Intermediate Term
7/92 to 12/92
1/93 to 12/93
1/94 to 7/94
CH4 Flow (cfm)
10.4
8 04
7.24
9.20
6.10
Air Fraction (%)
29 0
34 4
32.3
29.4
44.9
Composting Ratio X 100
2 20
8.30
11 3
10.6
18.8
E-34
-------
Alternative Design 2
Alternative Design 2 differs from Design 1 in that a shorter depth of compacted soil is
used (10 ft compared to 19 ft) and a 4 inch layer of lean concrete underlies the compacted soil. A
slightly different compaction method was used at the Puente Hills Landfill in 1992/3. Table 5
summarizes the two compaction methods.
To evaluate the performance of Alternative Design 2, fifteen wells were randomly
selected from the 1992/3 installation. Eighteen months of routine monthly monitoring data
through July 1994 were analyzed to determine average values of the methane collection rate, air
fraction, and composting ratio. These data are presented in Table 6.
The average methane flow, air fraction, and composting ratio for these wells constructed
with Alternative Design 2 are comparable to the respective parameter values in Table 3 for the
compacted soil seal wells constructed according to Alternative Design 1.
E-35
-------
Table 5
Compaction Specifications for Well Seals
Parameter
Wells Installed in 1991
Wells Installed in 1992/3
Soil Lift Size
Wetting of Soil
Compaction Procedure
3'
Each lift wetted with 5 gallons of water
Compaction with 28" circular steel disk w/6" annular
opening. Disk welded to 6" diameter pipe. Disk/pipe
assembly (weight > 500 lb) lowered into well bore
hole, raised 1and dropped to compact soil. This
procedure repeated five time for each lift
r
Soiled mixed with water prior to backfilling to bring to
optimum moisture content.
Thoroughly mixed to a uniform moisture content.
Compaction with hand-held pneumatic tamper
(Ingersoll-Rand Model 241A2M).
Weight = 26.9 lb, length = 52.8", barrel bore = 1 5/16",
avg. piston stroke = 4", blows per minute = 1590.
Compaction to 90% of optimum density.
Table 6
Average Data for Wells with 1992/3 Compaction Method
CH4 Flow (cfm)
Air Fraction (%)
Composting Ratio X 100
199
21.5
5.85
E-36
-------
Case Study F: Monitoring Vacuum Levels As An Indicator
Of Air Infiltration In Arid Regions
Test Method Specification: Test for infiltration of air into the landfill by measuring the
gauge pressures of the shallow pressure probes and using
Method 3C to determine the LFG N2 concentration ...
reduce the blower vacuum so that the N2 concentration is
less than 1 percent. (Section: Method 2E: Section 3.7.2)
Alternative Design: Determine appropriate vacuum levels from landfill gas
composition rather than nitrogen content
Locations: Palos Verdes Landfill, Rolling Hills Estates, CA.
Scholl Canyon Landfill, Glendale, CA.
Spadra Landfill, Pomona, CA.
Calabasas Landfill, Agoura, CA.
Puente Hills Landfill, Whittier, CA.
Mission Canyon Landfill, Los Angeles, CA.
Operated by Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts
(Districts)
The rationale for the proposed rules in the Federal Register (56 FR 24491, May 30, 1991) states:
"Excessive air infiltration poses a safety hazard, because too much air may lead to an
explosion or landfill fire. Nitrogen concentration is used as a surrogate measure for air
infiltration. Based on these safety concerns, EPA has determined that N2 concentration should
be maintained under 1 percent by volume."
All the landfills in the case study generally operate at nitrogen concentrations greater than
20 percent in the header lines. Table 1 presents the average of the monthly gas analyses for the
E-37
-------
1993 year. The nitrogen percentage ranges from 24 to 60 percent. Being in an arid region, these
landfills probably draw in more air than the majority of landfills in the nation. That fact alone
does not mean that the landfills are being dangerously operated or that the header lines face
danger of explosion.
The Permanent Gas Sample1 results from Table 1 were used to produce the two attached
graphs. Figure l2 shows the percent volume of methane relative to the percent volume of
additional inerts. The "additional inerts" is the quantity of inert gas that is present but not
accounted for by the presence of air. For example, if a mixture was 50 percent air, there would
be a corresponding percent nitrogen present; any nitrogen present above that percent would be
additional inert gas in the sample. The volume percent of air is approximated by the oxygen
content found in the sample. Figure 1 includes a curve that represents the flammability limits of
a mixture of methane, nitrogen and air. Considering a mixture with nitrogen is the most
conservative approach because the other inert gas found in landfill gas, carbon dioxide, limits the
flammability of methane even more. The area bounded by the y-axis on the left and the curve on
the right is a region wherein the gas mixture is flammable. Outside of this curve, the gas mixture
is not flammable. The gas characteristics from all six of the landfills in the case study fall
outside of this curve, and therefore are not flammable gas mixtures despite their volume
percentages of nitrogen being well above 1 percent.
1 Permanent gas samples are samples of gas collected at each landfill on a monthly basis and
then analyzed in a laboratory by a gas chromatograph.
2 This graph was adapted from Figure 28 of the Michael G. Zabetakis article "Flammability
Characteristics of Combustible Gases and Vapors", published in 1965 as Bulletin 627 of the U.S.
Bureau of Mines.
E-38
-------
Table 1
Gas Composition Data for Case Study Landfills
Average 1993 Permanent Gas
* Calculation of
Monthly Samples
Corresponding
Landfill
Oxygen
%
Carbon Dioxide
%
Nitrogen
%
Methane
%
Air
%
Additional Inerts
%
Puente Hills (PH)
4.3
31.4
23.7
38.5
20.5
39.1
Palos Verdes (PV)
10.8
17.2
50.0
20.2
51.5
27.0
Spadra (SP)
4.7
32.6
24.4
36.2
22.4
39.5
Calabasas (CA)
5.6
30.5
29.8
31.6
26.6
39.5
Mission Canyon
(MC)
7.9
16.6
60.4
13.4
37.7
47.6
Scholl Canyon (SC)
6.0
29.0
30.9
32.0
28.6
37.6
* Air percent is determined from oxygen percent in sample. Additional inerts are the sum of nitrogen and carbon dioxide present that
would be additional to percents present due to air percent.
-------
¦
II
3H
SP
sc ¦ ¦
CA
PV
¦
• - . . .
MC
¦
Flammable
within curve
_ . - -
-
0 10 20 30 40 50
Added Inert, voI-'A
Figure 1. Limits of Flammability of Methane-Nitrogen-Air Mixture
E-40
-------
Figure 23 presents the range of flammability of gases according to their volume percent of
methane and oxygen. Once again, the data from the case study landfills fall well outside the
specified flammable area. If a considerable amount of oxygen was added to the landfill gas, the
composition would start to approach the flammable region. However, the landfills are operating
safely at the current specifications. For the landfills in the case study, at least, the proposed
nitrogen percent limit would make it impossible to operate what is currently safely operated
landfills.
3 This graph was adapted from Figure 22 of the H. F. Coward and G. W. Jones article "Limits of
Flammability of Gases and Vapors", published in 1952 as Bulletin 503 of the U. S. Bureau of Mines.
E-41
-------
jFlamm
PV Non
i
Flammable
MC
c
SC
SP
\
0 10 20 30 40 50
METHANE, X
Figure 2. Relation Between Gas Composition and Flammability
E-42
-------
Case Study G: Horizontal Collector Design
Specification: Horizontal Collector (only) System
Location: Scholl Canyon Landfill, Glendale CA.
Operated by Los Angeles County Sanitation District (Districts)
Introduction
In 1988, a group of horizontal landfill gas collectors was installed on the top deck area of
Scholl Canyon Landfill (SCLF). Twelve collectors were installed in an area that had no existing
gas collection system (either vertical wells or horizontal collectors) in place. These twelve
collectors, shown in Figure 1, are the subject of this case study. Eight of the twelve collectors
(main collectors) span the width of the landfill from its southern to its northern border. The
remaining four collectors (auxiliary collectors) follow roughly the daylight line along the site's
southeast boundary. All twelve collectors are connected to the same 18-inch diameter gas header
which is located on a fire road which runs along the southern boundary. The following
discussion provides design details, operational information and performance data for the subject
collectors.
Horizontal Collector Design
Main Collectors
The main top deck horizontal collectors span the width of the landfill from the southern
border where they connect to the header to the northern border. In general, they consist of a
trench, casing, backfill material, and header connection. The main collectors (listed in Table 1)
range in length from 1300 to 1800-feet with a horizontal spacing of 250-feet. They are
constructed in 2-foot 3-inch wide by 5-foot 9-inch deep trenches that span the top deck but are
E-43
-------
Figure 1. Scholl Canyon Landfill - Horizontal Collectors
E-44
-------
Scholl Canyon Landfill
Table 1
Main Horizontal Collectors
End Collector *
Casing Diameter
Length
Spacing
Collector Number
(inch)
(feet)
(feet)
Casing Dia (in.)
Length (ft)
09-125
15 and 18
1320
250
8 and 12
450
09-135
15 and 18
1700
250
8 and 12
225
09-145
15 and 18
1600
250
8 and 12
225
09-155
15 and 18
1650
250
8 and 12
275
09-165
15 and 18
1780
250
8 and 12
200
09-175
15 and 18
1710
250
8 and 12
250
09-185
15 and 18
1540
250
8 and 12
225
09-195
15 and 18
1260
250
8 and 12
250
* inset 75-feet from northwest boundary daylight line
E-45
-------
inset approximately 75-feet from the northern boundary daylight line and 30-feet from the
southern boundary daylight line. These collectors have casings comprised of 10-foot sections of
alternating 15-inch and 18-inch diameter corrugated steel pipe (CSP). The alternating sections of
CSP have a 2-foot overlapping connection, as shown in Figure 2. The annular space created at
each overlap connection allows the landfill gas to enter the casing when vacuum is applied to the
collector. The casing is horizontally centered within the trench supported by a 6-inch bed of
uncrushed, 0.5 to 1.5-inch diameter, rock. The trench is backfilled with additional uncrushed
rock to within 2-feet of the trench top. A polypropylene filter fabric covers the gravel and
extends 2-feet vertically up the trench walls. The filter fabric is covered with on-site soil filling
the trench to the top as shown in Figure 3.
The main horizontal collectors have a unique termination at their northwest end where
they connect to the midpoint of smaller diameter horizontal collectors (end collectors) which run
roughly perpendicular to the main trench. These "end" collectors which are constructed like the
main collectors except with alternating sections of 8 and 12-inch diameter CSP casing. They
range in length from 250 to 500-feet, follow along the site's northern boundary (inset
approximately 30-feet from the refuse line), and are spaced 30-feet apart end to end. The casing
opening at both ends of these collectors is covered with 2 layers of polypropylene filter fabric.
The end collectors obtain their vacuum from the main collector and have no separate vacuum
control valve of their own.
The main horizontal collectors are connected at their southern end to an 18-inch diameter
gas header. The header runs along a fire road which follows the southern boundary but at a
higher elevation than the site's top deck. Consequently, connections from the main collectors are
routed up the side slope from the top deck to the header as shown in Figure 4. As previously
mentioned, the main collector trenches end approximately 30-feet in from the southern boundary
daylight line. Extending from the trench end is a section of 12-inch diameter CSP which is
connected within the trench to the collector casing. This 12-inch diameter section of CSP
protrudes approximately 5-feet beyond the trench end where it connects, using a neoprene gasket
CSP expansion joint, to another section of CSP. This CSP section connects to a 40 degree elbow
E-46
-------
;3
-------
ex/sr. so/l. covsfit-
fll—Ifisll/s """ \ l«atl=l
TYPAR. 3-4 Of &r PUfONf 0*-
£Oual filT£r fxaac. exreuaaa
«a.t yj/ar#MA/o ups/oes
OF 7-&EMCH »5 SMOWH
poe-r Mem coa. reo cst=t
14 &A. /&" /&" o/A
VNCftUSHEO G HAVEL
-------
Figure 4. IVIain Collector to Header Connection
E-49
-------
which re-directs the CSP up the side slope toward the gas header. As the CSP extends up the
slope it breaks through the top deck and continues above ground. The CSP then connects to a
24-inch long flat band coupling that joins it to another section of CSP that has a steel flange end.
The steel flange is mated to a PVC flange and a 12-inch to 8-inch diameter PVC reducer. An
8-inch diameter PVC pipe connects the reducer to an 8-inch butterfly valve (used to regulate the
collector vacuum), to an 8-inch diameter by 5-foot long flex connection. The flex connection
attaches to the 18-inch diameter header through an 8-inch PVC saddle.
Auxiliary Collectors
The four auxiliary collectors are located along the site's southern boundary, inset
approximately 30-feet from the daylight line, as shown in Figure 1. They range in length from
400-feet to 600-feet, see Table 2, and are spaced apart at 60-foot intervals end to end. They are
constructed like the main collectors described above but with alternating sections of 8 and
12-inch diameter CSP casing. The casing opening at both ends of the auxiliary collectors is
covered with 2 layers of polypropylene filter fabric. At the point where main and auxiliary
collectors cross, the auxiliary collector is routed under the main collector as shown in Figure 5.
An 8-inch CSP tee, installed in the collector casing, is used as the collector to header connection
point. From the tee, the header connection is the same as the main collector header connection
except that 8-inch CSP and 4-inch PVC pipe (or 12-inch CSP and 8-inch PVC) is used as shown
in Figure 6. The auxiliary collectors are connected to the header through 4-inch butterfly valves
which allows independent vacuum adjustments.
Operational and Performance Characteristics
Operation
The primary objective in the operation of the SCLF horizontal collectors described above
is to control surface gas emissions from the site. To meet this objective, surface gas monitoring
results and collector operational data (e.g. flow rate, percent methane, percent oxygen, gas temp,
E-50
-------
Table 2
Auxiliary Horizontal Collectors
Casing Diameter
Length
Spacing
Collector Number
(inch)
(feet)
(feet)
09-134
8 and 12
400
60
09-154
8 and 12
500
60
09-174
8 and 12
600
60
09-194
8 and 12
600
60
* inset 30-feet from northwest boundary daylight line
E-51
-------
T|
<5"
c
-t
©
oi
>
c
X
w
J
to
0)
o
o
©
o
O
a>
w
5"
CD
C0
-o
( rrp /
/2 ^
POLyMSR COATED'
C rrP/cA l )
S*0 POLYME& COATED
, cs/> crrfz/CAL.)
WOfi> fa&k/catso 8
POt-rMe/Z COAT££>
'C&/> T£E
'Gau*scn>A. cm*#
secu/vs 2 «y«s rrPA
*340t F-itTEK FA&ZKZ
JX3 £A/£> OP PfP£ w/fAh
vrJia* /&>*>£, fryA/CAL
d> £ACM £V£>)
-------
trf
*n
(5"
c
-*
(D
p
>
C
X
5"
-t
»<
a
o
o
o
o
0
1
Q)
a
&& ^cattmmfATm* -
^i/^r^ro-
****« AT Z i.eo*rim*
AS
"3
ffPOLTMe* C£*J'£n
JOWTS *teQfWel*JS
3L*£v£. GA&tfmr wtr*i
i*L*r ma** src. cov^jL/ua
swc*uj r£XA/***9*et>
>=0* C.L.j*JCtT-f
AUmJC/A/tr CO4.l£0*Kr
-------
vacuum pressure, etc.) are obtained and reviewed on an ongoing basis. Slight variations in the
operational data are corrected as necessary with minor adjustments to the collector vacuum. Any
significant increase in surface gas emissions would warrant immediate and perhaps more drastic
collector adjustment.
The 1993 average operational data for the horizontal collectors described herein are
contained in Tables 3 and 4. Valve position corresponds to control valve opening where zero
degrees is "fully closed" and 90 degrees is "fully open." Surface gas monitoring results are
presented below.
Performance
In the Los Angeles area, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
adopted in 1985 a rigorous landfill gas control rule, Rule 1150.1, "Control of Gaseous Emissions
from Active Landfills". The rule, with its January 1989 compliance deadline, required the
installation of gas collection systems at active sites and the implementation of a field monitoring
program. It established a 50 ppm total organic compounds as methane (TOC as methane) limit
for average gas emissions measures over the surface of the landfill (integrated surface gas
monitoring). Sites complying with Rule 1150.1 are considered as having good gas control with
those maintaining emission levels far below the 50 ppm limit having excellent control.
SCLF is located within SCAQMD jurisdiction and it complies with the requirements of
Rule 1150.1. In the area controlled by the horizontal collectors described herein the average
surface gas emissions since 1989 have stayed at background levels below 5 ppm TOC as
methane.
E-54
-------
Scholl Canyon Landfill
Table 3
Main Horizontal Gas Collectors
Average Operational Characteristics -1993
Collector
Number
Valve Position
(degrees)
Percent of
Time at
Position
Average
Percent
ch4
Average
Percent
02
Average Flow
(eta)
Average
Vacuum
(in. HjO)
Average
Temp.
(deg F)
09-125
15
100
44.9
1.2
292
0.71
88.9
09-135
15
100
44.4
08
215
0 53
88.9
09-145
15
36
34.9
2.8
191
0.6
87
30
57
30.5
4.5
302
0.8
87.2
45
7
31
7
711
0 1
71
09-155
15
73
26 6
5
183
0.5
82.4
30
27
16.6
11.9
194
0 56
64.9
09-165
30
21.4
45.8
0.63
191
0.52
76.5
45
78 6
37.9
0.64
305
0.77
83.8
09-175
30
100
39 4
LI
222
0 55
75 7
09-185
0
100
99
14 4
0
-0 01
80.2
09-195
15
100
42 9
1.3
257
0.48
75.2
Table 4
Auxiliary Horizontal Collectors
Average Operational Characteristics
Collector
Number
Valve Position
(degrees)
Percent of
Time at
Position
Average
Percent
ch4
Average
Percent
O,
Average Flow
(cfm)
Average
Vacuum
(in HjO)
Average
Temp
(deg F)
09-134
15
100
44 7
1 7
35
0 46
90 6
09-154
30
125
196
11.6
71
0.84
78 8
45
87.5
23
7.8
62
0.65
75.7
09-174
15
14.3
37 5
2
64.5
0.6
73.7
30
7.1
39
1
51
1
60
45
78.6
39.1
0.61
65 8
06
79
09-194
15
100
35.8
1 8
77
0 55
76 2
E-55
-------
Case Study H: Design For LF With Horizontal Collectors and Vertical Wells
Specification: Front Face Horizontal Collectors and Vertical Gas Wells
Location: Scholl Canyon Landfill, Glendale CA.
Operated by Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (Districts)
Introduction
In 1988, a number of horizontal collectors and vertical gas collection wells were installed
on the top deck area and front face respectively of Scholl Canyon landfill (SCLF). They were
installed to collect landfill gas and control surface emissions in accordance with local
regulations. A group of horizontal collectors were installed in a east-west orientation with
connection (at their western end) to a front face gas header. The header which runs along a front
face bench was also connected to a series of vertical gas collection wells. These wells were
installed, evenly spaced, along the top of the slope leading from the header bench to the next
lower bench. Six of the horizontal collectors and eight of the vertical wells, described above are
shown in Figure 1. This group of wells and collectors are the subject of this case study. The
following discussion provides design details, operational information, and performance data for
the subject wells and collectors.
Collector/Well Design
Horizontal Collectors
The horizontal collectors (listed in Table 1) are connected at one end to the front face
header, described above, and extend easterly toward the center of the landfill. The collectors
range in length from 880 to 1020-feet, have a 2 percent slope downward toward the front face,
and are spaced at 200-foot intervals. They are the first and only horizontal collectors installed at
SCLF and consequently have no collectors below them. In general, they consist of a horizontal
E-56
-------
N
ho:
,co
t'r
Figure 1. Scholl Canyon Landfill - Front Face Horizontal
Collectors and Vertical Gas Wells
E-57
-------
School Canyon Landfill
Table 1
Horizontal Collectors
Casing Diameter
Length
Spacing
Collector Number
(inch)
(feel)
(feet)
07-057
12 and 15
880
200
07-095
12 and 15
910
200
07-097
12 and 15
880
200
07-102
12 and 15
930
200
07-115
12 and 15
1020
200
07-125
12 and 15
950
200
E-58
-------
trench, casing, backfill material, and a header connection. They are constructed in a 2-foot
3-inch wide by 5-foot 9-inch deep trench that runs the length of the collector inset a minimum of
30-feet from the front face to prevent air intrusion. These collectors have casings comprised of
10-foot sections of alternating 12 and 15-inch diameter corrugated steel pipe (CSP). The
alternating sections of CSP have a 2-foot overlapping connection, as shown in Figure 2. The
annular space created at each overlap connection allows the landfill gas to enter the casing when
vacuum is applied to the collector. The casing is horizontally centered within the trench
supported by a 6-inch bed of uncrushed, 0.5 to 1.5-inch diameter, rock. The trench is backfilled
with additional uncrushed rock to within 2-feet of the trench top. A polypropylene filter fabric
covers the gravel and extends 2-feet vertically up the trench walls. The filter fabric is covered
with on-site soil filling the trench to the top as shown in Figure 3.
The casing opening at the eastern, unconnected, end of the horizontal collectors is
covered with 2 layers of polypropylene filter fabric, as shown in Figure 4. The western end of
the collectors is connected to an 18-inch diameter gas header which runs along a front face bench
which is at a lower elevation than the collectors. Consequently, connections from the collectors
are routed down the slope from the top deck to the header bench as shown in Figure 5. The
12-inch diameter collector casing extends past the end of the trench and is coupled, using a
36-inch long flat band coupling, to another 12-inch diameter section of CSP which terminates in
a steel flange. The steel flange is mated to a PVC flange and 12-inch by 8-inch diameter reducer.
E-59
-------
p u
h10
O (y
-------
ex/sr so/l covstz
fltelltelife
Rails'!
rrPA*. 3*Of by wrour on.
£qual FtireR fhb&c. exre/vo/eo
pul-l WfartfAHO upsJoes
OP r&£A/CH AS SMOW/V.
pour m&f*. coarso csr-
/4 GA. J2." AMD /£"
WC/WSHED 6&AVEL
O.S - /.£* " J?/A.
BACKFILL. w/o*r Sirs SOIL
'M=iil=ii'i
IW5MI
TOP DECK
-------
/o
top oecK
t»*tp
* © *
o
o
L BACKF/LL w/2+" OA/-
C J Tff <£">¦* /i '
UMC&(/S#£0 GfiZ4Ve:/L —
S/Z£ AS £/=>£C/*V£0.
5ECV/2E 2-tAYm
rrPA# * 340/
PLAST/C £HT, Br
Dv/wr TO /ZA/£>
-------
t v>
tj ^
Si4*- V
Figure 5. Horizontal Collector to Header Connection
E-63
-------
The reducer connects to a section of 8-inch diameter PVC pipe, a 31-inch long expansion
coupling, followed by another section of 8-inch diameter PVC pipe which protrudes through the
front face terminating in a branch angle tee. From this point, the collector to trench connection is
routed above ground as it extends down the front face slope to the toe of the header bench. The
above ground section, starting at the branch angle tee, consists of three in-line sections of 8-inch
diameter PVC pipe connected by two 31-inch long expansion couplings. An 8-inch butterfly
valve, used to adjust the collector vacuum, is in-line between the two expansion couplings. At
the toe of the slope, the 8-inch diameter PVC pipe is routed under the header bench. This buried
section of pipe is sloped at 3 percent downward toward the face to facilitate the draining of
condensate from the line. The buried section of pipe which transverses the bench has a 31-inch
long PVC expansion coupling at its mid-point and terminates into a 8-inch PVC tee. A 3-inch
diameter PVC pipe is connected to the side of the tee through a 3-inch by 8-inch reducer. It
extends horizontally out through the face to the surface where it connects to the condensate
collection system. An 8-inch diameter PVC pipe extends vertically from the top of the tee
through the surface of the bench where it connects to a 31-inch long PVC expansion coupling.
From the expansion coupling the pipe is attached to an 8-inch PVC saddle connected to the
header.
Vertical Gas Wells
The vertical gas wells (listed in Table 2) are located along the front face bench on which
the collector header is located. They are installed approximately 4-feet out from the header on
the slope which extends down to the lower bench. The wells which are all 60-feet in length are
horizontally spaced at approx. 150-foot intervals (see Figure 1). They are constructed as shown
in Figure 6 with alternating sections of 4 and 6-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe in the bottom
40 feet and a 4-inch diameter PVC pipe riser. The riser connects to a 4-inch by 3-inch reducing
tee which connects to a section of 3-inch PVC pipe. The pipe is connected to a 3-inch wafer type
butterfly valve which is used to adjust well vacuum. A section of PVC pipe connects the valve
to 3-inch diameter flex connection which is attached to the header with a 3-inch PVC saddle.
E-64
-------
Table 2
Vertical Gas Wells
Casing Diameter
Length
Spacing
Well Number
(inch)*
(feet)
(feet)
07-060
4 and 6
60
175
07-070
4 and 6
60
175
07-080
4 and 6
60
175
07-090
4 and 6
60
175
07-100
4 and 6
60
175
07-120
4 and 6
60
175
07-130
4 and 6
60
175
* 4 and 6-inch dia perforated sections, 4-inch dia solid riser
E-65
-------
. N? S«S5
zmmmi
g1 **.V> ""*' »
0-B>
Figure 6. Vertical Gas Collection Well
E-66
-------
Operational and Performance Characteristics
Operation
The primary objective in the operation of the SCLF horizontal collectors and vertical gas
wells is to control surface gas emissions from the site. To meet this objective, surface gas
monitoring results and collector/well operational data (e.g. flow rate, percent methane, percent
oxygen, gas temperature, vacuum pressure, etc.) are obtained and reviewed on an ongoing basis.
Slight variations in the operational data are corrected as necessary with minor adjustments to the
collector/well vacuum. Any significant increase in surface gas emissions would warrant
immediate and perhaps more drastic collector/well adjustments.
The 1993 average operational data for the horizontal collectors and vertical gas wells
described herein are contained in Tables 3 and 4. Valve position corresponds to valve opening
where zero degrees is closed and 90 degrees is wide open. Surface gas monitoring results are
presented below.
Performance
In the Los Angeles area, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
adopted in 1985 a rigorous landfill gas control rule, Rule 1150.1, "Control of Gaseous Emissions
from Active Landfills". The rule, with its January 1989 compliance deadline, required the
installation of gas collection systems at active sites and the implementation of a field monitoring
program. It established a 50 ppm total organic compounds as methane (TOC as methane) limit
for average gas emissions measured over the surface of the landfill (integrated surface gas
monitoring). Sites complying with Rule 1150.1 are considered as having good gas control with
those maintaining emission levels far below the 50 ppm limit having excellent control.
SCLF is located within SCAQMD jurisdiction and it complies with the requirements of
Rule 1150.1. In the area along the header bench where the vertical gas wells are located surface
E-67
-------
Scholl Canyon Landfill
Table 3
Horizontal Collectors
Average Operational Characteristics -1993
Collector
Number
Valve Position
(degrees)
Percent of
Time at
Position
Average
Percent
CH,
Average
Percent
Average Flow
(cfin)
Average
Vacuum
(in H20)
Average
Temp,
(deg. F)
07-125
15
100
50
0
118
06
94
07-115
15
100
50
1
159
0.7
93
07-102
15
100
35
5
117
3.2
95
07-097
15
100
49
1
152
0.6
98
07-095
15
100
45
1
131
0.6
103
07-057
15
56
44
1
115
0.9
90
0
44
51
1
0
0.1
79
Table 4
Vertical Gas Wells
Average Operational Characteristics -1993
Gas Well
Number
Valve Position
(degrees)
Percent of
1993 at that
Position
Average
Percent
CH,
Average
Percent
O,
Average Flow
(cfm)
Average
Vacuum
in. H,0
Average
Temp,
(deg. F)
07-060
30
27
54
1
37
5.0
95
15
73
53
1
22
40
102
07-070
30
27
40
1
26
80
84
15
73
24
1
11
4.0
94
07-080
15
100
41
2
32
9.0
97
07-090
45
92
54
0
36
2 0
102
15
8
50
0
33
22
99
07-100
30
100
50
1
22
1.0
104
07-110
15
100
28
6
14
0.0
105
07-020
15
100
46
1
21
0.0
115
07-130
15
100
33
4
21
0.0
119
E-68
-------
gas emissions since 1990 have stayed at background levels below 5 ppm TOC as methane. In the
top deck area covered by the horizontal collectors surface gas emissions have also stayed at
background levels below 4 ppm TOC as methane.
E-69
-------
APPENDIX F
REPORT CHECKLISTS
-------
APPENDIX F
REPORT CHECKLISTS
The following checklists are provided in this appendix:
- Initial Design Capacity Report [§ 60.757(a)],
- Amended Design Capacity Report [§ 60.757(a)(3)].
- Annual or 5-year NMOC Emission Rate Report (Tier 1) [§ 60.757(b)],
- Revised NMOC Emission Rate Report (Tier 2) [§ 60.757(c)(1)],
- Revised NMOC Emission Rate Report (Tier 3) [§ 60.757(c)(2)],
- Collection and Control System Design Plan [§ 60.757(c)],
- Initial Control System Performance Test Report [§ 60.757(g)].
- Annual Reports [§ 60.757(f)].
- Landfill Closure Report [§ 60.757(d)].
- Control Equipment Removal Report [§ 60.757(e)].
Complete these checklists to determine compliance with the reporting requirements in
§60.757. A "yes" response to all questions indicates full compliance. A "no" response does not
necessarily indicate non-compliance with the regulations. In situations where a "no" response is
appropriate, note whether the intent of the requirements have been met and whether the
information provided by the landfill is acceptable.
F-l
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
INITIAL DESIGN CAPACITY REPORT [§60.757(a)]
All landfills subject to the regulations must submit this report.
Yes No
1. Was the report submitted within the timeframe given below?
~ ~ • on or before June 10, 1996 for landfills that commenced
construction, modification, or reconstruction on or after May 30,
1991, but before March 12, 1996.
~ ~ • within 90 days after the date of construction, modification,
reconstruction for landfills that commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction on or after March 12, 1996. [Note:
The initial design capacity report fulfills the requirements of the
notification of the date construction is commenced as required
under §60.7(a)(l) of the part 60 General Provisions.]
2. Did the report contain the following?
~ ~ • a map or plot map of the landfill, providing the size and location of
the landfill, and identifying all areas where refuse may be landfilled
according to the permit issued by the State, local, or tribal agency
responsible for regulating the landfill.
~ ~ • the maximum design capacity of the landfill. [Note: Where the
maximum design capacity is specified in the permit issued by the
State, local, or tribal agency responsible for regulating the landfill, a
copy of the permit specifying the maximum design capacity may be
submitted. If the maximum design capacity of the landfill is not
specified in the permit, the maximum design capacity must be
calculated using good engineering practices. The calculations must
be provided, along with the relevant parameters.]
Additional information may be requested to verify the maximum design capacity of the landfill.
F-2
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
AMENDED DESIGN CAPACITY REPORT [§60.757(a)(3)]
All landfills subject to the regulations must submit an amended design capacity report if the
design capacity included in the initial design capacity report has increased and the resulting
capacity is equal to or greater than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3.
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Was the report submitted within 90 days of an increase in the permitted
volume of the landfill or an increase in the density that results in a
maximum design capacity equal to or greater than 2.5 million Mg and
2.5 million m3. [Note: A landfill owner or operator who converts
design capacity from volume to mass or mass to volume to
demonstrate that landfill design capacity is less than 2.5 million Mg or
2.5 million m3, must keep readily accessible, on-site records of the
annual recalculation of site-specific density, design capacity, and the
supporting documentation. Off-site records may be maintained if they
are retrievable within 4 hours.]
F-3
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
ANNUAL NMOC EMISSION RATE REPORT (TIER 1) [§ 60.757(b)]
Landfills that have an initial or amended design capacity equal to or greater than
2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3 must submit this report. Once a collection and control system
has been installed, this report is no longer required.
Yes No
1. Was the report submitted no later than either of the following, as
appropriate:
~ ~ • June 10, 1996, for landfills that commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction on or after May 30, 1991, but before
March 12, 1996, or
~ ~ • Ninety days after the date of commenced construction,
modification, or reconstruction on or after March 12, 1996.
[Note: This report may be combined with the Initial Design Capacity
Report required in § 60.757(a)(1). Subsequent reports should be
submitted annually thereafter unless the owner or operator elects to
submit an estimate of the NMOC emission rate for the next 5 years
(5-year NMOC Emission Rate Report) in lieu of the Annual Report. In
order to submit a 5-year NMOC Emission Rate Report, the estimated
NMOC emission rate in each of 5 consecutive years must be less than
50 Mg/yr]
2. Did the Annua] report include the following?
~ ~ • emission estimate; and
~ ~ • all data, calculations, sample reports, and measurements upon
which the estimate is based.
Additional information may be requested to verify the reported NMOC emission rate.
F-4
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
FIVE-YEAR NMOC EMISSION RATE REPORT [§ 60.757(b)]
This report may be submitted in lieu of the Annual NMOC Emission Rate Report if the
annual NMOC emission rate is less than 50 Mg/year for 5 consecutive years.
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Was the report revised and submitted at least every 5 years?
~ ~ 2. If the actual waste acceptance rate exceeded the estimated waste
acceptance rate in any year reported in the 5-year revised estimate, was
a revised 5-year estimate submitted? [The revised estimate must cover
the 5 years beginning with the year in which actual rate exceeded the
estimated waste acceptance rate.]
3. Did the 5-year report include the following?
current amount of refuse-in-place;
estimated NMOC emission rate estimates for each of the 5 years;
estimated waste acceptance rate for each of the 5 years for which
the NMOC emission rate is estimated; and
~ ~ • all data, calculations, sample reports, and measurements upon
which the estimate is based.
~
~
•
~
~
•
~
~
•
[Note: The annual or Five-year NMOC Emission Rate Report (Tier 1) is not required after the
installation of a collection and control system in compliance with section § 60.752(b)(2).]
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
REVISED NMOC EMISSION RATE REPORT (TIER 2) [§ 60.757(c)(1)]
Landfills that have a 50 Mg/year or greater NMOC emission rate determined using the Tier 1
formulas and defaults must submit this report if they choose not to submit a collection and
control system design plan but choose instead to use the Tier 2 procedures to recalculate the
NMOC emission rate.
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Was the report submitted within 180 days of the first Tier 1 NMOC
emission rate report that showed emissions >50 Mg/year.
~ ~ 2. Does the report include the site-specific NMOC concentration
determined according to § 60.754(a)(3)?
~ ~ 3. If the recalculated NMOC emission rate was < 50 Mg/year, was annual
periodic reporting resumed?
~ ~ 4. If the recalculated NMOC emission rate was > 50 Mg/year, did the
owner or operator submit a Collection and Control System Design
Plan, or recalculate the NMOC emission rate according to Tier 3
procedures?
F-6
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
REVISED NMOC EMISSION RATE REPORT (TIER 3) [§ 60.757(c)(2)]
Landfills that have calculated a 50 Mg/year NMOC emission rate or greater using the Tier 2
procedures must submit this report if they choose not to submit a collection and control system
design plan but choose instead to use the Tier 3 procedures to recalculate the NMOC emission
rate.
Yes No
~ ~ 1.
~ ~ 2.
~ ~ 3.
Was the report submitted within 1 year of the first Tier 1 NMOC
emission rate report that showed emissions >50 Mg/yr?
Did the report include the revised (Tier 2) NMOC emission rate and
the site-specific methane generation rate constant (k) determined
according to § 60.754(a)(4)?
If the annual emission rate was 50 Mg or greater, was the report
submitted along with a Collection and Control System Design Plan
within 1 year of the first calculated exceedance of the standard?
F-7
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
COLLECTION AND CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN PLAN [§60.757(c)]
Landfills that have an NMOC emission rate equal to or greater than 50 Mg/year must submit
a Collection and Control System Design Plan unless the owner or operator elected to recalculate
the NMOC emission rate using NMOC sampling and analysis (Tier 2 or Tier 3) and the resulting
rate is less than 50 Mg/yr.
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Was the design plan submitted within 1 year of the first report of an
NMOC emission rate >50 Mg/yr?
~ ~ 2. Did the design plan include either of the following?
• a collection and control system conforming to the specifications
provided in §60.759, or
• an alternative collection system design plan meeting the
requirements of §60.752(b)(2).
~ ~ 3. If an active collection system is planned, does it meet the following
criteria in §60.752(b)(2)(ii)?
~ ~ • Is it designed to handle the maximum expected gas flow from the
entire area of the landfill that warrants control over the intended use
period of the equipment?
~ ~ • Is it designed to collect gas from each area or cell in which the
initial solid waste has been placed for a period of: 5 years or more
if active; or 2 years or more if closed or at final grade?
~ ~ • Will gas be collected at a sufficient extraction rate?
(A sufficient extraction rate means a rate sufficient to maintain a
negative pressure at all wellheads in the collection system without
causing air infiltration. All wellheads includes any wellheads
connected to the system as a result of expansion or excess surface
emissions, for the life of the blower.)
~ ~ • Is it designed to minimize off-site migration of subsurface gas?
F-8
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
COLLECTION AND CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN PLAN [§60.757(c)] (Continued)
4. If a passive collection system is planned, does it meet the following
criteria in §60.752(b)(2)(ii)?
~ ~ • Is it designed to handle the maximum expected gas flow from the
entire area of the landfill that warrants control over the intended use
period of the equipment?
~ ~ • Is it designed to collect gas from each area or cell in which the
initial solid waste has been placed for a period of: 5 years or more
if active; or 2 years or more if closed or at final grade?
O ~ • Is it designed to minimize off-site migration of subsurface gas?
O ~ • Will it have liners on the bottom and all sides of all areas in which
gas is to be collected?
[See Appendix E for additional information on the contents and review of collection system
design plan]
F-9
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
INITIAL CONTROL SYSTEM PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT [§ 60.757(g)]
Landfills that are required to install collection and control systems must submit a Control
System Performance Test Report.
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Was the following information submitted with the Initial Control
System Performance Test Report required under § 60.8 within
180 days of emission control system start-up?
2. Did the report include the following information?
~ ~ a. a diagram of the collection system showing extraction well spacing,
including the locations of any areas excluded from collection and
the proposed sites for the future addition of wells.
~ ~ b. the data upon which sufficient density of wells or other extraction
devices and the gas mover equipment sizing are based. (Sufficient
density means any number, spacing, and combination of collection
system components, including vertical wells, horizontal collectors,
and surface collectors, necessary to maintain emission and
migration control as determined by measures of performance.)
~ ~ c. the documentation of the presence of asbestos or nondegradable
material for each area from which collection wells have been
excluded based on the presence of asbestos or nondegradable
material.
~ ~ d. the sum of the gas generation flow rates for areas from which
collection wells have been excluded based on the presence of
nonproductive materials and the calculations of gas generation flow
rate for each excluded area.
~ ~ e. the provisions for increasing gas mover equipment capacity with
increased gas generation flow rate, if the present gas mover
equipment is inadequate to move the maximum flow rate expected
over the life of the landfill.
~ ~ f. The provisions for the control of off-site migration.
F-10
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
ANNUAL REPORTS [§ 60.757(f)]
Landfills that have installed collection and control systems must submit this report.
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Was the report submitted annually beginning 180 days after submittal
of the Initial Control System Performance Test Report?
2. Did the report include the value and length of time for exceedance of
the following?
~ ~ • the gauge pressure in the gas collection header (measured on a
monthly basis).
~ ~ • the nitrogen or oxygen concentration in the landfill (measured on a
monthly basis).
~ ~ • the temperature of the landfill gas (measured on a monthly basis).
3. If an enclosed combustion device was used to comply, did the report
include the following?
~ ~ • all 3-hour periods of operation (unless the control device is a
boiler or process heater >44 megawatts) during which the
average combustion temperature based on continuous
temperature monitoring was more than 28° Celcius below the
average combustion temperature as established during the initial
or most recent performance test [60.752(b)(2)(iii)(B)(2)]. (Note:
This is not required for boilers and process heaters > 44
megawatts)
~ ~
• duration of periods when control device was bypassed.
F-ll
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
ANNUAL REPORTS [§60.757(f)] (Continued)
Yes No
4. If an open flare was used to comply, did the report include the
following?
~ ~ • length of time during which flare flame was absent based on
continuous monitoring for presence of a flame at the pilot light
or flare.
~ ~ • duration of periods when control device was bypassed
~ ~ 5. Did the report include the date of installation and the location of each
well added to the collection system?
~ ~ 6. Did the report include description and duration of periods > 1 hr when
control device was not operating?
~ ~ 7. Did the report include all periods >5 days when the collection system
was not operating?
~ ~ 8. Did the report include location of exceedances of the 500 ppm methane
concentration and the concentration recorded at each location for
which an exceedance was reported the previous monitoring period?
~ ~ 9. For systems not conforming to the specifications for active collection
systems (§60.759), did the report include exceedances of any
monitoring parameters that have been specified by the Administrator
per §60.756(e)?
F-12
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
LANDFILL CLOSURE REPORT [§ 60.757(d)]
Controlled landfills must submit this report within 30 days of ceasing to accept waste.
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Was this report submitted within 30 days of when the landfill stopped
accepting MSW?
2. Did the closure report include the following?
~ ~ • date landfill last accepted waste.
~ ~ • date landfill closed.
~ ~ 3. Did the report indicate that closure is permanent?
[If additional wastes are to be placed in the landfill, the landfill owner
or operator must file a notification of modification as described under
§ 60.7(a)(4).]
F-13
-------
APPENDIX F (CONTINUED)
CONTROL EQUIPMENT REMOVAL REPORT [§ 60.757(e)]
Landfills that wish to remove their gas collection and control system must submit this report
prior to removing or ceasing operation of their system.
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Was the report submitted 30 days prior to removal or cessation of
operation of the control equipment?
2. Did the Control Equipment Removal Report include the following?
~ ~ a. a copy of the closure report.
~ ~ b. a copy of the Initial Performance Test Report (demonstrating that
the 15-year minimum control period has expired).
~ ~ c. dated copies of three successive NMOC emission rate reports
(demonstrating that the landfill is no longer emitting 50 Mg or
above NMOC per year prior to the control device).
Additional information may be requested to verify that all conditions for removal in
§ 60.752(b)(2)(V) have been met.
F-14
-------
APPENDIX G
ON-SITE INSPECTION CHECKLISTS
-------
APPENDIX G
ON-SITE INSPECTION CHECKLISTS
The following checklists are provided in this appendix:
- Monitoring Equipment
- Recordkeeping
Collection and Control Equipment
G-l
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
ON-SITE INSPECTION CHECKLISTS
FOR DETERMINING COMPLIANCE WITH MSW LANDFILL NSPS AND EG
These checklists can be used to verify compliance with the NSPS or EG monitoring,
recordkeeping, and control equipment requirements. Inspectors should use copies of these
checklists for each inspection.
A "yes" response to checklist questions indicates compliance with the regulations. A "no"
response does not necessarily indicate non-compliance. The inspector has the discretion to
determine compliance or non-compliance. Therefore, the inspector should determine if the intent
of the requirements has been achieved. In the case of a "no" response, indicate whether the
checklist question, and hence the requirement, is satisfied.
G-2
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
MONITORING EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST
Refer to each appropriate section below to determine compliance with monitoring
requirements of the rule. Complete the checklist by indicating "yes" or "no" to the questions.
A "yes" indicates compliance. A "no" does not necessarily indicate non-compliance with the
regulations.
ACTIVE GAS COLLECTION SYSTEMS [§60.756(a)]
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Is a sampling port installed at each wellhead?
~ ~ 2. Is there a thermometer, other temperature measuring device, or an access port for
temperature measurements at each wellhead?
3. Are the following parameters being monitored?
~ ~ • gauge pressure in the gas collection header on a monthly basis
~ ~ • nitrogen concentration in the landfill gas as provided in Method 3C or
oxygen concentration as provided in Method 3A
~ ~ • temperature of the landfill gas on a monthly basis
~ ~ 4. If an alternative method is used to monitor for infiltration, is this method
documented and maintained with the landfill records?
G-3
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
ENCLOSED COMBUSTION DEVICES [§60.756(b)]
Yes No
1. Is the following required equipment being calibrated, maintained, and
operated according to the manufacturer's specifications?
~ ~ • a temperature monitoring device equipped with a continuous recorder
and having an accuracy of ±1 percent of the temperature being
measured, expressed in degrees Celsius or ±0.5 °C, whichever is
greater (except when the control device is a boiler or process heater
>44 megawatts)
~ ~ • a gas flow measuring device that records the gas flow to the control
device or bypass lines are sealed shut and seals are inspected monthly
~ ~ 2. Are the temperature and the gas flow (if applicable) being recorded at least
every 15 minutes?
OPEN FLARES [§60.756(c)]
Yes No
1. Is the following required equipment being calibrated, maintained, and
operated according to the manufacturer's specifications?
~ ~ • a heat sensing device, such as an ultraviolet beam sensor or
thermocouple, at the pilot light or at the flare flame to indicate the
continuous presence of a flame
~ ~ • a device that records the gas flow to or bypass of the flare or bypass
lines are sealed shut and seals are inspected monthly
~ ~ 2. Are the presence of the pilot light and the gas flow (if applicable) being
recorded at least every 15 minutes?
G-4
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
OTHER CONTROL DEVICES [§60.756(d) and §60.756(e)]
A. OTHER CONTROL DEVICES
Yes No
~ ~ 1. If a control device other than a flare or enclosed combustion device is
used, does the landfill have documentation demonstrating that the
alternative device was approved by the Administrator?
~ ~ 2. If the Administrator specified additional monitoring procedures, does the
landfill have appropriate records demonstrating compliance with these
procedures?
B. COLLECTION SYSTEMS NOT CONFORMING TO §60.759
~ ~ 1. If a collection system not conforming to §60.759 is used, does the landfill
have documentation demonstrating that the alternative design was
approved by the Administrator?
~ ~ 2. If the Administrator specified additional monitoring procedures, does the
landfill have appropriate records demonstrating compliance with these
procedures?
G-5
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
MONITORING METHANE CONCENTRATIONS AT THE LANDFILL SURFACE
[§60.756(f)]
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Are surface concentrations of methane being monitored on a quarterly
basis to determine compliance (unless the skip period method described in
#3 below is used)?
2. Does the monitoring device comply with the following instrumentation
specifications and procedures for surface emission monitoring devices
[§60.755(d)]:
~ ~ • Does the portable analyzer meet the instrument specifications in
Section 3 of Method 21, except that "methane" replaces all references
to VOC?
~ ~ • Is the calibration gas methane, diluted to a nominal concentration of
500 ppm in air?
~ ~ • To meet the performance evaluation requirements in Section 3.1.3 of
Method 21, are the instrument evaluation procedures of Section 4.4 of
the method used?
~ ~ • Are the calibration procedures provided in Section 4.2 of Method 21
followed immediately before commencing a surface monitoring
survey?
3. Are the following procedures, provided in §60.756(f), followed if skip
period monitoring is used:
~ ~ • If no exceedances are detected for three successive quarterly
monitoring periods, is the surface monitored annually until an
exceedance is detected?
~ ~ • If an exceedance is detected and corrected as provided in §60.755(a)(5),
is the surface monitored quarterly until a concentration >500 ppm is not
detected for three successive quarters?
G-6
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
RECORDKEEPING CHECKLIST
Refer to each appropriate section below to determine compliance with the recording
requirements of the rule. A "yes" indicates compliance. A "no" does not necessarily indicate
non-compliance with the regulations.
GENERAL RETENTION REQUIREMENTS [§60.758(a)]
Yes No
1. Are all records
~ ~ • available for at least the past 5 years?
~ ~ • up-to-date?
~ ~ • readily accessible?
~ ~ • on-site or, if offsite, retrievable in 4 hours?
~ ~ • in hardcopy or electronic format?
2. Are records of the following information available?
~ ~ • maximum design capacity
~ ~ • current amount of MSW in place
~ ~ • year-by-year waste acceptance rate
G-7
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
INITIAL PERFORMANCE TEST OR COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION FOR
CONTROL EQUIPMENT [§60.758(b)]
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Are records that document the initial performance test or compliance
determination kept for the life of the control equipment?
~ ~ 2. Are records of any subsequent compliance tests or compliance
determinations maintained for at least 5 years?
3. Do the records include the following information?
~ ~ • the density of wells is sufficient as calculated by procedures in
§60.759(a)(l), and
~ ~ • the maximum expected gas generation flow rate as calculated by the
procedure in §60.755(a)(l); or
~ ~ • the maximum expected gas generation flow rate as calculated by
another approved method.
4. For owners or operators using enclosed combustion devices other than
boilers and process heaters, do the records include the following?
~ ~ • average combustion temperature measured at least every 15 minutes
and averaged over the same time period as the performance test
~ ~ • a percent reduction of 98 percent or greater, or an NMOC
concentration less than 20 ppm by volume, dry basis as hexane at 3%
oxygen
5a. For owners or operators using any size boiler or process heater, do the
records include the following?
~ ~ • description of the location at which the collected gas vent stream is
introduced into the boiler or process heater over the same time period
of the performance testing
G-8
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
INITIAL PERFORMANCE TEST OR COMPLIANCE DETERMINATION FOR
CONTROL EQUIPMENT [§60.758(b)] (Continued)
Yes No
5b. For owners or operators using boilers or process heaters with a design heat
input capacity of less than 44 megawatts, do the records include the
following?
~ ~ • the average combustion temperature of the boiler or process heater
measured at least every 15 minutes and averaged over the same time
period of the performance testing
~ ~ • a percent reduction of 98 percent or greater or an NMOC concentration
less than 20 ppm by volume, dry basis as hexane at 3 percent oxygen
6. For owners or operators using an open flare, do the records include the
following?
~ ~ • flare type (i.e., steam assisted, air-assisted, or nonassisted)
~ ~ • all visible emission readings
~ ~ • heat content determinations
~ ~ • flow or bypass flow records
~ ~ • exit velocity determinations
~ ~ • continuous records of the flare flame or pilot flame monitoring
~ ~ • records of all periods of operation during which the pilot flame or flare
flame was absent
~ ~ 7. For owners or operators using a flare, do the visible emission, heat
content, flow rate, and exit velocity data show that specifications in §60.18
are met? (The specifications vary by flare type.)
G-9
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
EQUIPMENT OPERATING PARAMETERS AND PARAMETER BOUNDARY
EXCEEDANCES [§60.758(c)]
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Are records available of all equipment operating parameters and parameter
boundary exceedances?
~ ~ 2. Are the records retained for at least 5 years?
~ ~ 3. Are the records continuous (i.e., a value recorded at least every 15
minutes)?
~ ~ 4. For enclosed combustion devices (except for boilers and process heaters
with design heat input capacity of 44 megawatts or greater and open
flares), were all 3-hour periods of operation during which the average
combustion temperature was more than 28 °C below the average
combustion temperature during the most recent performance test recorded
and reported?
~ ~ 5. For all boilers and process heaters, were any changes in location at which
the vent stream was introduced into the flame zone recorded and reported?
6. For all control devices,
~ ~ • were continuous records of LFG flow to the control device or bypass
flow maintained or, if bypass lines were sealed closed, were monthly
seal inspection results recorded?
~ ~ • were all periods when the gas stream was diverted from the control
device or had no flowrate recorded and reported?
~ ~ 7. For owners or operators using a boiler or process heater with a design
input capacity of 44 megawatts or greater, are records of all periods of
operation of the boiler or process heater available?
8. For owners or operators using an open flare:
~ ~ • were continuous records maintained of pilot flame or flare flame
monitoring?
~ ~ • were all periods of operation in which the flare or pilot flame was
absent recorded and reported?
G-10
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
COLLECTION SYSTEM INFORMATION [§60.758(d)]
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Is an up-to-date, readily accessible collection system plot map available?
2. Does the plot map include the following?
~ ~ • the location of each existing and planned collector in the system
~ ~ • a unique identification label for each collector
3. Did the well records include the following information related to newly
installed collectors?
~ ~ • installation date of each collector
~ ~ • location of each collector
G-ll
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
WASTE EXCLUDED FROM COLLECTION - AREAS INCLUDED IN THE
1 PERCENT THAT DO NOT WARRANT CONTROL [§60.758(d)]
Yes No
1. Do the records pertaining to asbestos-containing or nondegradable waste
excluded from collection and/or any area included in the 1 percent that
does not warrant control include the following?
~
~
•
nature of the waste
~
~
•
date of deposition of the waste
~
~
•
amount of the waste
~
~
•
location of waste on the landfill site
COLLECTION AND CONTROL EXCEEDANCE [§60.758(e)]
Yes No
1. Are records of the following available:
~ ~ • all collection and control system exceedances of the operational
standards in §60.753? These include: readings of positive pressure at
any wellhead (except as allowed in §60.753(b); wellhead temperature
>55 °C or other approved temperature; nitrogen level >20% or oxygen
level >5%; and surface methane concentration >500 ppm
~ ~ • a reading in the month following an exceedance
~ ~ • location of each exceedance
DESIGN CAPACITY CALCULATION [§60.758(f)]
Yes No
~ ~ 1. For landfill owners or operators who convert design capacity from volume
to mass or from mass to volume to demonstrate that landfill design
capacity is less than the design capacity size limit, do the records include
the annual recalculation of site-specific density, design capacity, and all
supporting documentation?
G-12
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
COLLECTION AND CONTROL EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST
This checklist is to be used for collection and control systems that conform to the specifications
provided in §60.759. If an alternative collection and control system was installed, the approved
alternative design plans should be used to check for compliance. Complete the checklist by
indicating "yes" or "no" to the questions. A "yes" indicates compliance. A "no" does not
necessarily indicate non-compliance with the regulations.
SITING ACTIVE COLLECTION SYSTEMS [§60.759(a)]
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Are the active collection wells sited throughout all gas producing areas of
the landfill (that are at least 5 years old for active areas or 2 years old for
areas that are closed or at final grade)?
~ ~ 2. Is sufficient density of collectors demonstrated? (Sufficient density means
any number, spacing, and combination of collection system components,
including vertical wells, horizontal collectors, and surface collectors,
necessary to maintain emission and migration control as determined by
measures of performance.)
~ ~ 3. If gas is not collected from any areas because they contain asbestos or
nondegradable material, is the nature, date of deposition, location, and
amount of asbestos or nondegradable material documented?
~ ~ 4. If gas is not collected from nonproductive areas, has it been demonstrated
that total emissions from the excluded areas are <1% of total NMOC
emissions from the landfill?
~ ~ 5. If gas is not collected from nonproductive areas, has the amount, location,
and age of the material been documented?
G-13
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
CONSTRUCTION OF ACTIVE COLLECTION SYSTEMS [§60.759(b)]
Yes No
~ ~ 1. Does the connector assembly used to connect the wellhead to the
collection header pipes include the following:
• positive closing throttle valve,
• any necessary seals and couplings,
• access couplings,
• at least one sampling port?
~ ~ 2. Are the landfill gas extraction components constructed of one of the
following? (Circle material used)
• polyvinyl chloride (PVC)
• high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipe
• fiberglass
• stainless steel
• other nonporous, corrosion-resistant material
~ ~ 3. Is the collection device constructed of one of the following? (Circle
material used.)
• PVC
• HDPE
• fiberglass
• stainless steel
• other nonporous material of suitable thickness
~ ~ 4. Does the construction and location of wells and other collection system
components match the approved collection and control system design
plan?
G-14
-------
APPENDIX G (continued)
GAS MOVER EQUIPMENT [§60.759(c>]
~ ~ 1. Is the gas mover equipment operating?
~ ~ 2. Is the gas mover equipment sized to handle the maximum gas generation
flow rate expected over the intended use period?
~ ~ 3. Has the gas mover equipment exceeded its intended use period?
(The intended use period of the equipment should be specified in the
approved collection and control system design plan.)
G-15
-------
APPENDIX H
EXAMPLE REPORT FORMS
-------
APPENDIX H
EXAMPLE REPORT FORMS
(separate form for each report)
The following example forms are included in this appendix:
1. Initial Design Capacity Report;
2. Initial NMOC Emission Rate Report, including
a. Tier 1 calculation form,
b. Emission inventory form;
3. Landfill Closure Report; and
4. Control Equipment Removal Report.
H-l
-------
Appendix H (continued)
INITIAL DESIGN CAPACITY REPORT FORM
(Please Print or Type)
This form fulfills the requirements of the Initial Design Capacity Report for the municipal solid
waste landfills new source performance standards and emission guidelines promulgated on
March 12, 1996 (61 FR 9905) 40 CFR 60, subparts WWW and Cc. All new landfills subject to
the regulations must submit this report. For new landfills, this report also fulfills the
requirements of the notification of the date construction is commenced as required under 40 CFR
60.7(a)(1).
This form must be completed and submitted to the implementing agency within the following
timeframe:
• on or before June 10, 1996 for landfills that commenced construction, modification,
or reconstruction on or after May 30,1991, but before March 12,1996.
« within 90 days after the date of commenced construction, modification, or
reconstruction for landfills that commenced construction, modification, or
reconstruction on or after March 12, 1996. [Note: The initial design capacity report
fulfills the requirements of the notification of the date construction is commenced as
required under §60.7(a)(l) of the part 60 General Provisions.]
I. IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
1. Name of person completing form
Telephone number
2. Person's position
3. Name of landfill
4. Address of landfill
5. Name of landfill owner
6. Address of landfill owner
H-2
-------
Appendix H (continued)
7. Name of landfill operator ;
8. Address of landfill operator
9. Is landfill new or existing?
new (began construction, reconstruction, or modification on or after May 30, 1991)
existing (began construction, reconstruction, or modification before May 30,1991;
and has accepted waste after November 8, 1987 or has additional capacity available
for future waste deposition)
II. DATES
10. Date construction or operating permit was issued
11. Date landfill began construction, modification, or reconstruction
12. Date landfill first accepted waste___
13. Date this form is submitted
III. DESIGN CAPACITY INFORMATION
14. Maximum design capacity of landfill in Mg or m3
(To calculate Mg, multiply tons by 0.907. To calculate m\ multiply yd3 by 0.7646)
A. If the landfill has a State, county or tribal agency construction or RCRA permit stating
the maximum design capacity, attach a copy of the permit to this form. If there is any
waste in place not accounted for in the most recent permit, include this amount in the
design capacity and attach documentation.
B. If maximum design capacity is NOT specified in a permit, attach design capacity
calculations, and provide documentation of the relevant parameters used to calculate
design capacity (for example, landfill horizontal dimensions, depth of landfill, waste
acceptance rates and/or other parameters that might be used to calculate design
capacity).
15. If design capacity is converted from mass to volume or from volume to mass, attach the
calculation, including the site-specific density.
H-3
-------
Appendix H (continued)
16. Attach a map or plot map of the landfill to this form. The map should provide the size and
location of the landfill. Include an identification of all areas where refuse may be landfilled
according to the permit issued by the State, local, or tribal agency responsible for regulating
the landfill.
IV. SIGNATURE
17. Signature of person completing form
18. Date of signature
H-4
-------
Appendix H (continued)
EXAMPLE INITIAL NMOC EMISSION RATE REPORT
State Air Agency Director
State Air Agency
Air Agency Address
Air Agency's Town, State, and Zip Code
RE: Initial NMOC Emission Rate Report as required by the MSW Landfill NSPS
Dear State Air Agency Director:
Facility A is currently regulated according to the MSW Landfill NSPS. Under the requirements
of the regulations, Landfill A must submit an estimate of the NMOC emissions. The estimated
NMOC emission rate is Mg/yr. This estimate was calculated based on the Tier 1 procedures
in the regulations. A copy of the calculations is enclosed.
Sincerely,
Landfill A Owner/Operator
enclosure
H-5
-------
Appendix H (continued)
EXAMPLE TIER 1 NMOC EMISSION RATE CALCULATION FORM
NMOC EMISSION RATE REPORT
TIER 1 CALCULATION FORM
This calculation form presents the equations and default values used in the Tier 1 NMOC
emission rate analysis. Completing this form will yield the annual NMOC emission rate, which
should be entered in the space provided in the cover letter.
Note that Equation 1 is for landfills where the annual MSW acceptance rate is not known.
Equation 2 is to be used if the annual acceptance rate is known. The equations are to be used
together if the annual acceptance rate is known for only part of the life of the landfill. For
example, a 30-year old landfill with an unknown annual acceptance rate during the first 10 years
would require Equation 1 for that time period, and would require Equation 2 for the subsequent
20 years when the annual acceptance rate was known.
Equation 1. (For landfills where the annual acceptance rate is not known)
M^oc = 2L0R(e"kc - e-k,)(CNMOC)(3.6 x 10"9)
where,
Mmmoc = mass emission rate of NMOC, (Mg/yr)
L0 =
Refuse methane generation potential:
170*
(m3/Mg)
R
Average annual acceptance rate:
(Mg/yr)
k
Methane generation rate constant:
0.05*
(i/yr)
c =
Years since closure (c = 0 for active
and/or new landfills):
(yrs)
t =
Age of landfill (i.e., years since landfill
first opened)
(yrs)
Cnmoc =
Concentration of NMOC:
4.000*
(ppm as hexane)
Conversion factor: 3.6 x 10 9
H-6
-------
Appendix H (continued)
NMOC EMISSION RATE CALCULATION (continued)
Mnmoc = 2 (170) ( ) (e"(0 05K > - e"®05* >) (4,000) (3.6 x 10"9)
Mnmoc = Mg/yr
~Default values. An alternative methane generation rate constant (k) of 0,02 can be used for
landfills located in geographical areas with a 30-year annual average precipitation of less than
25 inches. The average annual precipitation must be indicated by the nearest representative
meteorological site.
Equation 2. (For landfills where the annual acceptance rate is known)
M.NMOC Ql + Q2 + Q3 + etC-
and,
Qj = 2 k Lo M, (e ~kt|) (CNM0c) (3.6 x lO^9)
where,
Mnmoc = total mass emission rate of NMOC from all sections of the landfill (Mg/yr)
Qj = mass emission rate of NMOC from the ith section of the landfill (Mg/yr)
Example Values for Calculations
Variables
Ql
Q2
Q3
k
= methane generation rate
constant (1/yr)
0.05
0.05
0,05
(default*)
K
= refuse methane generation
potential (mJ/Mg)
170
170
170
(default)
M,
= mass of waste in the i"1 section
of the landfill (Mg)
500
600
800
(landfill-
specific)
t,
= age of the ith section of the
landfill
20
19
18
(landfill-
specific)
C-NMOC =
concentration of NMOC in landfill gas
(ppm as Hexane)
4,000
4,000
4,000
(default)
conversion factor
3.6 x 10"9
3.6 x 10-"
3.6 x 10'"
(fixed
factor)
* As described above, an alternative default k of 0.02 can be used in arid areas.
H-7
-------
Appendix H (continued)
Calculate the mass emission rate (Q,) = for each segment of the landfill:
Qf = 2 (0.05) (170) ( ) (e"
-------
Appendix H (continued)
EXAMPLE LANDFILL CLOSURE REPORT
State Air Agency Director
State Air Agency
Air Agency Address
Air Agency's Town, State, and Zip Code
RE: Landfill Closure Report as required by the MSW Landfill NSPS
Dear State Air Agency Director:
Facility A is currently regulated according to the MSW Landfill NSPS. Under the requirements
of the regulations, Landfill A must submit a Landfill Closure Report within 30 days of ceasing to
accept MSW. The last day of waste acceptance was and the landfill was closed on
. The closure is intended to be permanent.
The design capacity of the landfill is . The estimated quantity of refuse-in-place is
. Therefore, there is no additional capacity. (Include the following if there is additional
capacity: If additional waste is accepted by Landfill A, a notification of modification will be
submitted according to 60.7(a)(4).)
Also note that Landfill A is not being controlled. (Include the following if the landfill is
controlled: The controls are planned to be removed after operating for 15 years and the NMOC
emissions are demonstrated to be below 50 Mg/yr which will be in years.)
Sincerely,
Landfill A Owner/Operator
H-9
-------
Appendix H (continued)
EXAMPLE CONTROL EQUIPMENT REMOVAL REPORT
State Air Agency Director
State Air Agency
Air Agency Address
Air Agency's Town, State, and Zip Code
RE: Control Equipment Removal Report as required by the MSW Landfill NSPS
Dear State Air Agency Director:
Facility A is currently regulated according to the MSW Landfill NSPS. Under the requirements
of the regulations, Landfill A must submit a Control Equipment Removal Report 30 days prior
to ceasing to operate and removing landfill gas collection and control equipment. Operation of
the collection and control system is scheduled to cease on .
The control system has been in operation since . Therefore the minimum 15 year
operating requirement has been fulfilled. As indicated by 60.757(e), a dated copy of the Initial
Performance Test Report is enclosed to document the date of initial installation of the system.
Also enclosed per 60.757(e) are dated copies of the three most recent NMOC Emission Rate
Reports demonstrating that the landfill is no longer emitting 50 Mg/yr of NMOC.
Note that a Landfill Closure Report was submitted on . The last day of waste
acceptance was and the landfill was closed .
Sincerely,
Landfill A Owner/Operator
enclosures
H-10
-------
APPENDIX I
TIER CALCULATION DETAILS AND EQUATIONS
-------
APPENDIX I
TIER CALCULATION DETAILS AND EQUATIONS
This rule includes detailed procedures for calculating NMOC emissions from landfills
(§60.754). The procedure consists of a 3-tiered approach, with Tier 1 being the simplest. All
"Tier" calculations provide an estimate of NMOC emissions, as a function of three variables:
(1) NMOC concentration in LFG, (CnMOC)'>
(2) Methane generation rate constant, (k); and
(3) Refuse methane generation potential, (L0).
Tier 1 calculations are based on default values that yield conservative NMOC emission
rates. If Tier 1 calculations indicate emissions greater than 50 Mg/yr, a landfill may elect to
perform Tier 2 or Tier 3 calculations, which require site-specific data gathered through testing.
Otherwise, a landfill owner/operator must submit a notice of intent to install a gas collection and
control system to the implementing agency.
Tier 2 calculations are based on site-specific NMOC concentrations and yield a more
accurate estimate of the NMOC emission rate. The NMOC concentrations are determined by
performing EPA Method 25C or EPA Method 18. If Tier 2 calculations result in NMOC
emissions greater than 50 Mg/yr, then Tier 3 calculations may be performed.
Tier 3 calculations are based on both site-specific NMOC concentrations and methane
generation rates. Tier 3 calculations yield the most accurate determination of NMOC emission
rates. The NMOC concentrations are determined by following the Tier 2 procedures. The
methane generation rate is determined by performing EPA Method 2E in conjunction with EPA
Method 25C or EPA Method 18.
1-1
-------
Appendix I (continued)
Figure 1-1 presents a flow chart showing the steps for determining NMOC emissions from
a landfill and whether the landfill must be controlled.
Tier 1 Procedures
The procedures in Tier 1 estimate an NMOC emission rate using refuse acceptance rates
for a landfill and default values for the parameters listed above. The default values are as
follows:
(1) 4,000 ppmv, NMOC concentration (CjsjMOC);
(2) 0.05 yr"l, methane generation rate constant (k); and
(3) 170 m^/Mg, refuse methane generation potential (L0).
For landfills located in a geographical area with a 30-year annual average precipitation of
less than 25 inches (as measured by the nearest representative official meteorological site), a k
value of 0.02 per year should be used. Otherwise, the default k value of 0.05 per year should be
used.
The following equation determines the NMOC emission rate for individual landfill
sections (or cells) when the actual year-to-year refuse acceptance rate is known and the default k
value is used.
n
MNMOC = 2 2 k L0 Mj (e"kti) (CnmOC) (3-6 x 10"9)
i=l
where,
MnMOC
k
Lo
1-2
Total NMOC emission rate from the landfill, Mg/yr;
methane generation rate constant, year" 1;
methane generation potential, m3/Mg of refuse;
-------
Appendix I (continued)
Initial Design
Capacity Report
60.757(a)ilH2]
sine
Design Capacity
>2,500.000 Mg
and
3
No Further Action
Necessary Unless
There Is an Increase
In Design Capacity
ofLandfll
>2.500,000m
Calculate NMOC
Emission Rate
60.754(a)(1)
Recalculate at
Specified Intervals
Submit Emission
Rate Report
60.757(b)
is the
Landfill
Closed
?
her i
Is toe NMOC Emission
ate >50 M
J
Or
Submit Collection
arid Control System
Design Han per
60.752(b)(2) ond 60.75?
TIER 2
Determine NMOC
Concentration via
Sampling
nstall
System
Design Plan Approved
by Implementing Agency
Submit
Recalculate NMOC
Emission Rate
Using HER 2 NMOC
Concentration
60.754(a)(3)
Redetermine NMOC
Concentration per TIER 2
1
w
[ Every 5 Years
Submit TIER 2 Reused
Emission Rats Report
60.757(0(1)
Recalciiate at
Specified Intervals
HER 2
Is the NMOC Emission
ate >50 M
or
HER 3
Determine Site-Specific
Methane Generation Rate
Recalcttote NMOC Emission
Rate Using TIER 2 NMOC
Concentration and TIER 3
Methane Generation Rate
60.754(a)(4)
4
Redetermine NMOC
ConcentraHon per TIER 2
Every 5 Years
1
Submit TIER 3 Revised
Emission Rale Report
60.7S7(c)(2]
Recalculate at
Specified Intervals
NMOC
Figure 1-1. Flow Chart for Determining Control Requirements
1-3
-------
Appendix I (continued)
Mi
ti
cNMOC
3.6 x 10"9
mass of refuse in the i^1 section, Mg;
age of the i^ section, years;
concentration of NMOC, ppmv as hexane; and
conversion factor.
The total NMOC emission rate for a landfill (Mnmoc) *s the sum of the NMOC
emissions from each landfill section. This equation can be used more easily when the defined
landfill section represents accumulated refuse of 1 year. Nondegradable refuse such as asbestos
or demolition refuse may be subtracted from the total mass of refuse in a particular landfill
section when calculating the value for Mj. Nondegradable waste can be excluded provided the
nature and amount of the refuse is documented.
When the actual year-by-year refuse acceptance rate is unknown, an average refuse
acceptance rate (R) is determined by dividing the total quantity of refuse currently in place by the
age of the landfill. This average refuse acceptance rate (and the default k value) is then used in
the following equation to estimate the NMOC emission rate:
MNMOC
2 L0 R (e"kc - e-kt) (CNMOC)(3-6 x 10"9)
where,
mNMOC
Lo
R
k
t
cNMOC
c
3.6 x 10~9
mass emission rate of NMOC, Mg/yr;
methane generation potential, m3/Mg of refuse;
average annual acceptance rate, Mg/yr;
methane generation rate constant, year 1 '»
age of landfill, years;
concentration of NMOC, ppmv as hexane;
time since closure, years. For active landfill c = O and e"^c = 1,
years; and
conversion factor.
1-4
-------
Appendix I (continued)
The result of this equation is the total NMOC emission rate for the entire landfill (or
specified section). This equation automatically accounts for variability in NMOC emission rates
for refuse in landfill sections with different ages. Nondegradable refuse such as asbestos or
demolition refuse may be subtracted from the total mass of refuse currently disposed in a landfill
when calculating the R. Nondegradable waste can be excluded provided the nature and amount
of the refuse is documented.
Tier 1 calculations are likely to overestimate the NMOC emission rate because the values
for k, L0, and the NMOC concentration are conservative. Landfills with Tier 1 NMOC emission
rates less than 50 Mg/yr are not required to install emission controls. However, the NMOC
emission rate must be recalculated at a specified interval of once a year or once every 5 years for
the NMOC emission rate report.
Landfills with Tier 1 NMOC emission rates equal to or greater than 50 Mg/yr are required
to submit a gas collection and control system design plan or recalculate the NMOC emission rate
by determining the site-specific NMOC concentration. The site-specific NMOC concentration
allows for a more accurate estimate of the NMOC emission rate. The procedures for determining
a site-specific NMOC concentration are detailed in Tier 2.
Tier 2 Procedures
Under Tier 2, the landfill owner/operator conducts sampling to determine a site-specific
NMOC concentration. This site-specific value will be substituted for the default NMOC
concentration used in the Tier 1 equation. The general sampling procedures for determining a
site-specific NMOC concentration are as follows:
(1) Install a minimum of two gas sampling probes per hectare of landfill surface that
has retained refuse for at least 2 years. In the unlikely event that landfill emission
are equal to or greater than 50 Mg/yr and none of the landfill has retained waste
for at least 2 years, the landfill owner/operator may wait until the first waste
deposited is 2 years old before conducting Tier 2 sampling. Landfills with a
surface area greater than 25 hectares only need to install a maximum of
50 sampling probes;
(2) Collect and analyze one gas sample from each sample probe following the
procedures in EPA Method 25C or EPA Method 18. An alternative testing
1-5
-------
Appendix I (continued)
method can be used as long as the method has been approved by the implementing
agency;
(3) If composite gas samples are used, they must be created using equal gas volumes
from each sample probe;
(4) All gathered gas samples must be used in the analysis; and
(5) Divide the NMOC concentration determined by Method 25C by six to convert the
concentration basis from total carbon to hexane.
A landfill owner/operator is required to submit a gas Collection and Control System
Design Plan if a site-specific NMOC concentration results in a recalculated NMOC emission rate
equal to or greater than 50 Mg/yr. As an alternative, a landfill owner/operator may recalculate
the NMOC emission rate by determining the site-specific methane generation rate constant. This
additional site-specific measurement, in conjunction with the site-specific NMOC concentration,
allows for the most accurate estimate of the NMOC emission rate. The procedures for
determining a site-specific gas generation rate constant are detailed in Tier 3.
If a site-specific NMOC concentration results in a recalculated NMOC emission rate less
than 50 Mg/yr, a landfill owner/operator must recalculate the NMOC emission rate at a specified
interval of once a year or once every 5 years for the NMOC emission rate report. Annual Tier 2
NMOC emission rate reports are due on the anniversary of the Initial Tier 1 report submittal.
The site-specific NMOC concentration used in the Tier 2 (or Tier 3) calculations must be
recalculated at least once every 5 years.
Tier 3 Procedures
Under Tier 3, the landfill owner/operator conducts additional sampling to determine a
site-specific methane generation rate constant, k. This site-specific k will be determined
following the procedures in EPA Method 2E. An alternative testing method can be used as long
as the method has been approved by the implementing agency. The default values for k and the
NMOC concentration used in the Tier 1 equation will be replaced with the site-specific values.
The general sampling procedures for determining a site-specific k includes the installation of
extraction wells either in a cluster of three or at five locations dispersed throughout the landfill.
1-6
-------
Appendix I (continued)
A blower is used to create a negative pressure gradient between the extraction well and the
surrounding refuse. Extracted landfill gas is analyzed for volumetric flow rate, composition, and
the landfill pressure near the extraction well. For each extraction well, these data are used to
determine the site-specific methane generation rate constant for a landfill.
If a site-specific k and NMOC concentration result in a recalculated NMOC emission rate
equal to or greater than 50 Mg/yr, a landfill owner/operator is required to submit a gas Collection
and Control System Design Plan. For those landfills where the recalculated NMOC emission
rate is less than 50 Mg/yr, a landfill owner/operator must recalculate the NMOC emission rate at
a specified interval of once a year or once every 5 years for the NMOC emission rate report. The
site-specific NMOC concentration must be determined at least once every 5 years. However, the
site-specific value for k is determined once for the landfill.
The cost of Method 2E testing for Tier 3 can be significant, especially for a small landfill.
It is unlikely that a site-specific Tier 3 evaluation will lower the annual NMOC emission estimate
below the 50 Mg/yr threshold unless the Tier 2 emission estimate is only slightly higher than this
threshold. Dry, arid regions may show a more significant lowering of emissions at Tier 3 than
wet regions. The likelihood that Tier 3 will indicate an emission rate less than 50 Mg/yr should
be assessed before performing Tier 3 measurements. For example, the owner/operator could
utilize the EPA's landfill air emissions model (see Appendix J) to assess by trial and error the k
value necessary to achieve an emission rate below the 50 Mg/yr threshold, based on the site-
specific disposal history and the measured Tier 2 NMOC concentrations. Information on typical
ranges for k values could be reviewed to judge the likelihood of obtaining the necessary k value
from a Tier 3 test.
After Installing Controls
After the installation of a gas collection and control system at a landfill, a landfill
owner/operator must calculate the NMOC emission rate for purposes of determining when the
control system can be removed. The following equation is used:
MNMOC = 1-89 x 10-3 * qlfg * CNM0C
1-7
-------
Appendix I (continued)
where,
mNMOC
Qlfg
Cnmoc
mass emission rate of NMOC, Mg/yr;
flow rate of landfill gas entering the control system, m^/min; and
NMOC concentration as measured in the gas collection common
header pipe, ppmv as hexane.
The landfill gas flow rate must be determined by measuring the total LFG flow rate at the
common header pipe that leads to the control device. A gas-measuring device calibrated
according to provisions of Section 4 of Method 2E must be used. The average NMOC
concentration must be determined by collecting and analyzing LFG sampled from the common
header pipe using Method 25C or Method 18. The sample location must be prior to any gas
moving, condensate removal, or other gas refining equipment. The resulting NMOC
concentration as determined by Method 25C must be divided by six to convert the concentration
basis from total carbon to hexane.
Special Situations
Questions have arisen as to how to calculate emissions from landfills that already have
control systems. Two of these questions are discussed below:
1. Question: If an existing landfill greater than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m^
already has a collection system in place that is controlled, how should it be determined if
it emits NMOC greater than less/than 50 Mg/yr? Under Tier 1 calculations they would
probably show landfill gas emissions ^ 50 Mg/yr. Tier 2 calculations also may not be
appropriate.
1. Discussion: This issue was raised in one case where Tier 1 calculations for a landfill
that already had a control system indicated emissions greater than 50 Mg/yr. The tier
procedures in the NSPS do not specifically address how to estimate uncontrolled
emissions from already controlled landfills for purposes of determining if the emissions
exceed 50 Mg/yr and whether the landfill must meet the NSPS or EG control
requirements and emission limits. The State agency reasoned that to determine
uncontrolled emissions for a landfill with a collection and control system already in place,
it would be appropriate to use the equation and NMOC concentrations measurement
procedure in § 60.754(b). This equation is the one used for controlled landfills to
1-8
-------
Appendix I (continued)
determine if uncontrolled emissions have fallen below 50 Mg/yr such that the control
system can be removed.
Using this approach, landfills that already have collection and control systems would
calculate uncontrolled NMOC emissions for the portion of the landfill from which gas is
collected using the equation and NMOC concentration measurement procedures in
§ 60.754(b). (If there are areas of the landfill from which gas is not collected, the tier
procedures would be used for these areas.) In order for the equation in § 60.754(b) to be
appropriate, the collection system must be well designed and operated. In particular, for
an active collection system, a negative pressure should be maintained at the wellheads
without excess air infiltration. Also, if surface monitoring has been done at the landfill, it
should show methane concentrations below 500 ppm.
In addition to using the equation found in § 60.654(b) in combination with the actual
measured NMOC concentration collected at the header, the NMOC concentration
measured at the header could also be used in the equation found in § 60.754(a)(1) to
determine if the landfill should be subject to the requirements found in the NSPS or EG.
If total uncontrolled emissions are <50 Mg/yr, the landfill is not subject to the control
requirements of the NSPS or EG, but must continue to submit annual NMOC emission
rate reports (unless it is closed). If the annual NMOC report shows that the uncontrolled
emission rate has increased to 50 Mg/yr or greater, the landfill would become subject to
the control requirements of the NSPS or EG. The landfill would then have 1 year to
submit a design plan to either document that the existing system meets the requirements
of the NSPS or EG or to specify plans to upgrade the system to achieve compliance. The
landfill would need to come into compliance and begin required testing and monitoring
within the time frames specified in the NSPS or EG.
2. Question: Can a landfill with uncontrolled emissions ^50 Mg/yr install a control
system that does not meet NSPS or EG requirements to reduce actual emissions to
<50 Mg/yr and thereby avoid being subject to NSPS or EG control requirements?
2. Discussion: No. As explained in the answer to the previous question, the
uncontrolled emission rate is used to determine whether the landfill is subject to NSPS or
EG control requirements.
1-9
-------
APPENDIX J
COMPUTER MODEL FOR LANDFILL AIR EMISSIONS ESTIMATION
-------
APPENDIX J
COMPUTER MODEL FOR LANDFILL AIR EMISSIONS ESTIMATION
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sponsored the development of a computer
model to provide individuals with the ability to estimate gaseous emissions from landfills. The
Landfill Air Emissions Estimation Model, available for Windows™, utilizes a first-order
decomposition model to estimate emissions of methane, carbon dioxide, NMOC and pollutants
regulated under the Clean Air Act Amendments. The model combines user-entered landfill
operating characteristics with defaults derived from either the landfills NSPS and EG or AP-42 to
provide yearly estimates of gaseous emissions. These estimates may be displayed as text or in
graphical depictions. The model also allows the user to replace internal defaults with landfill-
specific parameters to refine the calculations for a specific site. Version 2.0 was released in
February 1998.
The model is consistent with the equations specified in the landfill NSPS and EG for
calculating NMOC emissions. Landfills using the model to calculate annual emission rates for
purposes of NSPS applicability determination must use the NSPS default values rather than the
AP-42 default values.
A package with a diskette containing the model as well as the user's guide is available
under the title: "Landfill Gas Emissions Model, User's Manual," Version 2.0 and may be
purchased from:
National Technical Information Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Telephone: (703) 487-4650
or accessed on the EPA TTN Web at http://www.epa.gOv/ttn/catc/products.html#software.
Additionally, information or questions regarding the model and its operation may be obtained
from Susan A Thorneloe, the EPA Project Officer overseeing its development. She may be
contacted at:
Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Telephone: (919)541-2709
J-l
-------
APPENDIX K
LANDFILL REPORT LOG
-------
Appendix K (continued)
LANDFILL REPORT LOG
This log provides a means of tracking reports from landfills and indicates the next report
expected from the landfill. As reports are received, this log should be completed. Instructions
for filling out this log are listed below.
1. Enter the facility name and contact person's name and telephone number in the spaces
provided.
2. The due date of the first report (Initial Design Capacity Report) is June 10, 1996 for
landfills that commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction on or after
May 30, 1991, but before March 12, 1996, or 90 days after the date the landfill
commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction for landfills that do so on or
after March 12, 1996. Therefore, enter the appropriate date in the space labeled "Trigger
Date" provided in the upper left corner of the log.
3. Enter the due date of the Initial Design Capacity Report. See footnote "a" for a
description on computing the due date.
4. Note that the due date for the Initial NMOC Emission Rate Report is the same as for the
Initial Design Capacity Report. However, if the design capacity is less than
2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m3 of MSW, an NMOC Emission Rate Report is not
required.
5. The due date is the date that the regulations require the report to be submitted. When
reports are received, enter the date of the postmark. This date is effectively the date the
report was submitted. If the submittal date is late, penalties may be considered.
6. The far right column describes the next action to track the reports. These actions indicate
the next report expected from the landfill. For example, if the NMOC emission rate is
equal to or greater than 50 Mg/yr, the next report expected from the landfill is the
Collection and Control System Design Plan or the Revised NMOC Emission Rate Report
based on Tier 2 procedures. Footnotes indicate how to calculate the due date of each
report.
7. Two attached forms, Attachments A and B, are to be used in the cases of reports that will
be received annually. Attachment A is to be used to track the annual NMOC Emission
Rate Reports. These reports will be submitted annually or every 5 years if specific
criteria are met and as long as the emission rate is less than 50 Mg/yr. Attachment B is to
be used to track the Annual Compliance Reports. These reports will be submitted every
12 months after a collection and control system is installed. All landfills with capacities
K-l
-------
Appendix K (continued)
greater than 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3 must submit either the NMOC Emission
Rate Reports or the Annual Reports.
K-2
-------
LANDFILL REPORT LOG
Trigger Date FACILITY NAME:
/ / CONTACT PERSON,
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
#
Report
Due
Date
Date
Postmarked
Acceptable
(yes or no)
Comments
Actions if Report is Acceptable
1
Initial Design Capacity
Report"
If capacity is s 2.5 million Mg and 2 5 million m\ go to #2.
If capacity is < 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m', no further action
is required unless capacity is increased.
2
Initial NMOC
Emission Rate Report''
If NMOC emission rate is 2 50 Mg, go to #3 or #4.
If NMOC emission rate is < 50 Mg, go to Attachment A (NMOC
emission rate report tracking form).
3
Collection and Control
System Design Plan'
Go to Attachment B (Annual report tracking form).
4
Revised NMOC
Emission Rate Report
(Tier 2)d
If NMOC emission rate is 2 50 Mg, go to #3 or #5.
If NMOC emission rate is < 50 Mg, go to Attachment A (NMOC
emission rate report tracking form).
5
Revised NMOC
Emission Rate Report
(Tier 3)"
If NMOC emission rate is 2 50 Mg, go to #3.
If NMOC emission rate is < 50 Mg, go to Attachment A (NMOC
emission rate report tracking form).
6
Landfill Closure
Report'
7
Control Equipment
Removal Report*
8
Amended Design
Capacity Reporth
If the amended design capacity is i 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million
ms, go to #2.
If capacity is < 2.5 million Mg or 2.5 million m', no further action
is required unless capacity is increased.
-------
Appendix K (continued)
aThe Initial Design Capacity Report is due no later than:
1. June 10, 1996 for landfills that commenced construction, modification, or
reconstruction on or after May 30, 1991 but before March 12, 1996, or
2. 90 days after the date the landfill commenced construction, modification, or
reconstruction on or after March 12, 1996.
'The Initial NMOC Emission Rate Report is due by the same date as the Initial Design Capacity
Report.
C1 year after reporting ^50 Mg/yr of NMOC.
d 180 days after reporting ^50 Mg/yr of NMOC.
el year after reporting >50 Mg/yr of NMOC.
fwithin 30 days after ceasing to accept MSW.
gThe Control Equipment Removal Report is required to be submitted 30 days prior to removal or
ceasing to operate the control equipment. In addition, the following three conditions must be met
prior to removing controls:
1. closure report has been submitted,
2. controls have been operated for at least 15 years, and
3. three consecutive NMOC emission rate reports have demonstrated emissions
< 50 Mg/yr.
hThe Amended Design Capacity Report must be submitted within 90 days of an increase in the
maximum design capacity of the landfill above the 2.5 million Mg and 2.5 million m3 size
exemption.
K-4
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-453R/96-004
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills, Volume 1: Summary of the
Requirements for the New Source Performance Standards and
Emission Guidelines for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
5. REPORT DATE
September 1998
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. Al)THOR(S)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Director
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Office of Air and Radiation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/200/04
15 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
This volume is one of several documents designed to assist States, EPA regional offices, and municipal
solid waste (MSW) landfill owners and operators in implementing the New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) and Emission Guidelines (EG) for MSW landfills. Full references to all related documents are
provided. Enclosed is a summary of the NSPS and EG and the control, monitoring, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements. Explanations are included to help implementing agencies determine applicability,
ensure compliance, collect and review reports, and conduct inspections. The appendices include tools for
ensuring compliance.
17 KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Group
Air Pollution control
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19 SECURITY CLASS (Report)
Unclassified
21 NO OF PAGES
Release Unlimited
20 SECURITY CLASS (Page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77)
PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE
-------
LANDFILL REPORT LOG
ATTACHMENT A: NMOC EMISSION RATE REPORTS
#
Report
Due
Date
Date
Postmarked
Acceptable
(yes or no)
NMOC Emission
Rate*
(Mafrr)
Comments
A-l
Initial NMOC
Emission Rate
Report"'
A-2
2nd NMOC Emission
Rate Report
A-3
3rd NMOC Emission
Rate Report
A-4
4th NMOC Emission
Rate Report
A-S
5th NMOC Emission
Rate Report
A-6
6th NMOC Emission
Rate Report
A-V
7th NMOC Emission
Rate Report
'If NMOC emission rate is i 50 Mg, go to #3 or #4 on Landfill Report Log If NMOC emission rale is < 50 Mg, go to next row.
"Complete the information for the Initial NMOC Emission Rate Report using the information from the Landfill Report log.
'Subsequent NMOC Emission Rate Reports are due annually after the initial report. However, if the projected emission rate is < SO Mg in each of
5 consecutive years, the NMOC Emission Rate Report may be submitted every 5 years
'Add rows as necessary.
-------
LANDFILL REPORT LOG
ATTACHMENT B: ANNUAL REPORTS
#
Report
Due
Date
Date
Postmarked
Acceptable
(yes or no)
Any
Exceedances?'
(yes or no)
Comments
B-I
Initial Performance
Test and Annual
Reportb't
B-2
2nd Annual Report
B-3
3rd Annua! Report
B-4
4th Annual Report
B-5
5th Annual Report
B-6
6th Annual Report
B-7
7th Annua] Report
8-8
8th Annual Report
B-9"
9th Annual Report
"Refer to the appropriate Annual Report for details on exceedances
The Initial Performance Test and Annual Reports are due within 180 days of installation arid siart-up of collection and control system.
'Subsequent Annual Reports are due every 12 months thereafter, as long as the collection and control system are operating.
"Add rows as necessary.
-------
|