[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24930-24933]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08899]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2021-0610; FRL-9081-01-R4]
Air Plan Approval; NC; NC BART Rule Revisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision,
submitted through a letter dated April 13, 2021, proposing changes to
North Carolina's SIP-approved rule addressing best available retrofit
technology (BART) for regional haze. EPA proposes to approve North
Carolina's SIP revision because the changes are consistent with Clean
Air Act (CAA or Act) requirements.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 27, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2021-0610, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be
reached via telephone at (404) 562-9031 or electronic mail at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Regional Haze and Regional Haze SIPs
Regional haze is visibility impairment that is produced by a
multitude of sources and activities which are located across a broad
geographic area and emit fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
(e.g., sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon, elemental carbon, and soil
dust) and their precursors (e.g., sulfur dioxide (SO2),
nitrogen oxides (NOX), and in some cases, ammonia and
volatile organic compounds). Fine particle precursors react in the
atmosphere to form PM2.5 which impairs visibility by
scattering and absorbing light. Visibility impairment (i.e., light
scattering) reduces the clarity, color, and visible distance that one
can see. PM2.5 can also cause serious health effects
(including premature death, heart attacks, irregular heartbeat,
aggravated asthma, decreased lung function, and increased respiratory
symptoms) and mortality in humans and contributes to environmental
effects such as acid deposition and eutrophication.
In section 169A of the 1977 Amendments to the CAA, Congress created
a program for protecting visibility in the nation's national parks and
wilderness areas. This section of the CAA establishes as a national
goal the prevention of any future, and the remedying of any existing,
anthropogenic impairment of visibility in 156 national parks and
wilderness areas designated as mandatory Class I federal areas.
Congress added section 169B to the CAA in 1990 to address regional haze
issues, and EPA promulgated the Regional Haze Rule (RHR), codified at
40 CFR 51.308,\1\ on July 1, 1999.\2\ The RHR established a requirement
to submit a regional haze SIP which applies to all 50 states, the
[[Page 24931]]
District of Columbia, and the Virgin Islands.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In addition to the generally applicable regional haze
provisions at 40 CFR 51.308, EPA also promulgated regulations
specific to addressing regional haze visibility impairment in Class
I areas on the Colorado Plateau at 40 CFR 51.309. The latter
regulations are therefore not relevant here.
\2\ See 64 FR 35714 (July 1, 1999). On January 10, 2017, EPA
promulgated revisions to the RHR that apply for the second and
subsequent implementation periods. See 82 FR 3078.
\3\ 40 CFR 51.300(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address regional haze visibility impairment, the RHR established
an iterative planning process that requires states in which Class I
areas are located and states from which emissions may reasonably be
anticipated to cause or contribute to any impairment of visibility in a
Class I area to periodically submit SIP revisions to address regional
haze visibility impairment.\4\ Under the CAA, each SIP submission must
contain ``a long-term (ten to fifteen years) strategy for making
reasonable progress toward meeting the national goal,'' and the initial
round of SIP submissions also had to address the statutory requirement
that certain older, larger sources of visibility-impairing pollutants
install and operate BART, as discussed further in Section I.B,
below.\5\ States' first regional haze SIPs were due by December 17,
2007, with subsequent SIP submissions containing revised long-term
strategies originally due July 31, 2018, and every ten years
thereafter.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 42 U.S.C. 7491(b)(2); 40 CFR 51.308(b) and (f); see also
64 FR 35768 (July 1, 1999). EPA established in the RHR that all
states either have Class I areas within their borders or ``contain
sources whose emissions are reasonably anticipated to contribute to
regional haze in a Class I area;'' therefore, all states must submit
regional haze SIPs. See 64 FR 35721. In addition to each of the 50
states, EPA also concluded that the Virgin Islands and District of
Columbia contain a Class I area and/or contain sources whose
emissions are reasonably anticipated to contribute regional haze in
a Class I area. See 40 CFR 51.300(b) and (d)(3).
\5\ See 42 U.S.C. 7491(b)(2)(A); 40 CFR 51.308(d) and (e).
\6\ See 40 CFR 51.308(b). The 2017 RHR revisions changed the
second period SIP due date from July 31, 2018, to July 31, 2021, and
maintained the existing schedules for the subsequent implementation
periods. See 40 CFR 51.308(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. BART
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
Section 169A of the CAA directs states to evaluate the use of
retrofit controls at certain larger, often uncontrolled, older
stationary sources in order to address visibility impacts from these
sources. Specifically, section 169A(b)(2) of the CAA requires states to
revise their SIPs to contain such measures as may be necessary to make
reasonable progress towards the national visibility goal, including a
requirement that certain categories of existing major stationary
sources built between 1962 and 1977 procure, install, and operate
``Best Available Retrofit Technology'' as determined by the state. On
July 6, 2005, EPA published the Guidelines for BART Determinations
Under the Regional Haze Rule at Appendix Y to 40 CFR part 51
(hereinafter referred to as the ``BART Guidelines'') to assist states
in the BART evaluation process. Under the RHR and the BART Guidelines,
the BART evaluation process consists of three steps: (1) An
identification of all BART-eligible sources, (2) an assessment of
whether the BART-eligible sources are subject to BART, and (3) a
determination of the BART controls.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 40 CFR 51.308(e); BART Guidelines at I.F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
States must conduct BART determinations for all ``BART-eligible''
sources that may reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to
any visibility impairment in a Class I area, or in the alternative,
adopt an emissions trading program or other alternative program as long
as the alternative provides greater reasonable progress towards
improving visibility than BART. In making a BART determination for a
fossil fuel-fired electric generating plant with a total generating
capacity in excess of 750 megawatts, a state must use the approach set
forth in the BART Guidelines. A state is generally encouraged, but not
required, to follow the BART Guidelines in other aspects.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ For additional details regarding the three steps of the BART
evaluation process, see, e.g., 85 FR 47134, 47136-37 (August 4,
2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A regional haze SIP must include source-specific BART emissions
limits and compliance schedules for each source subject to BART. Once a
state has made its BART determination, the BART controls must be
installed and in operation as expeditiously as practicable, but no
later than five years after the date of EPA approval of the regional
haze SIP. See CAA section 169A(g)(4); 40 CFR 51.308(e)(1)(iv). In
addition to what is required by the RHR, general SIP requirements
mandate that the SIP must also include all regulatory requirements
related to monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting for the BART
controls on the source. See CAA section 110(a)(2).
States undertook the BART determination process during the first
implementation period. The BART requirement was a one-time requirement.
BART-eligible sources may need to be re-assessed for additional
controls in future implementation periods under the CAA's reasonable
progress provisions. States should treat BART-eligible sources the same
as other reasonable progress sources going forward. See 81 FR 26942,
26947 (May 4, 2016).
2. Summary of BART Sources in North Carolina
In the State's December 17, 2007, regional haze plan for the first
implementation period, North Carolina identified 17 BART-eligible
sources (six electric generating units (EGUs) and eleven non-EGUs) in
the State. The non-EGUs submitted BART-exemption modeling
demonstrations for NOX, SO2, and particulate
matter (PM) as applicable to individual facilities. Nine of the 11 non-
EGU sources demonstrated that they are not subject to BART by modeling
less than the State's BART-exemption visibility impact threshold of 0.5
deciviews. The EGUs relied on the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) \9\
as a BART alternative for NOX and SO2 and
submitted BART-exemption modeling demonstrations for PM. All of the
EGUs demonstrated that they are not subject to BART for PM by modeling
less than the State's BART-exemption threshold. See 77 FR 11858, 11874
(February 28, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ CAIR created regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce
SO2 and NOX emissions in 28 eastern states
(and the District of Columbia), including North Carolina, that
contributed to downwind nonattainment or interfered with maintenance
of the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) or the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. CAIR is no longer in
effect is no longer in effect and has since been replaced by the
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). CSAPR requires substantial
reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions from EGUs
in 27 states in the Eastern United States that significantly
contribute to downwind nonattainment of the 1997 PM2.5
and ozone NAAQS, 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. As discussed in Section II.B, below, EPA subsequently
approved North Carolina's reliance on its Clean Smokestacks Act as a
BART alternative in lieu of CAIR. See 81 FR 32652 (May 24, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Carolina found that two non-EGUs (Blue Ridge Paper and PCS
Phosphate) had modeled visibility impacts greater than the State's 0.5
deciview BART contribution threshold. Therefore, these two facilities
were found subject to BART and submitted State permit applications
including their proposed BART determinations. PCS Phosphate
subsequently shut down its two sulfuric acid units subject to BART and
these units were not further evaluated. For Blue Ridge Paper, North
Carolina determined and EPA agreed that BART for the subject-to-BART
units (two recovery furnaces, their associated smelt dissolving tanks,
and the black liquor oxidation system) is the existing emissions
control systems in place at the time of that determination. See 77 FR
at 11874-75.
[[Page 24932]]
II. Summary and EPA's Evaluation of North Carolina's SIP Revision
A. Summary of North Carolina's SIP Revision
Through a letter dated April 13, 2021, and submitted to EPA on
April 14, 2021, North Carolina submitted a SIP revision to modify its
SIP-approved rule at 15A North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 02D
.0543, Best Available Retrofit Technology (NC BART Rule), which applies
to BART-eligible sources. EPA incorporated this rule into North
Carolina's SIP as part of EPA's limited approval action on the State's
regional haze plan for the first implementation period. See 77 FR 38185
(June 27, 2012).
The proposed revisions to the NC BART Rule include the following
changes. The submission removes 15A NCAC 02D .0543(g) because it is
outdated, requiring the submission of BART permit applications by
September 1, 2006. The submission also removes 15A NCAC 02D .0543(i)
which required owners or operators of BART-eligible sources required to
adopt BART controls in North Carolina to have installed and begun
operation of the BART controls by December 31, 2012. The revision also
renumbers .0543(h) to .0543(g) and removes the statement that EGUs
covered under and complying with 15A NCAC 02D .2400, Clean Air
Interstate Rules, are considered to be in compliance with the BART
requirements for NOX and SO2 under the NC BART
Rule. Additionally, the revisions update the provisions for accessing
EPA's Guidelines for Determining Best Available Retrofit Technology for
Coal-fired Power Plants and Other Existing Stationary Facilities in a
renumbered provision under 15A NCAC 02D .0543(h) (formerly provision
(j)). The submission also includes non-substantive punctuation and
wording changes.
B. EPA's Evaluation of North Carolina's SIP Revision
1. NC BART Rule Revisions
North Carolina elected to adopt the NC BART Rule to establish BART
requirements in response to federal requirements that states address
BART in their initial regional haze SIPs. The CAA and RHR do not
require states to develop state BART rules for incorporation into their
SIPs. Thus, changes to the NC BART Rule are approvable as long as North
Carolina continues to implement and enforce BART and the changes are
otherwise consistent with federal BART requirements. EPA proposes to
find that the rule changes are approvable for the reasons discussed
below.
Regarding the removal of provisions under 15A NCAC 02D .0543, EPA
preliminarily agrees that provisions (g) and (i) can be removed because
the State-established due dates of September 1, 2006, and December 31,
2012, for submission of BART permit applications and installation and
operation of BART, respectively, have since passed and all subject
sources have met those requirements. Furthermore, the rule continues to
require the owner or operator of a BART-subject emissions unit to
install, operate, and maintain BART as approved by the State after BART
is incorporated into the unit's permit under 15A NCAC 02Q. See 15A NCAC
02D .0543(f).
EPA preliminarily concurs with the removal of the reference to 15A
NCAC 02D .2400, Clean Air Interstate Rules, as a means to satisfy BART
for SO2 and NOX for covered EGUs in North
Carolina because EPA approved a SIP revision on October 31, 2014,
allowing the State to rely on its Clean Smokestacks Act as an
alternative to BART to satisfy BART requirements for BART-eligible EGUs
formerly subject to CAIR. See 81 FR 32652 (May 24, 2016).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ To view EPA's full analysis of the October 31, 2014, North
Carolina SIP revision and additional details regarding the
relationship between BART and EPA's transport rules, see the notice
of proposed rulemaking at 81 FR 19519 (April 5, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA preliminarily concurs with the remainder of the changes to the
rule because they are editorial revisions that do not alter the
substance of the NC BART Rule.
For the reasons described above, EPA preliminarily concludes that
the NC BART Rule changes do not alter the State's authority and ability
to continue to implement and enforce BART in North Carolina, are
consistent with federal BART requirements, and do not interfere with
any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress or any other applicable CAA requirement.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See CAA Section 110(l).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Federal Land Manager (FLM) Review
In accordance with 40 CFR 51.308(i)(4), Section 11 of the State's
December 17, 2007, regional haze SIP contains procedures for continuing
consultation between the State and FLMs on the implementation of the
State's visibility protection program. North Carolina provided the SIP
revision to the FLMs to review pursuant to the State's regional haze
SIP and 40 CFR 51.308(i)(2), and the FLMs have not provided any
comments.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference North Carolina rule 15A NCAC 02D .0543 entitled ``Best
Available Retrofit Technology,'' state effective November 1, 2020,
which removes outdated provisions and makes minor editorial changes.
EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally
available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 office
(please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
IV. Proposed Action
EPA proposes to approve the SIP revision containing changes to 15
NCAC 02D .0543 because they are consistent with the BART requirements
set forth in the RHR and CAA and the applicable requirements in CAA
section 110.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. This action merely
proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
[[Page 24933]]
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 19, 2022.
Daniel Blackman,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2022-08899 Filed 4-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P