Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Connecticut; State Implementation Plan Revision To Implement the Clean Air Interstate Rule, 50305-50311 [E7-17196]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 169 / Friday, August 31, 2007 / Proposed Rules
(4) Boaters will have complete access
to the danger zone whenever there is no
weapons firing scheduled, which will
be indicated by the absence of any
warning flags, pennants, or beacons
displayed ashore.
(5) The danger zone is not considered
safe for boaters whenever weapons
firing is in progress. Boaters shall
expeditiously vacate the danger zone at
best speed and by the most direct route
whenever weapons firing is scheduled.
Passage of vessels through the danger
zone when weapons firing is in progress
will be permitted, but boaters shall
proceed directly through the area at best
speed. Weapons firing will be
suspended as long as there is a vessel in
the danger zone. Whenever a boater
disregards the publicized warning
signals that hazardous weapons firing is
scheduled, the boater will be personally
requested to expeditiously vacate the
danger zone by MCBH Kaneohe Bay
military personnel utilizing a bull-horn
from a Marine helicopter, hailing the
vessel via VHF channel 16 or U.S. Navy
surface craft.
(6) Observation posts will be manned
whenever any weapons firing is
scheduled and in progress. Visibility
will be sufficient to maintain visual
surveillance of the entire danger zone
and for an additional distance of 5 miles
in all directions whenever weapons
firing is in progress.
(c) The Enforcing Agency. The
foregoing regulations shall be enforced
by the Commanding General, MCBH
Kaneohe Bay and such agencies as he/
she may designate.
Dated: August 23, 2007.
Mark F. Sudol,
Acting Chief, Operations, Directorate of Civil
Works.
[FR Doc. E7–17155 Filed 8–30–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710–92–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2007–0399; FRL–8462–3]
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Connecticut; State Implementation
Plan Revision To Implement the Clean
Air Interstate Rule
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
a revision to the Connecticut State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on
SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Aug 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
April 26, 2007. This revision addresses
the requirements of EPA’s Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR), promulgated on
May 12, 2005 and subsequently revised
on April 28, 2006 and December 13,
2006. EPA is proposing to determine
that the SIP revision fully implements
the CAIR requirements for Connecticut.
Therefore, as a consequence of the SIP
approval, EPA will also withdraw the
CAIR Federal Implementation Plan
(CAIR FIP) concerning NOX ozoneseason emissions for Connecticut. The
CAIR FIPs for all States in the CAIR
region were promulgated on April 28,
2006 and subsequently revised on
December 13, 2006.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before October 1, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by FDMS Docket ID No. EPA–
R01–OAR–2007–0399, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918–0047.
4. Mail: ‘‘FDMS Docket ID No. EPA–
R01–OAR–2007–0399’’, Anne Arnold,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code
CAQ), Boston, MA 02114–2023.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver
your comments to: Anne Arnold,
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit,
Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114–2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. ‘‘FDMS Docket ID No.
EPA–R01–OAR–2007–0399’’. EPA’s
policy is that all comments received
will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made
available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
50305
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters and any form of
encryption and should be free of any
defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA’s public docket
visit the EPA Docket Center homepage
at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/
dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form. In
addition to publicly available docket
materials available electronically in
https://www.regulations.gov, the hard
copy of these materials, including the
state submittal, is available at the Office
of Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston,
MA. EPA requests that if at all possible,
you contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions concerning today’s
proposal, please contact Alison C.
Simcox, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114–2023, telephone
number (617) 918–1684, fax number
(617) 918–0684, e-mail
simcox.alison@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take?
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
50306
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 169 / Friday, August 31, 2007 / Proposed Rules
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR
and the CAIR FIPs?
III. What Are the General Requirements of
CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP
Submittals?
V. Analysis of Connecticut’s CAIR SIP
Submittal
A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations
B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs
C. Applicability Provisions for non-EGU
NOX SIP Call Sources
D. NOX Allowance Allocations
E. Individual Opt-in Units
VI. Proposed Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To
Take?
EPA is proposing to approve a
revision to Connecticut’s SIP, submitted
on April 26, 2007. This SIP revision
includes a new regulation, Regulations
of Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA)
section 22a–174–22c, ‘‘The Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) Nitrogen Oxides
(NOX) Ozone Season Trading Program’’
(herein called ‘‘Connecticut’s proposed
CAIR program’’), repeal of RCSA section
22a–174–22a (‘‘The Connecticut NOX
Budget Program’’), as of May 1, 2009,
and repeal of RCSA section 22a–174–
22b, ‘‘The Connecticut Post-2002 NOX
Budget Program’’ (herein called the
‘‘Connecticut NOX SIP Call trading
program’’), as of May 1, 2010. In its SIP
revision, Connecticut would meet CAIR
requirements by requiring certain
electric generating units (EGUs) to
participate in the EPA-administered
State CAIR cap-and-trade program
addressing NOX ozone-season
emissions. EPA is proposing to
determine that the Connecticut SIP as
revised will meet the applicable
requirements of CAIR. Any final action
approving the SIP will be taken by the
Regional Administrator for Region 1. As
a consequence of the SIP Approval, the
Administrator of EPA will also issue a
final rule to withdraw the FIP
concerning NOX ozone-season
emissions for Connecticut. This action
will delete and reserve 40 CFR 52.386.
The withdrawal of the CAIR FIP for
Connecticut is a conforming amendment
that must be made once the SIP is
approved because EPA’s authority to
issue the FIP was premised on a
deficiency in the SIP for Connecticut.
Once the SIP is fully approved, EPA no
longer has authority for the FIP. Thus,
EPA will not have the option of
maintaining the FIP following the full
SIP approval. Accordingly, EPA does
not intend to offer an opportunity for a
public hearing or an additional
opportunity for written public comment
on the withdrawal of the FIP.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Aug 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
The Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP) has
requested that EPA ‘‘parallel process’’
Connecticut’s proposed CAIR SIP
revision. Under this procedure, EPA
prepared this action before the State’s
final adoption of the regulations
included in the SIP revision. The DEP
held a public hearing on its proposed
CAIR SIP revision on October 19, 2006.
The DEP has prepared a response to the
comments received on its proposal and
has developed a ‘‘post-hearing final
draft’’ version of the regulations dated
April 10, 2007. This is the version of the
regulations included in Connecticut’s
April 26, 2007 SIP submittal to EPA and
the subject of EPA’s proposal.
On June 19, 2007, the Connecticut
DEP received adverse comments
regarding the allocation methodology in
its proposed CAIR program.
Consequently, the DEP may revise its
proposed regulations before final
promulgation. After the DEP submits its
final adopted regulations, EPA will
review these final regulations to
determine whether they differ from the
‘‘post-hearing final draft’’ version that is
the subject of this proposal. If
Connecticut’s final regulations do in fact
differ from the ‘‘post-hearing final draft’’
version, then EPA would need to
determine whether any of the changes
are significant. Ordinarily, changes that
are limited to the allocation
methodology would not be deemed
significant for SIP approval purposes,
assuming the methodology does not
lead to allocations in excess of the total
state budget. Based on EPA’s
determination regarding the significance
of any changes in the final regulations,
EPA would then decide whether it is
appropriate to prepare a final rule and
describe the changes in the final
rulemaking action, or re-propose action
based on the state’s final adopted
regulations.
II. What Is the Regulatory History of the
CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
was published by EPA on May 12, 2005
(70 FR 25162). In this rule, EPA
determined that 28 States and the
District of Columbia contribute
significantly to nonattainment and
interfere with maintenance of the
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) for fine particles (PM2.5) and/
or 8-hour ozone in downwind States in
the eastern part of the country. As a
result, EPA required those upwind
States to revise their SIPs to include
control measures that reduce emissions
of SO2, which is a precursor to PM2.5
formation, and/or NOX, which is a
precursor to both ozone and PM2.5
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
formation. For jurisdictions that
contribute significantly to downwind
PM2.5 nonattainment, CAIR sets annual
State-wide emission reduction
requirements (i.e., budgets) for SO2 and
annual State-wide emission reduction
requirements for NOX. Similarly, for
jurisdictions that contribute
significantly to 8-hour ozone
nonattainment, CAIR sets State-wide
emission reduction requirements for
NOX for the ozone season (May 1st to
September 30th). Under CAIR, States
may implement these reduction
requirements by participating in the
EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs or by adopting any other
control measures.
CAIR explains to subject States what
must be included in SIPs to address the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D) of
the Clean Air Act (CAA) with regard to
interstate transport with respect to the
8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA
made national findings, effective on
May 25, 2005, that the States had failed
to submit SIPs meeting the requirements
of section 110(a)(2)(D). The SIPs were
due in July 2000, 3 years after the
promulgation of the 8-hour ozone and
PM2.5 NAAQS. These findings started a
2-year clock for EPA to promulgate a
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to
address the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D). Under CAA section
110(c)(1), EPA may issue a FIP anytime
after such findings are made and must
do so within two years unless a SIP
revision correcting the deficiency is
approved by EPA before the FIP is
promulgated.
On April 28, 2006, EPA promulgated
FIPs for all States covered by CAIR in
order to ensure the emissions reductions
required by CAIR are achieved on
schedule. Each CAIR State is subject to
the FIPs until the State fully adopts, and
EPA approves, a SIP revision meeting
the requirements of CAIR. The CAIR
FIPs require EGUs to participate in the
EPA-administered CAIR SO2, NOX
annual, and NOX ozone season trading
programs, as appropriate. The CAIR FIP
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone
season trading programs impose
essentially the same requirements as,
and are integrated with, the respective
CAIR SIP trading programs. The
integration of the FIP and SIP trading
programs means that these trading
programs will work together to create
effectively a single trading program for
each regulated pollutant (SO2, NOX
annual, and NOX ozone-season) in all
States covered by the CAIR FIP or SIP
trading program for that pollutant. The
CAIR FIPs also allow States to submit
abbreviated SIP revisions that, if
approved by EPA, will automatically
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 169 / Friday, August 31, 2007 / Proposed Rules
replace or supplement certain CAIR FIP
provisions (e.g., the methodology for
allocating NOX allowances to sources in
the State), while the CAIR FIP remains
in place for all other provisions.
On April 28, 2006, EPA published
two additional CAIR-related final rules
that added the States of Delaware and
New Jersey to the list of States subject
to CAIR for PM2.5 and announced EPA’s
final decisions on reconsideration of
five issues, without making any
substantive changes to the CAIR
requirements.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
III. What Are the General Requirements
of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
CAIR establishes State-wide emission
budgets for SO2 and NOX and is to be
implemented in two phases. The first
phase of NOX reductions starts in 2009
and continues through 2014, while the
first phase of SO2 reductions starts in
2010 and continues through 2014. The
second phase of reductions for both
NOX and SO2 starts in 2015 and
continues thereafter. CAIR requires
States to implement the budgets by
either: (1) Requiring EGUs to participate
in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs; or (2) adopting other control
measures of the State’s choosing and
demonstrating that such control
measures will result in compliance with
the applicable State SO2 and NOX
budgets.
The May 12, 2005 and April 28, 2006
CAIR rules provide model rules that
States must adopt (with certain limited
changes, if desired) if they want to
participate in the EPA-administered
trading programs.
With two exceptions, only States that
choose to meet the requirements of
CAIR through methods that exclusively
regulate EGUs are allowed to participate
in the EPA-administered trading
programs. One exception is for States
that adopt the opt-in provisions of the
model rules to allow non-EGUs
individually to opt into the EPAadministered trading programs. The
other exception is for States that include
all units from their NOX SIP Call trading
programs in their CAIR NOX ozone
season trading programs.
IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP
Submittals?
States have the flexibility to choose
the type of control measures they will
use to meet the requirements of CAIR.
EPA anticipates that most States will
choose to meet the CAIR requirements
by selecting an option that requires
EGUs to participate in the EPAadministered CAIR cap-and-trade
programs. For such States, EPA has
provided two approaches for submitting
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Aug 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
and obtaining approval for CAIR SIP
revisions. States may submit full SIP
revisions that adopt the model CAIR
cap-and-trade rules. If approved, these
SIP revisions will fully replace the CAIR
FIPs. Alternatively, States may submit
abbreviated SIP revisions. These SIP
revisions will not replace the CAIR FIPs;
however, the CAIR FIPs provide that,
when approved, the provisions in these
abbreviated SIP revisions will be used
instead of or in conjunction with, as
appropriate, the corresponding
provisions of the CAIR FIPs (e.g., the
NOX allowance allocation
methodology).
A State submitting a full SIP revision
may either adopt regulations that are
substantively identical to the model
rules or incorporate by reference the
model rules. CAIR provides that States
may only make limited changes to the
model rules if the States want to
participate in the EPA-administered
trading programs. A full SIP revision
may change the model rules only by
altering their applicability and
allowance allocation provisions to:
1. Include NOX SIP Call trading
sources that are not EGUs under CAIR
in the CAIR NOX ozone season trading
program;
2. Provide for State allocation of NOX
annual or ozone season allowances
using a methodology chosen by the
State;
3. Provide for State allocation of NOX
annual allowances from the compliance
supplement pool (CSP) using the State’s
choice of allowed, alternative
methodologies; or
4. Allow units that are not otherwise
CAIR units to opt individually into the
CAIR SO2, NOX annual, or NOX ozone
season trading programs under the optin provisions in the model rules.
An approved CAIR full SIP revision
addressing EGUs’ SO2, NOX annual, or
NOX ozone-season emissions will
replace the CAIR FIP for that State for
the respective EGU emissions.
V. Analysis of Connecticut’s CAIR SIP
Submittal
A. State Budgets for Allowance
Allocations
The CAIR NOX annual and ozoneseason budgets were developed from
historical heat input data for EGUs.
Using these data, EPA calculated annual
and ozone season regional heat input
values, which were multiplied by 0.15
pounds per million British thermal
units (lb/mmBtu), for phase 1 of the
CAIR program (2009–2014) and by 0.125
lb/mmBtu, for phase 2 of the CAIR
program (2015 and thereafter) to obtain
regional NOX budgets for 2009–2014
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
50307
and for 2015 and thereafter,
respectively. EPA derived the State NOX
annual and ozone-season budgets from
the regional budgets using State heat
input data adjusted by fuel factors.
Connecticut, however, is only required
to participate in the CAIR NOX ozone
season program and not the CAIR NOX
annual or SO2 trading programs.
Therefore, only CAIR NOX ozone-season
budgets apply to the Connecticut CAIR
program.
In today’s action, EPA is proposing
approval of Connecticut’s SIP revision,
which will be codified at RCSA section
22a–174–22c. This SIP revision adopts
the budget established for the State in
CAIR, i.e., 2,559 tons of NOX ozoneseason emissions for CAIR phases 1 and
2, plus an additional 132 tons of NOX
ozone-season emissions for both phases
1 and 2 to account for NOX emissions
from ‘‘non-EGUs’’ from the Connecticut
NOX SIP Call trading program (see
section V.B. below). The total NOX
ozone-season budget is therefore 2,691
tons of NOX ozone-season emissions for
CAIR phases 1 and 2. Connecticut’s SIP
revision sets this budget as the total
number of allowances (with each
allowance authorizing one ton of NOX
ozone-season emissions) available for
allocation for each year under the EPAadministered CAIR cap-and-trade
program.
B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs
The CAIR NOX annual and ozoneseason model trading rules both largely
mirror the structure of the NOX SIP Call
model trading rule in 40 CFR part 96,
subparts A through I. While the
provisions of the NOX annual and
ozone-season model rules are similar,
there are some differences. For example,
the NOX ozone-season model rule
reflects the fact that the CAIR NOX
ozone season trading program replaces
the NOX SIP Call trading program after
the 2008 ozone season and is
coordinated with the NOX SIP Call
program. The NOX ozone-season model
rule provides incentives for early
emissions reductions by allowing
banked, pre-2009 NOX SIP Call
allowances to be used for compliance in
the CAIR NOX ozone season trading
program. In addition, States have the
option of continuing to meet their NOX
SIP Call requirement by participating in
the CAIR NOX ozone season trading
program and including all their NOX SIP
Call trading sources in that program.
Connecticut has decided to exercise the
option of including all its NOX SIP Call
units in its State CAIR program.
Therefore, the Connecticut CAIR SIP
revision includes amendments to the
Connecticut NOX SIP Call trading
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
50308
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 169 / Friday, August 31, 2007 / Proposed Rules
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
program (RCSA section 22a–174–22b)
such that the NOX SIP Call trading
program applies for the control periods
from 2003 through 2008, but is then
superseded by the Connecticut CAIR
program beginning with the control
period in 2009.
EPA also used the CAIR model
trading rules as the basis for the trading
programs in the CAIR FIPs. The CAIR
FIP trading rules are virtually identical
to the CAIR model trading rules, with
changes made to account for federal
rather than state implementation. The
CAIR model SO2, NOX annual, and NOX
ozone season trading rules and the
respective CAIR FIP trading rules are
designed to work together as integrated
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone
season trading programs.
In the SIP revision, Connecticut
proposes to implement its CAIR budgets
by requiring EGUs (as well as ‘‘nonEGUs’’ from its NOX SIP Call trading
program, as discussed below) to
participate in EPA-administered capand-trade programs for NOX ozoneseason emissions. Connecticut is
proposing a full SIP revision that
adopts, with certain allowed changes
discussed below, the CAIR model capand-trade rules for NOX ozone season
emissions.
C. Applicability Provisions for Non-EGU
NOX SIP Call Sources
In general, the CAIR model trading
rules apply to any stationary, fossil-fuelfired boiler or stationary, fossil-fuelfired combustion turbine serving at any
time, since the later of November 15,
1990 or the start-up of the unit’s
combustion chamber, a generator with
nameplate capacity of more than 25
MWe producing electricity for sale.
States have the option of bringing in,
for the CAIR NOX ozone season program
only, those units in the State’s NOX SIP
Call trading program that are not EGUs
as defined under CAIR (herein called
‘‘non-EGUs’’). EPA advises States
exercising this option to add the
applicability provisions in the State’s
NOX SIP Call trading rule for ‘‘nonEGUs’’ to the applicability provisions in
40 CFR 96.304 in order to include in the
CAIR NOX ozone season trading
program all units required to be in the
State’s NOX SIP Call trading program
that are not already included under 40
CFR 96.304. Under this option, the
CAIR NOX ozone season program must
cover all large industrial boilers and
combustion turbines, as well as any
small EGUs (i.e. units serving a
generator with a nameplate capacity of
25 MWe or less) that the State currently
requires to be in the NOX SIP Call
trading program.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:28 Aug 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
In the SIP revision, Connecticut
proposes to expand the applicability
provisions of the CAIR NOX ozone
season trading program to include all
units in the State’s NOX SIP Call trading
program, plus Exeter Energy, which is a
waste-tire-fired unit that EPA has
determined meets the definition of a
NOX SIP Call unit and a CAIR unit.
Units in the Connecticut NOX SIP Call
trading program include EGUs of 15
MW or more and non-EGUs (such as
industrial boilers and combustion
turbines) with a maximum design heat
input of 250 MMBtu/hr or more. These
units will be included in the
Connecticut CAIR program beginning
with the control period in 2009.
EPA has determined that
Connecticut’s proposed SIP revision
includes the allowable CAIR
applicability provisions relating to
adding all NOX SIP Call trading-program
units to the Connecticut CAIR NOX
ozone season program.
D. NOX Allowance Allocations
Deadlines: There is one technical flaw
in the SIP revision, but EPA is
proposing to approve the SIP revision
despite this flaw. CAIR requires states to
submit to EPA the initial allocations for
EGUs that started operation before 2001
by October 31, 2006. Connecticut’s
proposed SIP revision does not meet
this requirement, nor did the state in
fact submit those allocations by this
date. However, the purpose of this date
was to allow EPA sufficient time to
process the allocations data. EPA now
has the allocations, and no outside party
was prejudiced by Connecticut’s failure
to meet this date.
Specifically, according to 40 CFR
51.123(aa)(2)(iii)(C), for a full SIP
revision, ‘‘[t]he State’s methodology
must require that, for EGUs
commencing operation before January 1,
2001, the State will determine, and
notify the Administrator of, each unit’s
allocation of CAIR NOX allowances by
October 31, 2006 for the ozone seasons
2009, 2010, and 2011.’’ Connecticut’s
proposed SIP revision does not meet
this requirement because it does not
require that the State submit the 2009–
2011 allocations for pre-2001 EGUs by
October 31, 2006. Instead, Connecticut’s
SIP revision requires that it submit, and
in fact it did submit, these allocations
by April 30, 2007, the deadline that is
applicable to abbreviated SIP revisions
under 40 CFR 51.123(ee)(2)(ii)(C).
Since Connecticut has submitted a
full SIP revision, not an abbreviated SIP
revision, this failure to require that the
State will submit allocations by October
31, 2006 is technically a deficiency in
the SIP. However, this does not render
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the SIP unapprovable. The purpose of
the October 31, 2006 deadline, as
mentioned above, was to allow EPA’s
Clean Air Markets Division sufficient
time to process the allocations. At this
point, the deadline has elapsed;
Connecticut has, in fact, submitted its
allocations; and the Clean Air Markets
Division is fully able to process the
allocations despite having received
them later than CAIR envisions.
Potentially regulated entities received
ample notice of Connecticut’s plan for
allocations when the State’s program
was submitted for public comment on
the state level. Furthermore, in the
context of this action, it makes no
difference whether EPA would have
received the 2009–2011 allocations in
April of this year or October of last year,
since EPA has, in fact, received them
well before the date of this document.
No party is prejudiced by the
deficiency, since the deadline has
passed, and any interested party has a
full opportunity to comment on any
aspect of this proposed action.
Moreover, with Connecticut’s April
2007 submission of the allocations, EPA
will still be able—after final approval of
the SIP revision—to record them in
2007 and, thereby, provide the
allowances to owners and operators
sufficiently in advance of the 2009–2011
control periods. In sum, EPA has
determined that the interests of the
public, potentially regulated entities,
and EPA itself, including those interests
which 40 CFR 51.123(aa)(2)(iii)(C)
sought to protect, have been adequately
met by the proposed SIP revision’s
adoption and, more importantly, actual
submission of 2009–2011 allocation
data by April 30, 2007. Consequently,
EPA proposes to approve this SIP
revision despite Connecticut’s failure to
meet the requirements of 40 CFR
51.123(aa)(2)(iii)(C).
NOX allowance-allocation
methodology: Under the NOX
allowance-allocation methodology in
the CAIR model trading rules and in the
CAIR FIP, NOX annual and ozoneseason allowances are allocated to units
that have operated for five years (i.e.,
‘‘existing units’’), based on heat input
data from a three-year period that are
adjusted for fuel type by using fuel
factors of 1.0 for coal, 0.6 for oil, and 0.4
for other fuels. The CAIR model trading
rules and the CAIR FIP also provide a
new unit set-aside from which units
without five years of operation are
allocated allowances based on the units’
prior year emissions.
States may establish in their SIP
submissions a different NOX allowanceallocation methodology that will be
used to allocate allowances to sources in
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 169 / Friday, August 31, 2007 / Proposed Rules
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
the States if certain requirements are
met concerning the timing of
submission of units’ allocations to the
Administrator for recordation and the
total amount of allowances allocated for
each control period. In adopting
alternative NOX allowance-allocation
methodologies, States have flexibility
with regard to:
1. The cost to recipients of the
allowances, which may be distributed
for free or auctioned;
2. The frequency of allocations;
3. The basis for allocating allowances,
which may be distributed, for example,
based on historical heat input or electric
and thermal output; and
4. The use of allowance set-asides
and, if used, their size.
In the SIP revision, Connecticut
proposes to replace the provisions of the
CAIR NOX ozone-season model trading
rule concerning allowance allocations
with its own methodology. For most
fossil-fuel-fired units, Connecticut
proposes to allocate NOX ozone-season
allowances largely based on electric and
thermal output, rather than heat input.
For cogeneration units, certain
industrial boilers or indirect heat
exchangers, and waste-tire-fired units,
Connecticut proposes to allocate
allowances based on the unit’s actual or
permitted NOX emission rate.
Connecticut also provides a percentage
of allowances for an energy efficiency/
renewable energy set-aside and a new
unit set-aside.
(1) What Types of Set-Asides Are
Included in Connecticut CAIR?
In the SIP revision, Connecticut
proposes to include in its CAIR program
both an energy efficiency/renewable
energy set-aside (EERESA) to encourage
Energy Efficiency Projects (EEPs),
Renewable Energy Projects (REPs), and
Qualifying Other Project (QOPs), and a
new unit set-aside to allow for addition
of new units.
Connecticut defines a new unit as any
fossil-fuel-fired unit that began
operating on or after January 1, 2006
and that serves a generator that
produces electricity at an output of 15
MWe or more. A unit is considered to
be a new unit for 6 ozone-season control
periods (or portion thereof) following
the date of initial operation. This change
in status means that a Connecticut CAIR
‘‘new unit’’ will then become a
Connecticut CAIR ‘‘existing unit.’’
Connecticut proposes to establish a
new unit set-aside at 7 percent of the
State’s CAIR budget during CAIR phase
1 (2009–2014), and at 5 percent of the
State’s CAIR budget during CAIR phase
2 (2015 and thereafter). Therefore, the
new unit set-aside would include 200
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Aug 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
CAIR NOX ozone-season allowances
during CAIR phase 1, and 134
allowances during CAIR phase 2.
Connecticut proposes to establish an
EERESA at 10 percent of the State’s
CAIR budget for both phases of the
CAIR program. Therefore, the EERESA
would include 268 CAIR NOX
allowances for the 2009 and subsequent
ozone-season control periods.
(2) Methodology for Allocating CAIR
Allowances
Connecticut is proposing to replace
the provisions of the CAIR NOX ozoneseason model trading rule concerning
allowance allocations with a largely
output-based methodology. Under
Connecticut’s proposed SIP revision,
most fossil-fuel-fired units would
receive allocations based on their
average net electricity output, without
adjustments for fuel type. For
cogeneration, industrial, and waste-tirefired units, Connecticut proposes to
allocate allowances based on the units’
actual or permitted NOX emission rates
and average heat input.
EPA has identified two potential
ambiguities in the allocation provisions
of Connecticut’s proposed CAIR
program, and asked the Connecticut
DEP for its interpretations. The
Connecticut DEP (Wendy Jacobs, Bureau
of Air Management) responded by
electronic mail on June 20, 2007. After
reviewing the Connecticut DEP’s
interpretations as stated in that
electronic mail message, EPA interprets
the provisions involved as follows.
First, the proposed regulation uses the
term ‘‘NOX allowance’’ in three places.
See RCSA sections 22a–174–22c(c)(2),
22a–174–22c(c)(3)(B), 22a–174–
22c(g)(4). However, this term is defined
neither in the proposed SIP revision nor
in the CAIR model rule. According to
the Connecticut DEP, the term ‘‘NOX
allowance’’ when used in RCSA section
22a–174–22c is identical to the term
‘‘CAIR NOX Ozone Season allowance’’
as defined at 40 CFR 96.302. EPA adopts
this interpretation.
Second, under RCSA sections 22a–
174–22c(e)(7)(A) and (B) and 22a–174–
22c(e)(8)(A), there is no limit to the
number of allowances that can be
allocated to cogeneration units,
industrial units, waste-tire-fired units,
or Phase I units in any control period.
In theory, these provisions could
operate to allocate more allowances to
cogeneration units, industrial units,
waste-tire-fired units, or Phase I units
than are available in Connecticut’s CAIR
NOX ozone-season budget. That said,
RCSA sections 22a–174–22c(e)(2) and
22a–174–22c(e)(3), which authorize the
Connecticut DEP to allocate CAIR NOX
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
50309
ozone season allowances, state the
maximum number of allowances
available for allocation for all units
other than new units.
According to the Connecticut DEP,
RCSA sections 22a–174–22c(e)(7)(A)
and 22a–174–22c(e)(8)(A) are modeled
after analogous provisions in the
Connecticut NOX Budget Program and
the Connecticut NOX SIP Call trading
program, and under those programs, the
allocations for cogeneration units and
industrial units have never resulted in
a shortage of allowances for units in
other categories. The DEP suggests that
if the data support allocating allowances
to cogeneration units, industrial units
and waste-tire-fired units on an output
basis, or if there are a significant
number of new entrants into these
categories, DEP may revise its CAIR
program to allocate to these categories
on an output basis.
For purposes of construing
Connecticut’s proposed SIP revision,
EPA interprets RCSA sections 22a–174–
22c(e)(2) and 22a–174–22c(e)(3) to
prohibit the Connecticut DEP from
allocating allowances in excess of the
total state budget, and to control in any
conflict with RCSA sections 22a–174–
22c(e)(7)(A) and (B) and 22a–174–
22c(e)(8)(A). Thus, if the operation of
RCSA sections 22a–174–22c(e)(7)(A)–
(B) and/or 22a–174–22c(e)(8)(A) were to
yield allowances for cogeneration units,
industrial units, waste-tire-fired units,
or Phase I units in excess of the state
budget, either by themselves or in
combination with allocations to other
categories, then RCSA sections 22a–
174–22c(e)(2) and 22a–174–22c(e)(3)
would require the Connecticut DEP to
recalculate or reallocate allowances so
as not to exceed the state budget.
EPA is relying on this interpretation
of Connecticut’s proposed SIP revision
for the purposes of approving it as
meeting the requirements of the Act and
the CAIR program. If EPA does not
receive comments to the contrary from
the Connecticut DEP or any other party
during the public comment period, the
interpretations stated above will
represent EPA’s formal interpretations
of the SIP provisions at issue for
purposes of federal law.
(3) NOX Reporting Requirements
Under the CAIR model rule, facilities
that are subject to the Acid Rain
Program or the CAIR NOX and SO2
annual trading programs must report
emissions data year-round, but facilities
that are only subject to the NOX ozone
season trading program need only
submit NOX emission data to the State
during the ozone season. As noted
above, Connecticut is only required to
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
50310
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 169 / Friday, August 31, 2007 / Proposed Rules
participate in the CAIR NOX ozone
season program. However, Connecticut’s
proposed CAIR program requires
additional data reporting beyond that
required by the model CAIR NOX ozone
season rule. Specifically, all units
would be required to provide annual
reports of net electricity output and
useful steam output (or an estimate of
this steam output) for each control
period. New CAIR units would be
required to provide annual estimates of
the total number of hours of operation
for each control period. Units that are
not subject to an Acid Rain emissions
limitation and that are monitoring NOX
emissions using a CEMS (but not those
that are not monitoring using a CEMS)
would be required to report emissions
on a year-round basis.
EPA has determined that these
modifications of the CAIR NOX ozone
season trading rule in regard to
reporting of output data are acceptable.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
(4) Submittal of CAIR Allocations to
EPA
In the SIP revision, Connecticut
requires the State to provide EPA with
existing-unit CAIR allocations for each
control period beyond 2011 by October
31st of each year beginning in 2008. For
units starting operation after January 1,
2001 that are treated as new units, the
State would notify EPA of each unit’s
allocation by July 31st of the year for
which the CAIR allowances are
allocated. EPA has determined that
these proposed reporting deadlines are
acceptable.
E. Individual Opt-In Units
The opt-in provisions of the CAIR SIP
model trading rules allow certain nonEGUs (i.e., boilers, combustion turbines,
and other stationary fossil-fuel-fired
devices) that do not meet the
applicability criteria for a CAIR trading
program to participate voluntarily in
(i.e., opt into) the CAIR trading program.
A non-EGU may opt into one or more
of the CAIR trading programs. In order
to qualify to opt into a CAIR trading
program, a unit must vent all emissions
through a stack and be able to meet
monitoring, recordkeeping, and
recording requirements of 40 CFR part
75. The owners and operators seeking to
opt a unit into a CAIR trading program
must apply for a CAIR opt-in permit. If
the unit is issued a CAIR opt-in permit,
the unit becomes a CAIR unit, is
allocated allowances, and must meet the
same allowance-holding and emissions
monitoring and reporting requirements
as other units subject to the CAIR
trading program. The opt-in provisions
provide for two methodologies for
allocating allowances for opt-in units,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Aug 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
one methodology that applies to opt-in
units in general and a second
methodology that allocates allowances
only to opt-in units that the owners and
operators intend to repower before
January 1, 2015.
States have several options
concerning the opt-in provisions. States
may adopt the CAIR opt-in provisions
entirely or may adopt them but exclude
one of the methodologies for allocating
allowances. States may also decline to
adopt the opt-in provisions at all.
The Connecticut CAIR SIP does not
include opt-in provisions. Under the
model CAIR NOX ozone season trading
rule, the energy-output methodology
that Connecticut proposes to use to
allocate allowances cannot be used for
opt-in sources.
VI. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve
Connecticut’s full CAIR SIP revision
submitted on April 26, 2007, including
new RCSA section 22a–174–22c (‘‘The
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Ozone Season
Trading Program’’), repeal of existing
RCSA section 22a–174–22a (‘‘The
Connecticut NOX Budget Program’’), as
of May 1, 2009, and repeal of existing
RCSA section 22a–174–22b (‘‘The
Connecticut Post-2002 NOX Budget
Program’’), as of May 1, 2010. Under
this SIP revision, Connecticut is
choosing to participate in the EPAadministered cap-and-trade program for
NOX ozone-season emissions.
Connecticut’s proposed SIP revision
meets the applicable requirements in 40
CFR 51.123(o) and (aa), with regard to
NOX ozone-season emissions. EPA is
proposing to determine that the SIP as
revised will meet the requirements of
CAIR. As a consequence of the SIP
approval, the Administrator of EPA will
also issue, without providing an
opportunity for a public hearing or an
additional opportunity for written
public comment, a final rule to
withdraw the CAIR FIP concerning NOX
ozone-season emissions for Connecticut.
This action will delete and reserve 40
CFR 52.386.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
therefore is not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget. For
this reason, this action is also not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This action merely proposes
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to approve State law as meeting Federal
requirements and would impose no
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this
proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this action
proposes to approve pre-existing
requirements under State law and
would not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required
by State law, it does not contain any
unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4).
This proposal also does not have
tribal implications because it would not
have a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
proposed action also does not have
Federalism implications because it
would not have substantial direct effects
on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action
merely proposes to approve a State rule
implementing a Federal standard and
will result, as a consequence of that
approval, in the Administrator’s
withdrawal of the CAIR FIP. It does not
alter the relationship or the distribution
of power and responsibilities
established in the Clean Air Act. This
proposed rule also is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it would
approve a State rule implementing a
Federal Standard.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the
absence of a prior existing requirement
for the State to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 169 / Friday, August 31, 2007 / Proposed Rules
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. This proposed
rule would not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Electric utilities,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.
Dated: August 22, 2007.
Ira Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New
England.
[FR Doc. E7–17196 Filed 8–30–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket No. FEMA–B–7733 and FEMA–D–
7816]
Proposed Flood Elevation
Determinations
Federal Emergency
Management Agency, DHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Technical information or
comments are requested on the
proposed Base (1% annual chance)
Flood Elevations (BFEs) and proposed
BFEs modifications for the communities
listed below. The BFEs are the basis for
the floodplain management measures
that the community is required either to
adopt or to show evidence of being
Flooding source(s)
already in effect in order to qualify or
remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP).
DATES: The comment period is ninety
(90) days following the second
publication of this proposed rule in a
newspaper of local circulation in each
community.
ADDRESSES: The proposed BFEs for each
community are available for inspection
at the office of the Chief Executive
Officer of each community. The
respective addresses are listed in the
table below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William R. Blanton, Jr., Engineering
Management Section, Mitigation
Directorate, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–3151.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) proposes to make
determinations of BFEs and modified
BFEs for each community listed below,
in accordance with section 110 of the
Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973,
42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
These proposed BFEs and modified
BFEs, together with the floodplain
management criteria required by 44 CFR
60.3, are the minimum that are required.
They should not be construed to mean
that the community must change any
existing ordinances that are more
stringent in their floodplain
management requirements. The
community may at any time enact
stricter requirements of its own, or
pursuant to policies established by other
Federal, State or regional entities. These
proposed elevations are used to meet
the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP and are also
used to calculate the appropriate flood
insurance premium rates for new
buildings built after these elevations are
made final, and for the contents in these
buildings.
National Environmental Policy Act.
This proposed rule is categorically
excluded from the requirements of 44
CFR part 10, Environmental
Consideration. An environmental
impact assessment has not been
prepared.
Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood
elevation determinations are not within
the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, a regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required.
Regulatory Classification. This
proposed rule is not a significant
regulatory action under the criteria of
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of
September 30, 1993, Regulatory
Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism.
This proposed rule involves no policies
that have federalism implications under
Executive Order 13132.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform. This proposed rule meets the
applicable standards of Executive Order
12988.
List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67
Administrative practice and
procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 67—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 67
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.;
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR,
1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367,
3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.
§ 67.4
[Amended]
2. The tables published under the
authority of § 67.4 are proposed to be
amended as follows:
Elevation in
feet(NGVD)+Elevation in
feet(NAVD)#Depth in feet
above ground
Location of referenced elevation
Effective
Communities affected
Modified
Lowndes County, Georgia, and Incorporated Areas
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with PROPOSALS
Sugar Creek ........................
At Baytree Road .......................................................
None
*145 City of Remerton.
Approximately 1,100 feet downstream of the conNone
*148
fluence of One Mile Branch.
* National Geodetic Vertical Datum.
# Depth in feet above ground.
+ North American Vertical Datum.
ADDRESSES
City of Remerton
Maps are available for inspection at 1757 Poplar Street, Remerton, GA 31601.
Send comments to The Honorable Peggy Seifert, Mayor, City of Remerton, 1757 Poplar Street, Remerton, GA 31601.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:10 Aug 30, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
50311
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 169 (Friday, August 31, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50305-50311]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-17196]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R01-OAR-2007-0399; FRL-8462-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Connecticut; State Implementation Plan Revision To Implement the Clean
Air Interstate Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Connecticut
State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on April 26, 2007. This
revision addresses the requirements of EPA's Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR), promulgated on May 12, 2005 and subsequently revised on April
28, 2006 and December 13, 2006. EPA is proposing to determine that the
SIP revision fully implements the CAIR requirements for Connecticut.
Therefore, as a consequence of the SIP approval, EPA will also withdraw
the CAIR Federal Implementation Plan (CAIR FIP) concerning
NOX ozone-season emissions for Connecticut. The CAIR FIPs
for all States in the CAIR region were promulgated on April 28, 2006
and subsequently revised on December 13, 2006.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 1, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by FDMS Docket ID No. EPA-
R01-OAR-2007-0399, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918-0047.
4. Mail: ``FDMS Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-2007-0399'', Anne Arnold,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold,
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. ``FDMS Docket
ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-2007-0399''. EPA's policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public docket without change and may
be made available online at https://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through https://www.regulations.gov, your
e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters and any form of
encryption and should be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. In addition to publicly
available docket materials available electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov, the hard copy of these materials, including the
state submittal, is available at the Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at
all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions concerning
today's proposal, please contact Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Planning
Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional
Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023,
telephone number (617) 918-1684, fax number (617) 918-0684, e-mail
simcox.alison@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take?
[[Page 50306]]
II. What Is the Regulatory History of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP Submittals?
V. Analysis of Connecticut's CAIR SIP Submittal
A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations
B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs
C. Applicability Provisions for non-EGU NOX SIP Call
Sources
D. NOX Allowance Allocations
E. Individual Opt-in Units
VI. Proposed Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take?
EPA is proposing to approve a revision to Connecticut's SIP,
submitted on April 26, 2007. This SIP revision includes a new
regulation, Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA) section
22a-174-22c, ``The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) Nitrogen Oxides
(NOX) Ozone Season Trading Program'' (herein called
``Connecticut's proposed CAIR program''), repeal of RCSA section 22a-
174-22a (``The Connecticut NOX Budget Program''), as of May
1, 2009, and repeal of RCSA section 22a-174-22b, ``The Connecticut
Post-2002 NOX Budget Program'' (herein called the
``Connecticut NOX SIP Call trading program''), as of May 1,
2010. In its SIP revision, Connecticut would meet CAIR requirements by
requiring certain electric generating units (EGUs) to participate in
the EPA-administered State CAIR cap-and-trade program addressing
NOX ozone-season emissions. EPA is proposing to determine
that the Connecticut SIP as revised will meet the applicable
requirements of CAIR. Any final action approving the SIP will be taken
by the Regional Administrator for Region 1. As a consequence of the SIP
Approval, the Administrator of EPA will also issue a final rule to
withdraw the FIP concerning NOX ozone-season emissions for
Connecticut. This action will delete and reserve 40 CFR 52.386. The
withdrawal of the CAIR FIP for Connecticut is a conforming amendment
that must be made once the SIP is approved because EPA's authority to
issue the FIP was premised on a deficiency in the SIP for Connecticut.
Once the SIP is fully approved, EPA no longer has authority for the
FIP. Thus, EPA will not have the option of maintaining the FIP
following the full SIP approval. Accordingly, EPA does not intend to
offer an opportunity for a public hearing or an additional opportunity
for written public comment on the withdrawal of the FIP.
The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has
requested that EPA ``parallel process'' Connecticut's proposed CAIR SIP
revision. Under this procedure, EPA prepared this action before the
State's final adoption of the regulations included in the SIP revision.
The DEP held a public hearing on its proposed CAIR SIP revision on
October 19, 2006. The DEP has prepared a response to the comments
received on its proposal and has developed a ``post-hearing final
draft'' version of the regulations dated April 10, 2007. This is the
version of the regulations included in Connecticut's April 26, 2007 SIP
submittal to EPA and the subject of EPA's proposal.
On June 19, 2007, the Connecticut DEP received adverse comments
regarding the allocation methodology in its proposed CAIR program.
Consequently, the DEP may revise its proposed regulations before final
promulgation. After the DEP submits its final adopted regulations, EPA
will review these final regulations to determine whether they differ
from the ``post-hearing final draft'' version that is the subject of
this proposal. If Connecticut's final regulations do in fact differ
from the ``post-hearing final draft'' version, then EPA would need to
determine whether any of the changes are significant. Ordinarily,
changes that are limited to the allocation methodology would not be
deemed significant for SIP approval purposes, assuming the methodology
does not lead to allocations in excess of the total state budget. Based
on EPA's determination regarding the significance of any changes in the
final regulations, EPA would then decide whether it is appropriate to
prepare a final rule and describe the changes in the final rulemaking
action, or re-propose action based on the state's final adopted
regulations.
II. What Is the Regulatory History of the CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) was published by EPA on May
12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). In this rule, EPA determined that 28 States and
the District of Columbia contribute significantly to nonattainment and
interfere with maintenance of the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for fine particles (PM2.5) and/or 8-hour
ozone in downwind States in the eastern part of the country. As a
result, EPA required those upwind States to revise their SIPs to
include control measures that reduce emissions of SO2, which
is a precursor to PM2.5 formation, and/or NOX,
which is a precursor to both ozone and PM2.5 formation. For
jurisdictions that contribute significantly to downwind
PM2.5 nonattainment, CAIR sets annual State-wide emission
reduction requirements (i.e., budgets) for SO2 and annual
State-wide emission reduction requirements for NOX.
Similarly, for jurisdictions that contribute significantly to 8-hour
ozone nonattainment, CAIR sets State-wide emission reduction
requirements for NOX for the ozone season (May 1st to
September 30th). Under CAIR, States may implement these reduction
requirements by participating in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs or by adopting any other control measures.
CAIR explains to subject States what must be included in SIPs to
address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) with regard to interstate transport with respect to the 8-hour
ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA made national findings, effective
on May 25, 2005, that the States had failed to submit SIPs meeting the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D). The SIPs were due in July 2000, 3
years after the promulgation of the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS. These findings started a 2-year clock for EPA to promulgate a
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D). Under CAA section 110(c)(1), EPA may issue a FIP
anytime after such findings are made and must do so within two years
unless a SIP revision correcting the deficiency is approved by EPA
before the FIP is promulgated.
On April 28, 2006, EPA promulgated FIPs for all States covered by
CAIR in order to ensure the emissions reductions required by CAIR are
achieved on schedule. Each CAIR State is subject to the FIPs until the
State fully adopts, and EPA approves, a SIP revision meeting the
requirements of CAIR. The CAIR FIPs require EGUs to participate in the
EPA-administered CAIR SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season trading programs, as appropriate. The CAIR
FIP SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone
season trading programs impose essentially the same requirements as,
and are integrated with, the respective CAIR SIP trading programs. The
integration of the FIP and SIP trading programs means that these
trading programs will work together to create effectively a single
trading program for each regulated pollutant (SO2,
NOX annual, and NOX ozone-season) in all States
covered by the CAIR FIP or SIP trading program for that pollutant. The
CAIR FIPs also allow States to submit abbreviated SIP revisions that,
if approved by EPA, will automatically
[[Page 50307]]
replace or supplement certain CAIR FIP provisions (e.g., the
methodology for allocating NOX allowances to sources in the
State), while the CAIR FIP remains in place for all other provisions.
On April 28, 2006, EPA published two additional CAIR-related final
rules that added the States of Delaware and New Jersey to the list of
States subject to CAIR for PM2.5 and announced EPA's final
decisions on reconsideration of five issues, without making any
substantive changes to the CAIR requirements.
III. What Are the General Requirements of CAIR and the CAIR FIPs?
CAIR establishes State-wide emission budgets for SO2 and
NOX and is to be implemented in two phases. The first phase
of NOX reductions starts in 2009 and continues through 2014,
while the first phase of SO2 reductions starts in 2010 and
continues through 2014. The second phase of reductions for both
NOX and SO2 starts in 2015 and continues
thereafter. CAIR requires States to implement the budgets by either:
(1) Requiring EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade
programs; or (2) adopting other control measures of the State's
choosing and demonstrating that such control measures will result in
compliance with the applicable State SO2 and NOX
budgets.
The May 12, 2005 and April 28, 2006 CAIR rules provide model rules
that States must adopt (with certain limited changes, if desired) if
they want to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs.
With two exceptions, only States that choose to meet the
requirements of CAIR through methods that exclusively regulate EGUs are
allowed to participate in the EPA-administered trading programs. One
exception is for States that adopt the opt-in provisions of the model
rules to allow non-EGUs individually to opt into the EPA-administered
trading programs. The other exception is for States that include all
units from their NOX SIP Call trading programs in their CAIR
NOX ozone season trading programs.
IV. What Are the Types of CAIR SIP Submittals?
States have the flexibility to choose the type of control measures
they will use to meet the requirements of CAIR. EPA anticipates that
most States will choose to meet the CAIR requirements by selecting an
option that requires EGUs to participate in the EPA-administered CAIR
cap-and-trade programs. For such States, EPA has provided two
approaches for submitting and obtaining approval for CAIR SIP
revisions. States may submit full SIP revisions that adopt the model
CAIR cap-and-trade rules. If approved, these SIP revisions will fully
replace the CAIR FIPs. Alternatively, States may submit abbreviated SIP
revisions. These SIP revisions will not replace the CAIR FIPs; however,
the CAIR FIPs provide that, when approved, the provisions in these
abbreviated SIP revisions will be used instead of or in conjunction
with, as appropriate, the corresponding provisions of the CAIR FIPs
(e.g., the NOX allowance allocation methodology).
A State submitting a full SIP revision may either adopt regulations
that are substantively identical to the model rules or incorporate by
reference the model rules. CAIR provides that States may only make
limited changes to the model rules if the States want to participate in
the EPA-administered trading programs. A full SIP revision may change
the model rules only by altering their applicability and allowance
allocation provisions to:
1. Include NOX SIP Call trading sources that are not
EGUs under CAIR in the CAIR NOX ozone season trading
program;
2. Provide for State allocation of NOX annual or ozone
season allowances using a methodology chosen by the State;
3. Provide for State allocation of NOX annual allowances
from the compliance supplement pool (CSP) using the State's choice of
allowed, alternative methodologies; or
4. Allow units that are not otherwise CAIR units to opt
individually into the CAIR SO2, NOX annual, or
NOX ozone season trading programs under the opt-in
provisions in the model rules.
An approved CAIR full SIP revision addressing EGUs' SO2,
NOX annual, or NOX ozone-season emissions will
replace the CAIR FIP for that State for the respective EGU emissions.
V. Analysis of Connecticut's CAIR SIP Submittal
A. State Budgets for Allowance Allocations
The CAIR NOX annual and ozone-season budgets were
developed from historical heat input data for EGUs. Using these data,
EPA calculated annual and ozone season regional heat input values,
which were multiplied by 0.15 pounds per million British thermal units
(lb/mmBtu), for phase 1 of the CAIR program (2009-2014) and by 0.125
lb/mmBtu, for phase 2 of the CAIR program (2015 and thereafter) to
obtain regional NOX budgets for 2009-2014 and for 2015 and
thereafter, respectively. EPA derived the State NOX annual
and ozone-season budgets from the regional budgets using State heat
input data adjusted by fuel factors. Connecticut, however, is only
required to participate in the CAIR NOX ozone season program
and not the CAIR NOX annual or SO2 trading
programs. Therefore, only CAIR NOX ozone-season budgets
apply to the Connecticut CAIR program.
In today's action, EPA is proposing approval of Connecticut's SIP
revision, which will be codified at RCSA section 22a-174-22c. This SIP
revision adopts the budget established for the State in CAIR, i.e.,
2,559 tons of NOX ozone-season emissions for CAIR phases 1
and 2, plus an additional 132 tons of NOX ozone-season
emissions for both phases 1 and 2 to account for NOX
emissions from ``non-EGUs'' from the Connecticut NOX SIP
Call trading program (see section V.B. below). The total NOX
ozone-season budget is therefore 2,691 tons of NOX ozone-
season emissions for CAIR phases 1 and 2. Connecticut's SIP revision
sets this budget as the total number of allowances (with each allowance
authorizing one ton of NOX ozone-season emissions) available
for allocation for each year under the EPA-administered CAIR cap-and-
trade program.
B. CAIR Cap-and-Trade Programs
The CAIR NOX annual and ozone-season model trading rules
both largely mirror the structure of the NOX SIP Call model
trading rule in 40 CFR part 96, subparts A through I. While the
provisions of the NOX annual and ozone-season model rules
are similar, there are some differences. For example, the
NOX ozone-season model rule reflects the fact that the CAIR
NOX ozone season trading program replaces the NOX
SIP Call trading program after the 2008 ozone season and is coordinated
with the NOX SIP Call program. The NOX ozone-
season model rule provides incentives for early emissions reductions by
allowing banked, pre-2009 NOX SIP Call allowances to be used
for compliance in the CAIR NOX ozone season trading program.
In addition, States have the option of continuing to meet their
NOX SIP Call requirement by participating in the CAIR
NOX ozone season trading program and including all their
NOX SIP Call trading sources in that program. Connecticut
has decided to exercise the option of including all its NOX
SIP Call units in its State CAIR program. Therefore, the Connecticut
CAIR SIP revision includes amendments to the Connecticut NOX
SIP Call trading
[[Page 50308]]
program (RCSA section 22a-174-22b) such that the NOX SIP
Call trading program applies for the control periods from 2003 through
2008, but is then superseded by the Connecticut CAIR program beginning
with the control period in 2009.
EPA also used the CAIR model trading rules as the basis for the
trading programs in the CAIR FIPs. The CAIR FIP trading rules are
virtually identical to the CAIR model trading rules, with changes made
to account for federal rather than state implementation. The CAIR model
SO2, NOX annual, and NOX ozone season
trading rules and the respective CAIR FIP trading rules are designed to
work together as integrated SO2, NOX annual, and
NOX ozone season trading programs.
In the SIP revision, Connecticut proposes to implement its CAIR
budgets by requiring EGUs (as well as ``non-EGUs'' from its
NOX SIP Call trading program, as discussed below) to
participate in EPA-administered cap-and-trade programs for
NOX ozone-season emissions. Connecticut is proposing a full
SIP revision that adopts, with certain allowed changes discussed below,
the CAIR model cap-and-trade rules for NOX ozone season
emissions.
C. Applicability Provisions for Non-EGU NOX SIP Call Sources
In general, the CAIR model trading rules apply to any stationary,
fossil-fuel-fired boiler or stationary, fossil-fuel-fired combustion
turbine serving at any time, since the later of November 15, 1990 or
the start-up of the unit's combustion chamber, a generator with
nameplate capacity of more than 25 MWe producing electricity for sale.
States have the option of bringing in, for the CAIR NOX
ozone season program only, those units in the State's NOX
SIP Call trading program that are not EGUs as defined under CAIR
(herein called ``non-EGUs''). EPA advises States exercising this option
to add the applicability provisions in the State's NOX SIP
Call trading rule for ``non-EGUs'' to the applicability provisions in
40 CFR 96.304 in order to include in the CAIR NOX ozone
season trading program all units required to be in the State's
NOX SIP Call trading program that are not already included
under 40 CFR 96.304. Under this option, the CAIR NOX ozone
season program must cover all large industrial boilers and combustion
turbines, as well as any small EGUs (i.e. units serving a generator
with a nameplate capacity of 25 MWe or less) that the State currently
requires to be in the NOX SIP Call trading program.
In the SIP revision, Connecticut proposes to expand the
applicability provisions of the CAIR NOX ozone season
trading program to include all units in the State's NOX SIP
Call trading program, plus Exeter Energy, which is a waste-tire-fired
unit that EPA has determined meets the definition of a NOX
SIP Call unit and a CAIR unit. Units in the Connecticut NOX
SIP Call trading program include EGUs of 15 MW or more and non-EGUs
(such as industrial boilers and combustion turbines) with a maximum
design heat input of 250 MMBtu/hr or more. These units will be included
in the Connecticut CAIR program beginning with the control period in
2009.
EPA has determined that Connecticut's proposed SIP revision
includes the allowable CAIR applicability provisions relating to adding
all NOX SIP Call trading-program units to the Connecticut
CAIR NOX ozone season program.
D. NOX Allowance Allocations
Deadlines: There is one technical flaw in the SIP revision, but EPA
is proposing to approve the SIP revision despite this flaw. CAIR
requires states to submit to EPA the initial allocations for EGUs that
started operation before 2001 by October 31, 2006. Connecticut's
proposed SIP revision does not meet this requirement, nor did the state
in fact submit those allocations by this date. However, the purpose of
this date was to allow EPA sufficient time to process the allocations
data. EPA now has the allocations, and no outside party was prejudiced
by Connecticut's failure to meet this date.
Specifically, according to 40 CFR 51.123(aa)(2)(iii)(C), for a full
SIP revision, ``[t]he State's methodology must require that, for EGUs
commencing operation before January 1, 2001, the State will determine,
and notify the Administrator of, each unit's allocation of CAIR
NOX allowances by October 31, 2006 for the ozone seasons
2009, 2010, and 2011.'' Connecticut's proposed SIP revision does not
meet this requirement because it does not require that the State submit
the 2009-2011 allocations for pre-2001 EGUs by October 31, 2006.
Instead, Connecticut's SIP revision requires that it submit, and in
fact it did submit, these allocations by April 30, 2007, the deadline
that is applicable to abbreviated SIP revisions under 40 CFR
51.123(ee)(2)(ii)(C).
Since Connecticut has submitted a full SIP revision, not an
abbreviated SIP revision, this failure to require that the State will
submit allocations by October 31, 2006 is technically a deficiency in
the SIP. However, this does not render the SIP unapprovable. The
purpose of the October 31, 2006 deadline, as mentioned above, was to
allow EPA's Clean Air Markets Division sufficient time to process the
allocations. At this point, the deadline has elapsed; Connecticut has,
in fact, submitted its allocations; and the Clean Air Markets Division
is fully able to process the allocations despite having received them
later than CAIR envisions. Potentially regulated entities received
ample notice of Connecticut's plan for allocations when the State's
program was submitted for public comment on the state level.
Furthermore, in the context of this action, it makes no difference
whether EPA would have received the 2009-2011 allocations in April of
this year or October of last year, since EPA has, in fact, received
them well before the date of this document. No party is prejudiced by
the deficiency, since the deadline has passed, and any interested party
has a full opportunity to comment on any aspect of this proposed
action. Moreover, with Connecticut's April 2007 submission of the
allocations, EPA will still be able--after final approval of the SIP
revision--to record them in 2007 and, thereby, provide the allowances
to owners and operators sufficiently in advance of the 2009-2011
control periods. In sum, EPA has determined that the interests of the
public, potentially regulated entities, and EPA itself, including those
interests which 40 CFR 51.123(aa)(2)(iii)(C) sought to protect, have
been adequately met by the proposed SIP revision's adoption and, more
importantly, actual submission of 2009-2011 allocation data by April
30, 2007. Consequently, EPA proposes to approve this SIP revision
despite Connecticut's failure to meet the requirements of 40 CFR
51.123(aa)(2)(iii)(C).
NOX allowance-allocation methodology: Under the NOX
allowance-allocation methodology in the CAIR model trading rules and in
the CAIR FIP, NOX annual and ozone-season allowances are
allocated to units that have operated for five years (i.e., ``existing
units''), based on heat input data from a three-year period that are
adjusted for fuel type by using fuel factors of 1.0 for coal, 0.6 for
oil, and 0.4 for other fuels. The CAIR model trading rules and the CAIR
FIP also provide a new unit set-aside from which units without five
years of operation are allocated allowances based on the units' prior
year emissions.
States may establish in their SIP submissions a different
NOX allowance-allocation methodology that will be used to
allocate allowances to sources in
[[Page 50309]]
the States if certain requirements are met concerning the timing of
submission of units' allocations to the Administrator for recordation
and the total amount of allowances allocated for each control period.
In adopting alternative NOX allowance-allocation
methodologies, States have flexibility with regard to:
1. The cost to recipients of the allowances, which may be
distributed for free or auctioned;
2. The frequency of allocations;
3. The basis for allocating allowances, which may be distributed,
for example, based on historical heat input or electric and thermal
output; and
4. The use of allowance set-asides and, if used, their size.
In the SIP revision, Connecticut proposes to replace the provisions
of the CAIR NOX ozone-season model trading rule concerning
allowance allocations with its own methodology. For most fossil-fuel-
fired units, Connecticut proposes to allocate NOX ozone-
season allowances largely based on electric and thermal output, rather
than heat input. For cogeneration units, certain industrial boilers or
indirect heat exchangers, and waste-tire-fired units, Connecticut
proposes to allocate allowances based on the unit's actual or permitted
NOX emission rate. Connecticut also provides a percentage of
allowances for an energy efficiency/renewable energy set-aside and a
new unit set-aside.
(1) What Types of Set-Asides Are Included in Connecticut CAIR?
In the SIP revision, Connecticut proposes to include in its CAIR
program both an energy efficiency/renewable energy set-aside (EERESA)
to encourage Energy Efficiency Projects (EEPs), Renewable Energy
Projects (REPs), and Qualifying Other Project (QOPs), and a new unit
set-aside to allow for addition of new units.
Connecticut defines a new unit as any fossil-fuel-fired unit that
began operating on or after January 1, 2006 and that serves a generator
that produces electricity at an output of 15 MWe or more. A unit is
considered to be a new unit for 6 ozone-season control periods (or
portion thereof) following the date of initial operation. This change
in status means that a Connecticut CAIR ``new unit'' will then become a
Connecticut CAIR ``existing unit.''
Connecticut proposes to establish a new unit set-aside at 7 percent
of the State's CAIR budget during CAIR phase 1 (2009-2014), and at 5
percent of the State's CAIR budget during CAIR phase 2 (2015 and
thereafter). Therefore, the new unit set-aside would include 200 CAIR
NOX ozone-season allowances during CAIR phase 1, and 134
allowances during CAIR phase 2.
Connecticut proposes to establish an EERESA at 10 percent of the
State's CAIR budget for both phases of the CAIR program. Therefore, the
EERESA would include 268 CAIR NOX allowances for the 2009
and subsequent ozone-season control periods.
(2) Methodology for Allocating CAIR Allowances
Connecticut is proposing to replace the provisions of the CAIR
NOX ozone-season model trading rule concerning allowance
allocations with a largely output-based methodology. Under
Connecticut's proposed SIP revision, most fossil-fuel-fired units would
receive allocations based on their average net electricity output,
without adjustments for fuel type. For cogeneration, industrial, and
waste-tire-fired units, Connecticut proposes to allocate allowances
based on the units' actual or permitted NOX emission rates
and average heat input.
EPA has identified two potential ambiguities in the allocation
provisions of Connecticut's proposed CAIR program, and asked the
Connecticut DEP for its interpretations. The Connecticut DEP (Wendy
Jacobs, Bureau of Air Management) responded by electronic mail on June
20, 2007. After reviewing the Connecticut DEP's interpretations as
stated in that electronic mail message, EPA interprets the provisions
involved as follows.
First, the proposed regulation uses the term ``NOX
allowance'' in three places. See RCSA sections 22a-174-22c(c)(2), 22a-
174-22c(c)(3)(B), 22a-174-22c(g)(4). However, this term is defined
neither in the proposed SIP revision nor in the CAIR model rule.
According to the Connecticut DEP, the term ``NOX allowance''
when used in RCSA section 22a-174-22c is identical to the term ``CAIR
NOX Ozone Season allowance'' as defined at 40 CFR 96.302.
EPA adopts this interpretation.
Second, under RCSA sections 22a-174-22c(e)(7)(A) and (B) and 22a-
174-22c(e)(8)(A), there is no limit to the number of allowances that
can be allocated to cogeneration units, industrial units, waste-tire-
fired units, or Phase I units in any control period. In theory, these
provisions could operate to allocate more allowances to cogeneration
units, industrial units, waste-tire-fired units, or Phase I units than
are available in Connecticut's CAIR NOX ozone-season budget.
That said, RCSA sections 22a-174-22c(e)(2) and 22a-174-22c(e)(3), which
authorize the Connecticut DEP to allocate CAIR NOX ozone
season allowances, state the maximum number of allowances available for
allocation for all units other than new units.
According to the Connecticut DEP, RCSA sections 22a-174-
22c(e)(7)(A) and 22a-174-22c(e)(8)(A) are modeled after analogous
provisions in the Connecticut NOX Budget Program and the
Connecticut NOX SIP Call trading program, and under those
programs, the allocations for cogeneration units and industrial units
have never resulted in a shortage of allowances for units in other
categories. The DEP suggests that if the data support allocating
allowances to cogeneration units, industrial units and waste-tire-fired
units on an output basis, or if there are a significant number of new
entrants into these categories, DEP may revise its CAIR program to
allocate to these categories on an output basis.
For purposes of construing Connecticut's proposed SIP revision, EPA
interprets RCSA sections 22a-174-22c(e)(2) and 22a-174-22c(e)(3) to
prohibit the Connecticut DEP from allocating allowances in excess of
the total state budget, and to control in any conflict with RCSA
sections 22a-174-22c(e)(7)(A) and (B) and 22a-174-22c(e)(8)(A). Thus,
if the operation of RCSA sections 22a-174-22c(e)(7)(A)-(B) and/or 22a-
174-22c(e)(8)(A) were to yield allowances for cogeneration units,
industrial units, waste-tire-fired units, or Phase I units in excess of
the state budget, either by themselves or in combination with
allocations to other categories, then RCSA sections 22a-174-22c(e)(2)
and 22a-174-22c(e)(3) would require the Connecticut DEP to recalculate
or reallocate allowances so as not to exceed the state budget.
EPA is relying on this interpretation of Connecticut's proposed SIP
revision for the purposes of approving it as meeting the requirements
of the Act and the CAIR program. If EPA does not receive comments to
the contrary from the Connecticut DEP or any other party during the
public comment period, the interpretations stated above will represent
EPA's formal interpretations of the SIP provisions at issue for
purposes of federal law.
(3) NOX Reporting Requirements
Under the CAIR model rule, facilities that are subject to the Acid
Rain Program or the CAIR NOX and SO2 annual
trading programs must report emissions data year-round, but facilities
that are only subject to the NOX ozone season trading
program need only submit NOX emission data to the State
during the ozone season. As noted above, Connecticut is only required
to
[[Page 50310]]
participate in the CAIR NOX ozone season program. However,
Connecticut's proposed CAIR program requires additional data reporting
beyond that required by the model CAIR NOX ozone season
rule. Specifically, all units would be required to provide annual
reports of net electricity output and useful steam output (or an
estimate of this steam output) for each control period. New CAIR units
would be required to provide annual estimates of the total number of
hours of operation for each control period. Units that are not subject
to an Acid Rain emissions limitation and that are monitoring
NOX emissions using a CEMS (but not those that are not
monitoring using a CEMS) would be required to report emissions on a
year-round basis.
EPA has determined that these modifications of the CAIR
NOX ozone season trading rule in regard to reporting of
output data are acceptable.
(4) Submittal of CAIR Allocations to EPA
In the SIP revision, Connecticut requires the State to provide EPA
with existing-unit CAIR allocations for each control period beyond 2011
by October 31st of each year beginning in 2008. For units starting
operation after January 1, 2001 that are treated as new units, the
State would notify EPA of each unit's allocation by July 31st of the
year for which the CAIR allowances are allocated. EPA has determined
that these proposed reporting deadlines are acceptable.
E. Individual Opt-In Units
The opt-in provisions of the CAIR SIP model trading rules allow
certain non-EGUs (i.e., boilers, combustion turbines, and other
stationary fossil-fuel-fired devices) that do not meet the
applicability criteria for a CAIR trading program to participate
voluntarily in (i.e., opt into) the CAIR trading program. A non-EGU may
opt into one or more of the CAIR trading programs. In order to qualify
to opt into a CAIR trading program, a unit must vent all emissions
through a stack and be able to meet monitoring, recordkeeping, and
recording requirements of 40 CFR part 75. The owners and operators
seeking to opt a unit into a CAIR trading program must apply for a CAIR
opt-in permit. If the unit is issued a CAIR opt-in permit, the unit
becomes a CAIR unit, is allocated allowances, and must meet the same
allowance-holding and emissions monitoring and reporting requirements
as other units subject to the CAIR trading program. The opt-in
provisions provide for two methodologies for allocating allowances for
opt-in units, one methodology that applies to opt-in units in general
and a second methodology that allocates allowances only to opt-in units
that the owners and operators intend to repower before January 1, 2015.
States have several options concerning the opt-in provisions.
States may adopt the CAIR opt-in provisions entirely or may adopt them
but exclude one of the methodologies for allocating allowances. States
may also decline to adopt the opt-in provisions at all.
The Connecticut CAIR SIP does not include opt-in provisions. Under
the model CAIR NOX ozone season trading rule, the energy-
output methodology that Connecticut proposes to use to allocate
allowances cannot be used for opt-in sources.
VI. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve Connecticut's full CAIR SIP revision
submitted on April 26, 2007, including new RCSA section 22a-174-22c
(``The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) Nitrogen Oxides
(NOX) Ozone Season Trading Program''), repeal of existing
RCSA section 22a-174-22a (``The Connecticut NOX Budget
Program''), as of May 1, 2009, and repeal of existing RCSA section 22a-
174-22b (``The Connecticut Post-2002 NOX Budget Program''),
as of May 1, 2010. Under this SIP revision, Connecticut is choosing to
participate in the EPA-administered cap-and-trade program for
NOX ozone-season emissions. Connecticut's proposed SIP
revision meets the applicable requirements in 40 CFR 51.123(o) and
(aa), with regard to NOX ozone-season emissions. EPA is
proposing to determine that the SIP as revised will meet the
requirements of CAIR. As a consequence of the SIP approval, the
Administrator of EPA will also issue, without providing an opportunity
for a public hearing or an additional opportunity for written public
comment, a final rule to withdraw the CAIR FIP concerning
NOX ozone-season emissions for Connecticut. This action will
delete and reserve 40 CFR 52.386.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal requirements
and would impose no additional requirements beyond those imposed by
State law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.). Because this action proposes to approve pre-existing
requirements under State law and would not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required by State law, it does not contain
any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104-4).
This proposal also does not have tribal implications because it
would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This proposed action also
does not have Federalism implications because it would not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This
action merely proposes to approve a State rule implementing a Federal
standard and will result, as a consequence of that approval, in the
Administrator's withdrawal of the CAIR FIP. It does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established in the Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it would approve a State rule implementing a Federal
Standard.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the
[[Page 50311]]
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) do not apply. This proposed rule would not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Electric
utilities, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
dioxide.
Dated: August 22, 2007.
Ira Leighton,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. E7-17196 Filed 8-30-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
