[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 32 (Wednesday, February 18, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8156-8159]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-4004]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MA-35-1-6659b; A-1-FRL-5968-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Massachusetts; Reasonably Available Control Technology for Major 
Stationary Sources of Nitrogen Oxides

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing a limited approval/limited disapproval of a 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision and full approval of two other 
SIP revisions submitted by Massachusetts. This revision establishes and 
requires the implementation of reasonably available control technology 
(RACT) for major stationary sources of nitrogen oxides (NOx). The 
intended effect of this action is to propose a limited approval/limited 
disapproval of a regulation and the full approval of two source-
specific NOx RACT determinations. This action is being taken under the 
Clean Air Act (CAA). Public comments on this document are requested and 
will be considered before taking final action on this SIP revision.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 20, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Susan Studlien, Deputy Director, 
Office of Ecosystem Protection (mail code CAA), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region I, JFK Federal Bldg., Boston, MA 02203. 
Copies of the State submittal and EPA's technical support document are 
available for public inspection during normal business hours, by 
appointment, at the Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region I, One Congress Street, 11th floor, Boston, 
MA and the Division of Air Quality Control, Massachusetts Department of 
Environmental Protection, One Winter Street, 8th Floor, Boston, MA 
02108.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven A. Rapp, at (617) 565-2773, or 
by e-mail at: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 15, 1994, October 4, 1996, and 
December 2, 1996, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental 
Protection (Massachusetts or MA DEP) submitted revisions to its SIP. 
The revisions added 310 CMR 7.19, ``Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT) for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx),'' as well as source-
specific NOx RACT determinations for Specialty Minerals, Incorporated 
in Adams and Monsanto Company's Indian Orchard facility in Springfield 
on the above dates, respectively.

I. Background

    The CAA requires States to develop RACT regulations for all major 
stationary sources of NOx in areas which have been classified as 
``moderate,'' ``serious,'' ``severe,'' and ``extreme'' ozone 
nonattainment areas, and in all areas of the Ozone Transport Region 
(OTR). EPA has defined RACT as the lowest emission limitation that a 
particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control 
technology that is reasonably available considering technological and 
economic feasibility (44 FR 53762; September 17, 1979). This 
requirement is established by sections 182(b)(2), 182(f), and 184(b) of 
the CAA. These sections, taken together, establish the requirements for 
Massachusetts to submit a NOx RACT regulation for all major stationary 
sources of NOx statewide.
    These CAA NOx RACT requirements are further described by EPA in a 
document entitled, ``State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides 
Supplement to the General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 
Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,'' published November 25, 1992 
(57 FR 55620). The November 25, 1992 document, also known as the NOx 
Supplement, should be referred to for

[[Page 8157]]

more detailed information on NOx requirements. Additional EPA guidance 
memoranda, such as those included in the ``NOx Policy Document for the 
Clean Air Act of 1990,'' (EPA-452/R-96-005, March 1996), should also be 
referred to for more information on NOx requirements.
    Section 182(b)(2) requires States located in areas classified as 
moderate ozone nonattainment areas to require implementation of RACT 
with respect to all major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC). 
Additionally, section 182(f) states that, ``The plan provisions 
required under this subpart for major stationary sources of volatile 
organic compounds shall also apply to major stationary sources (as 
defined in section 302 and subsections (c), (d), and (e) of the 
section) of oxides of nitrogen.'' This RACT requirement also applies to 
all major sources in ozone nonattainment areas with higher than 
moderate nonattainment classifications.
    Section 302 of the CAA generally defines ``major stationary 
source'' as a facility or source of air pollution which has the 
potential to emit 100 tons per year or more of air pollution. This 
definition applies unless another provision of the CAA explicitly 
defines major source differently. Therefore, for NOx, a major source is 
one with the potential to emit 100 tons per year or more in marginal 
and moderate areas, as well as in attainment areas in the OTR. However, 
for serious nonattainment areas, a major source is defined by section 
182(c) as a source that has the potential to emit 50 tons per year or 
more. The entire Commonwealth of Massachusetts is classified as a 
serious nonattainment area for ozone. Thus, in Massachusetts, NOx RACT 
is required from all sources with the potential to emit 50 tons per 
year or more of NOx.

A. Regulatory Background

    Massachusetts was notified in a January 23, 1991 letter from Region 
I that ``The CAAAs mandate that within 2 years of enactment, states 
submit a SIP revision which requires the implementation of RACT and NSR 
requirements with respect to oxides of nitrogen (NOx) for all major 
stationary sources * * * ``
    On August 10, 1992, Massachusetts submitted a draft of 310 CMR 7.19 
to EPA for comment. Region I met with MA DEP on August 26, 1992 and 
provided informal oral comments on the draft. On January 5, 1993, EPA 
Region I received proposed revisions to the Massachusetts SIP, 
including 310 CMR 7.19. On February 8, 9, 10, and 12, 1993, 
Massachusetts held public hearings on these proposed SIP changes. 
Region I provided formal comments to Massachusetts on February 19, 
1993.
    In April 1994, Massachusetts proposed a number of minor changes to 
310 CMR 7.19 and held a public hearing on those changes on May 6, 1994. 
EPA submitted written comments on these changes on May 19, 1994. The 
regulations were signed by the Secretary of State on July 1, 1994, and 
became effective on that date. MA DEP submitted its adopted regulation 
as a formal SIP submittal to EPA on July 15, 1994. After reviewing the 
regulation for completeness, EPA sent a letter on July 15, 1995 stating 
that Massachusetts' rule had been found to be administratively and 
technically complete.
    Additionally, in April 1994, Massachusetts proposed a number of 
amendments to 310 CMR 7.19 and 310 CMR 7.00 Appendix B(4) concerning 
emissions averaging. Public hearings were held on May 6 and 10, 1994. 
EPA provided written comments to Massachusetts on May 19, 1994. These 
changes were signed by the Secretary of State on January 11, 1995 and 
became effective on January 27, 1995. These adopted changes were 
received by EPA on April 14, 1995. On September 11, 1995, EPA sent a 
letter to Massachusetts deeming the submittal of these changes 
administratively and technically complete. On August 8, 1996, EPA 
approved these changes as part of the emissions averaging, banking, and 
trading program (see 61 FR 41371).
    On February 7, 1995, MA DEP proposed approval of the NOx RACT 
emission control plan which defined NOx RACT for two lime kilns at 
Specialty Minerals, Inc., in Adams, Massachusetts. The two kilns are 
subject to the miscellaneous RACT provisions of 310 CMR 7.19(12). On 
March 9, 1995, a public hearing was held on the proposed approval. EPA 
submitted written comments to the public record on March 3, 1995 
concerning this proposal. On June 16, 1995, MA DEP issued a final 
approval of the NOx RACT emission control plan (transmittal 
65843). On October 4, 1996, the final approval of the plan was 
submitted to EPA for approval into the Massachusetts SIP. On February 
6, 1997, EPA deemed the submittal administratively and technically 
complete.
    Similarly, on May 19, 1995, MA DEP proposed approval of the NOx 
RACT emission control plan for Monsanto Company's Indian Orchard 
facility in Springfield, Massachusetts. On June 16, 1995, a public 
hearing was held concerning the proposed approval. The proposed plan 
approval defined NOx RACT for the stoker fired coal burning boiler at 
Monsanto which is subject to the miscellaneous NOx RACT provisions of 
310 CMR 7.19(12). EPA submitted written comments to the public record 
on June 9, 1995. MA DEP proposed a final approval on September 12, 
1996, and held a second hearing on the proposal on October 4, 1996. MA 
DEP issued a final NOx RACT plan approval on October 28, 1996 and 
submitted the final plan approval to EPA on December 2, 1996 for 
approval into the Massachusetts SIP. On February 6, 1997, EPA deemed 
the submittal administratively and technically complete.

B. Description of Submittal

    Massachusetts' Regulation 310 CMR 7.19, ``Reasonably Available 
Control Technology (RACT) for Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx),'' is divided 
into fifteen sections. Section (1) defines the applicability of the 
overall rule to a NOx emitting facility, although the applicability of 
the rule to an individual emission unit is further determined in each 
section, based on a unit's type and size. Basically, an emissions unit 
is subject to the rule if it exceeds a minimum capacity rating and is 
located at a major source.
    Section (2) describes the general provisions of the regulation, 
including the general criteria for source specific alternative RACT 
limits, as well as general requirements for seasonal fuel-switching.
    Section (3) describes the general applicability, notification, 
elements, prohibitions, and approval of emission control plans for 
certain types of RACT subject sources.
    Section (4) describes the NOx RACT requirements for large boilers. 
Large boilers are defined as having an energy input capacity of 100 
million British thermal units (Btu) per hour or greater. This section 
further defines NOx RACT emission limitations for the following types 
of large boilers: dry bottom boilers burning coal, both tangentially 
and face-fired; stoker fired boilers burning other solid fuels; boilers 
burning either oil or oil and gas; and boilers burning only gas. 
Section (4) also sets out the requirements for any large boiler owners 
choosing to repower, as well as the emission rate limitations that the 
repowered units must meet. Additionally, section (4) includes the 
requirements for large boilers seeking alternative NOx RACT 
determinations, procedures for determining the NOx standard when 
multiple fuels are burned, and testing, monitoring, record keeping, 
reporting, and emission control plan requirements. Also, section (4) 
sets a carbon monoxide emission limitation for large boilers.

[[Page 8158]]

    Section (5) describes the requirements for medium boilers. Medium 
boilers are defined as boilers with energy input capacities of greater 
than 50 million Btu per hour but less than 100 million Btu per hour. 
This section sets NOx standards for the following types of boilers: 
tangential, face fired, or stoker fired boilers burning solid fuels; 
tangential or face fired boilers burning gas only, distillate oil or 
distillate oil and gas, and residual oil or residual oil and gas; and 
boilers which cofire multiple fuels. Additionally, section (5) sets a 
carbon monoxide emission limitation for medium boilers.
    Section (6) describes the NOx RACT requirements for boilers with 
energy input capacities of less than 50 million Btu per hour and 
greater than or equal to 20 million Btu per hour, i.e., small boilers. 
Basically, this section describes the tune-up procedures which must be 
followed for these boilers, as well as the applicable emissions record 
keeping and reporting requirements.
    Section (7) of the rule deals with stationary combustion turbines 
having energy input capacities of 25 million Btu per hour or greater. 
This section sets NOx emission standards for simple and combined cycle 
stationary combustion turbines burning gas, oil, or gas and oil.
    Section (8) of the rule describes the requirements for stationary 
reciprocating internal combustion (IC) engines with energy input 
capacities greater than or equal to 3 million Btu per hour. This 
section exempts engines which do not operate for more than 300 hours 
per year and are not operated as load-shaving units, peak power units, 
or standby engines in an energy assistance program. This section sets 
emission standards for reciprocating internal combustion engines which 
have operated for 1000 hours or more during a 12 month period since 
1990. The specific standards apply to the following engine types: rich 
burn, gas-fired; lean burn, gas-fired; and lean burn, oil-fired or dual 
fueled. Section (8) requires ignition timing retard to be performed on 
engines which have not operated more than 1000 hours per year since 
1990.
    Section (9) is reserved for NOx RACT requirements for incinerators. 
Section (10) is also reserved.
    Section (11) describes the requirements for glass melting furnaces 
that have maximum production rates of 14 tons or greater of glass 
removed per day.
    Section (12) describes NOx RACT requirements for miscellaneous 
emission units, i.e., emissions units with potential emissions of NOx 
greater than or equal to 25 tons per year, before the application of 
control equipment, at facilities having potential emissions greater 
than or equal to 50 tons per year of NOx, for which 310 CMR 7.19 does 
not set specific NOx emission standards. This section exempts emissions 
units already subject to BACT or LAER. Section (12) requires that the 
emission control plans for these miscellaneous NOx RACT sources be 
approved by EPA as well as the State.
    Section (13) establishes testing, monitoring, record keeping, and 
reporting requirements for sources subject to sections 7.19(2)(b), (4), 
(5), (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), or (14). This section requires 
certain sources to demonstrate compliance with NOx emission standards 
by using continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS). These sources 
include: boilers with energy input capacities greater than 250 million 
Btu per hour, units involved in emissions averaging, combined cycle 
combustion turbines with energy input capacities of greater than or 
equal to 100 million Btu per hour, sources currently using CEMS, and 
sources determined to need a CEMS as part of a miscellaneous or 
alternative RACT plan. Section (13) also describes the specific CEMS 
requirements. For other types of sources, section (13) describes the 
stack-testing and record keeping requirements which must be met.
    Section (14) deals with the averaging of emissions from multiple 
units to achieve compliance. Massachusetts previously submitted this 
section as part of the regulations concerning emissions averaging as 
specified in 310 CMR 7.00 Appendix B(4). These regulations were 
approved in a separate rulemaking action.
    Section (15) specifies the proration formula for determining the 
applicable emission limitation when different fuels are burned either 
simultaneously or during the same hour or same day if a 24 hour 
averaging time is used (i.e., cofiring).
    Additionally, Massachusetts submitted two case specific RACT 
determinations for facilities with NOx emitting units that are subject 
to the miscellaneous RACT provisions of 310 CMR 7.19(12). First, the 
NOx RACT emission control plan for Specialty Minerals, Inc. 
specifically defines NOx RACT for two lime kilns at the facility 
located in Adams, Massachusetts. Similarly, the NOx RACT emission 
control plan for Monsanto Company's Indian Orchard facility in 
Springfield, Massachusetts specifically defines NOx RACT for the 
facility's stoker fired coal burning boiler.
    EPA's evaluation of the submitted regulations and source specific 
RACT determinations is detailed in a memorandum, dated May 13, 1997, 
entitled ``Technical Support Document for Massachusetts' Regulation 310 
CMR 7.19, Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for Oxides of 
Nitrogen (NOx), and Case-Specific NOx RACT for Monsanto Company's 
Indian Orchard Plant in Springfield, and Specialty Minerals, Inc. in 
Adams.'' Copies of the document are available, upon request, from the 
EPA Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document. 
Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure 
by submitting written comments to the EPA Regional Office listed in the 
ADDRESSES section of this document.

II. Issues

    There are two issues associated with this rulemaking action. The 
first issue is related to the miscellaneous RACT provisions of 310 CMR 
7.19(12). Massachusetts proposed NOx RACT emission control plans for 
four sources with processes subject to the miscellaneous NOx RACT 
provisions of the rule: Lee Lime Corporation in Lee; Specialty 
Minerals, Inc., in Adams; Indeck Energy Services of Turners Falls, Inc. 
in Turners Falls; and, Monsanto Company, in Springfield. To date, 
however, EPA has only received SIP submittals for Specialty Minerals, 
Inc. and Monsanto Company. Therefore, Massachusetts must still submit 
final NOx RACT emission control plans for the units subject to 
miscellaneous NOx RACT provisions at Lee Lime and Indeck Energy.
    Second, the July 15, 1994 SIP submittal for 310 CMR 7.19 did not 
contain any emission limitations for incinerators with the potential to 
emit greater than 50 tons of NOx per year, including municipal waste 
combustors. According to the Massachusetts emissions inventory and 
EPA's database in the Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS), 
however, there are a number of incinerators of this size currently 
operating in Massachusetts. Therefore, Massachusetts must either revise 
section 7.19(9) to include a NOx emission limit for these categories of 
units, or consider these units as subject to the miscellaneous RACT 
section (i.e., 310 CMR 7.19(12)) of the rule and define source-specific 
NOx limits for them. As miscellaneous RACT units, 310 CMR 7.19(12) 
requires sources to submit emission control plans to MA DEP; 
subsequently, the plan approvals must be submitted to and approved by 
EPA as source-specific SIP revisions.

[[Page 8159]]

III. EPA Proposed Action

    EPA's review of this material indicates that Massachusetts has 
defined NOx RACT emission limitations or technology standards for a 
number of source categories and individual sources. However, not all 
major stationary sources of NOx have been covered by the regulations 
and case specific determinations. Thus, by incorporating 310 CMR 7.19 
and the submitted RACT determinations into the Massachusetts SIP, the 
SIP is strengthened but does not meet the requirements of sections 
182(b)(2) and 182(f) of the CAA.
    Therefore, EPA is proposing a limited approval/limited disapproval 
of the Massachusetts SIP revision for 310 CMR 7.19, which was submitted 
on July 15, 1994. In light of the deficiencies discussed in the issues 
section above, EPA cannot grant full approval of this rule under 
section 110(k)(3) and part D of the CAA. However, EPA may grant a 
limited approval of the submitted rule under section 110(k)(3) and 
EPA's authority pursuant to section 301(a) to adopt regulations 
necessary to further air quality by strengthening the SIP. The approval 
is limited because EPA's action also includes a limited disapproval. 
EPA is also proposing full approval of the source specific RACT 
determinations for Monsanto Company in Springfield, and Specialty 
Minerals, Inc. in Adams, Massachusetts.
    To receive full approval of 310 CMR 7.19, Massachusetts must submit 
final emission control plans for Lee Lime Corporation in Lee and Indeck 
Energy Services in Turners Falls, Massachusetts. Additionally, 
Massachusetts must either revise section 7.19(9) to include NOx 
emission limits for incinerators, or consider these units as subject to 
the miscellaneous RACT section (i.e., 310 CMR 7.19(12)) of the rule and 
define source-specific NOx limits for them. For full approval of 310 
CMR 7.19, all of these limits must be approved by EPA.
    As stated, EPA is also proposing a limited disapproval of this rule 
under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the CAA because the rule does 
not meet the requirements of sections 182(b) and 182(f) of the Act. 
Under section 179(a)(2), if the Administrator disapproves a submission 
under section 110(k) for an area designated nonattainment based on the 
submission's failure to meet one or more of the elements required by 
the Act, the Administrator must apply one of the sanctions set forth in 
section 179(b) unless the deficiency is corrected within 18 months of 
the disapproval. Section 179(b) makes two sanctions available to the 
Administrator: highway funding and offsets. The 18-month period 
referred to in section 179(a) will begin at the effective date 
established in this limited disapproval. Moreover, the final 
disapproval triggers the Federal implementation plan (FIP) requirement 
under section 110(c).
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any State Implementation Plan. Each request for revision to 
the State Implementation Plan shall be considered separately in light 
of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in 
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted this regulatory action from review under Executive Order 
12866.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    Limited SIP approvals and disapprovals under sections 110 and 301, 
and subchapter I, part D of the CAA do not create any new requirements 
but simply approve requirements that the State is already imposing. 
Therefore, because the Federal SIP limited approval/limited disapproval 
does not impose any new requirements, it does not have a significant 
impact on any affected small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of 
the Federal-State relationship under the CAA, preparation of a 
flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
reasonableness of state action. The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions 
concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 
U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA 
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with 
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan 
for informing and advising any small governments that may be 
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the proposed limited approval/limited 
disapproval action does not include a Federal mandate that may result 
in estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or 
tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This 
Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under State or local 
law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs 
to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, 
result from this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: February 4, 1998.
John P. DeVillars,
Regional Administrator, Region I.
[FR Doc. 98-4004 Filed 2-17-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F