Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Permits for Construction and Major Modification of Major Stationary Sources Which Cause or Contribute to Nonattainment Areas, 6491-6495 [2015-02304]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules
2008 Lead NAAQS for the Hillsborough
Area by no later than five years after the
Area was designated nonattainment.
The modeling indicates that the
Hillsborough Area will have attaining
data for the 2008 Lead NAAQS by
December 31, 2015. While there were
violations of the 2008 lead NAAQS in
2013, they occurred during the limited
time frame in which the facility was
undergoing construction to modernize
the facility which included building an
enclosure that is expected to reduce
emissions of lead significantly.
Notwithstanding the violations, EPA
believes that these violations, which
occurred as part of enclosure and
modernization of the facility in order to
achieve a significant permanent
reduction in lead emissions, do not
render Florida’s attainment
demonstration unapprovable. There
have been no violations of the 2008
Lead NAAQS since the last quarter of
2013 which directly corresponds with
the installation of the final set of
controls for the modernization. EPA
does not believe that the facility could
have achieved the 2008 Lead NAAQS
more expeditiously than the current
schedule. Therefore, EPA is proposing
to approve the State’s submission
related to achievement of the 2008 Lead
NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable.
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
V. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve Florida’s
lead attainment plan for the
Hillsborough Area. EPA has
preliminarily determined that the SIP
meets the applicable requirements of the
CAA. Specifically, EPA is proposing to
approve Florida’s June 29, 2012
submittal, as amended on June 27, 2013,
which includes the attainment
demonstration, base year emissions
inventory, RACM/RACT analysis,
contingency measures and RFP plan.
The requirement for a RFP plan is
satisfied because the State of Florida
demonstrated that the Area will attain
the 2008 Lead NAAQS as expeditiously
as practicable, and could not implement
any additional measures to attain the
NAAQS any sooner.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submittal that
complies with the provisions of the Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42
U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus,
in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed
action merely approves state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:44 Feb 04, 2015
Jkt 235001
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, October 7,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Reporting and Recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
6491
Dated: January 26, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2015–02335 Filed 2–4–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0792; FRL–9922–51–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; West
Virginia; Permits for Construction and
Major Modification of Major Stationary
Sources Which Cause or Contribute to
Nonattainment Areas
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to grant
approval to four State Implementation
Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection for the State
of West Virginia on June 29, 2010, July
8, 2011, July 6, 2012, and July 1, 2014
with the exception of certain revisions
related to ethanol production facilities
on which EPA is taking no action at this
time. These revisions proposed for
approval pertain to West Virginia’s
nonattainment New Source Review
(NSR) program, notably provisions for
preconstruction permitting
requirements for major sources of fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) and NSR
reform. This action is being taken under
the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before March 9, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2014–0792 by one of the
following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. Email: kreider.andrew@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0792,
Andrew Kreider, Acting Associate
Director, Office of Permits and Air
Toxics, Mailcode 3AP10, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05FEP1.SGM
05FEP1
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
6492
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2014–
0792. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, and may be
made available online at
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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The 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 email
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov, your
email 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, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
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. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business
hours at the Air Protection Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Copies of the State submittal are
available at the West Virginia
Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601
57th Street SE., Charleston, West
Virginia 25304.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Mike Gordon, (215) 814–2039, or by
email at gordon.mike@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:44 Feb 04, 2015
Jkt 235001
I. Background
The WVDEP submitted four SIP
revisions to EPA on June 29, 2010 (the
2010 submittal), July 8, 2011 (the 2011
submittal), July 6, 2012 (the 2012
submittal) and July 1, 2014 (the 2014
submittal). While each of the SIP
revisions was submitted individually,
EPA is acting on these submittals as a
whole. There are some instances where
specific language was added in a West
Virginia regulation included in one of
the earlier SIP submittals but the
language was subsequently removed
from that same regulation included in a
later SIP submittal such that EPA
therefore only assessed the
approvability of that portion of the
regulation included in the later SIP
submittal. It should be noted that the
most recent version of West Virginia’s
nonattainment NSR regulations is the
version included for SIP approval in the
2014 submittal, and this submittal
reflects the sum of the changes made
from the 2010, 2011, and 2012
submittals as well.1 A summary of the
changes made in each of the four
submittals has been included in the
docket for this action under ‘‘Summary
of West Virginia NSR Changes.’’ These
SIP revision requests, if approved,
would revise West Virginia’s currently
approved nonattainment NSR program
by amending Series 19 under Title 45 of
West Virginia Code of State Rules
(45CSR19). Generally, the revisions
incorporate provisions related to the
2008 ‘‘Implementation of the New
Source Review (NSR) Program for
Particulate Matter Less than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5)’’ (2008 NSR PM2.5
Rule; 73 FR 28321), the 2007
‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration,
Nonattainment New Source Review, and
Title V: Treatment of Certain Ethanol
Production Facilities Under the ‘Major
Emitting Facility’ Definition’’ (2007
Ethanol Rule; 72 FR 24060), as well as
updates as a result of the 2002 rule
‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) and Nonattainment NSR (NSR):
Baseline Emissions Determination,
Actual-to-Future-Actual Methodology,
Plantwide Applicability Limitations,
Clean Units, Pollution Control Projects’’
(2002 NSR Reform Rules; 67 FR 80186).
The 2002 NSR Reform Rules made
changes to five areas of the NSR
programs. In summary, the 2002 Rules:
(1) Provided a new method for
determining baseline actual emissions;
1 EPA, however, is proposing to act on all four SIP
submittals in this document because each submittal
contains necessary procedural information related
to West Virginia’s revisions to its nonattainment
NSR regulations and development of its SIP
submittals, which are required for SIP revisions by
40 CFR parts 51 and 52.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(2) adopted an actual-to-projected-actual
methodology for determining whether a
major modification has occurred; (3)
allowed major stationary sources to
comply with a Plantwide Applicability
Limit (PAL) to avoid having a
significant emissions increase that
triggers the requirements of the major
NSR program; (4) provided a new
applicability provision for emissions
units that are designated clean units;
and (5) excluded pollution control
projects (PCPs) from the definition of
‘‘physical change or change in the
method of operation.’’ On November 7,
2003, EPA published a notice of final
action on its reconsideration of the 2002
NSR Reform Rules,2 which added a
definition for ‘‘replacement unit’’ and
clarified an issue regarding PALs. For
additional information on the 2002 NSR
Reform Rules, see EPA’s December 31,
2002 final rulemaking action entitled:
‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) and Nonattainment NSR (NSR):
Baseline Emissions Determination,
Actual-to-Future-Actual Methodology,
Plantwide Applicability Limitations,
Clean Units, Pollution Control Projects’’
(67 FR 80186), the 2003 final
reconsideration: ‘‘Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Non-Attainment New Source Review
(NSR): Reconsideration’’ (68 FR 63021),
and https://www.epa.gov/nsr.
After the 2002 NSR Reform Rules
were finalized, industry, state, and
environmental petitioners challenged
numerous aspects of the 2002 NSR
Reform Rules, along with portions of
EPA’s 1980 NSR Rules (45 FR 52676,
August 7, 1980). On June 24, 2005, the
United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit)
issued a decision on the challenges to
the 2002 NSR Reform Rules. New York
v. United States, 413 F.3d 3 (D.C. Cir.
2005) (New York I).
In summary, the D.C. Circuit vacated
portions of the rules pertaining to clean
units and PCPs, remanded a portion of
the rules regarding recordkeeping and
the term ‘‘reasonable possibility’’ found
in 40 CFR 52.21(r)(6) and 40 CFR
51.166(r)(6), and either upheld or did
not comment on the other provisions
included as part of the 2002 NSR
Reform Rules. On June 13, 2007 (72 FR
32526), EPA took final action to revise
the 2002 NSR Reform Rules to remove
from federal law all provisions
pertaining to clean units and the PCP
exemption that were vacated by the D.C.
Circuit.
2 See ‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) and Non-Attainment New Source Review
(NSR): Reconsideration.’’ 68 FR 63021.
E:\FR\FM\05FEP1.SGM
05FEP1
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules
The 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule (as well as
the 2007 ‘‘Final Clean Air Fine Particle
Implementation Rule’’ (2007 PM2.5
Implementation Rule) 3), was also the
subject of litigation before the D.C.
Circuit in Natural Resources Defense
Council v. EPA.4 On January 4, 2013,
the court remanded to EPA both the
2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule and
the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule. The court
found that in both rules EPA erred in
implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS
solely pursuant to the general
implementation provisions of subpart 1
of part D of title I of the CAA (subpart
1), rather than pursuant to the
additional implementation provisions
specific to particulate matter in subpart
4 of part D of title I (subpart 4).5 As a
result, the court remanded both rules
and instructed EPA ‘‘to re-promulgate
these rules pursuant to subpart 4
consistent with this opinion.’’ 6
Although the D.C. Circuit declined to
establish a deadline for EPA’s response,
EPA intends to respond promptly to the
court’s remand and to promulgate new
generally applicable implementation
regulations for the PM2.5 NAAQS in
accordance with the requirements of
subpart 4. In the interim, however,
states and EPA still need to proceed
with implementation of the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS in a timely and effective
fashion in order to meet statutory
obligations under the CAA and to assure
the protection of public health intended
by those NAAQS.
On April 25, 2014, the Administrator
signed a final rulemaking that begins to
address the remand (see https://
www.epa.gov/airquality/
particlepollution/actions.html). Upon
its effective date, the final rule classifies
all existing PM2.5 nonattainment areas as
‘‘Moderate’’ nonattainment areas and
sets a deadline of December 31, 2014,
for states to submit any SIP
submissions, including nonattainment
NSR SIPs, that may be necessary to
satisfy the requirements of subpart 4
with respect to PM2.5 nonattainment
areas.
In a separate rulemaking process that
will follow the April 2014 rule, EPA is
evaluating the requirements of subpart 4
as they pertain to, among other things,
nonattainment NSR for PM2.5 emissions.
With respect to nonattainment NSR in
particular, subpart 4 includes section
189(e) of the CAA, which requires the
3 72
FR 20586 (April 25, 2007).
4 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
5 The court’s opinion did not specifically address
the point that implementation under subpart 4
requirements would still require consideration of
subpart 1 requirements, to the extent that subpart
4 did not override subpart 1.
6 Id. at 437.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:44 Feb 04, 2015
Jkt 235001
control of major stationary sources of
coarse particulate matter (PM10)
precursors ‘‘except where the
Administrator determines that such
sources do not contribute significantly
to PM10 levels which exceed the
standard in the area.’’ Under the D.C.
Circuit’s decision in NRDC, section
189(e) of the CAA also applies to PM2.5.
Additionally, the 2008 NSR PM2.5
Rule authorized states to adopt
provisions in their nonattainment NSR
rules that would allow major stationary
sources and major modifications
locating in areas designated
nonattainment for PM2.5 to offset
emissions increases of direct PM2.5
emissions or PM2.5 precursors with
reductions of either direct PM2.5
emissions or PM2.5 precursors in
accordance with offset ratios contained
in the approved SIP for the applicable
nonattainment area. The inclusion, in
whole or in part, of the interpollutant
offset provisions for PM2.5 is
discretionary on the part of the states. In
the preamble to the 2008 NSR PM2.5
Rule, EPA included preferred or
presumptive offset ratios, applicable to
specific PM2.5 precursors that states may
adopt in conjunction with the new
interpollutant offset provisions for
PM2.5, and for which the state could rely
on the EPA’s technical work to
demonstrate the adequacy of the ratios
for use in any PM2.5 nonattainment area.
Alternatively, the preamble indicated
that states may adopt their own ratios,
subject to the EPA’s approval, that
would have to be substantiated by
modeling or other technical
demonstrations of the net air quality
benefit for ambient PM2.5
concentrations. The preferred ratios
were subsequently the subject of a
petition for reconsideration, which the
EPA Administrator granted. EPA
continues to support the basic policy
that sources may offset increases in
emissions of direct PM2.5 or of any PM2.5
precursor in a PM2.5 nonattainment area
with actual emissions reductions in
direct PM2.5 or PM2.5 precursors in
accordance with offset ratios as
approved in the SIP for the applicable
nonattainment area. However, we no
longer consider the preferred ratios set
forth in the preamble to the 2008 NSR
PM2.5 Rule to be presumptively
approvable. Instead, any ratio involving
PM2.5 precursors adopted by the state for
use in the interpollutant offset program
for PM2.5 nonattainment areas must be
accompanied by a technical
demonstration that shows the net air
quality benefits of such ratio for the
PM2.5 nonattainment area in which it
will be applied.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
6493
II. Summary of SIP Revision
Specifically, the revisions submitted
by WVDEP involve amendments to
45CSR19 (Permits for Construction and
Major Modification of Major Stationary
Sources Which Cause or Contribute to
Nonattainment Areas) as a result of
Federal regulatory actions previously
discussed. A summary of the changes
made in the 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014
submittals are available in the docket
under ‘‘Summary of West Virginia NSR
Changes.’’ Additionally, several nonsubstantive, clarifying and
organizational revisions were submitted.
WVDEP has included redline/strikeout
versions of the submittals so that all
revisions to 45CSR19 can be seen.
Following is EPA’s rationale for the
proposed approval.
A. NSR Reform
EPA finds West Virginia’s regulations
dealing with NSR reform closely mirror
the Federal counterpart regulations in
40 CFR parts 51 and 52. Several aspects
of NSR reform, including a new method
for determining baseline actual
emissions, adoption of actual-toprojected-actual methodology for
determining whether a major
modification has occurred, and the
allowance of PALs were submitted to
EPA by WVDEP in prior SIP
submissions and subsequently approved
by EPA on November 2, 2006 (71 FR
64468). However, in this prior
submission, WVDEP specifically
requested that EPA exclude from its SIP
approval the provisions of 45CSR19
pertaining to ‘‘Clean Units’’ and
‘‘Pollution Control Project’’ in order to
ensure that their Federally-approved
regulations are consistent with the D.C.
Circuit’s June 24, 2005 ruling in New
York I. West Virginia subsequently
removed provisions relating to
‘‘pollution control projects’’ and ‘‘clean
unit’’ from 45CSR19 at the state level
and updated language relating to
‘‘reasonable possibility’’ provisions, as
is reflected in the 2010 submittal. Thus,
EPA finds the SIP revisions including
the revised 45CSR19 meet requirements
of NSR Reform for a nonattainment NSR
permitting program in 40 CFR parts 51
and 52, and is proposing to fully
approve revisions relating to NSR
reform.
B. Ethanol Rule
West Virginia’s proposed SIP
revisions include provisions that
exclude facilities that produce ethanol
through a natural fermentation process
from the definition of ‘‘chemical process
plants’’ in the major NSR source
permitting program as amended in the
E:\FR\FM\05FEP1.SGM
05FEP1
6494
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2007 Ethanol Rule. The 2010 submittal
added provisions at 45CSR19–2.35.e.20
and 3.7.a.20 that remove certain ethanol
production facilities from the definition
of ‘‘chemical process plants.’’ These
provisions are also included in the
subsequent 2011, 2012, and 2014
submittals. In this rulemaking, we are
not at this time proposing to take action
on any of the SIP submittals concerning
West Virginia’s submitted regulation
revisions at 45CSR19–2.35.e.20 and
3.7.a.20 addressing the 2007 Ethanol
Rule.
C. PM2.5
EPA finds the revisions to 45CSR19
submitted by WVDEP for approval that
relate to PM2.5 mirror the 2008 NSR
PM2.5 Rule, which: (1) Required NSR
permits to address directly emitted
PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; (2)
established significant emission rates for
direct PM2.5 and precursor pollutants
(including sulfur dioxide (SO2) and
oxides of nitrogen (NOX)); (3)
established PM2.5 emission offsets; and
(4) required states to account for gases
that condense to form particles
(condensables) in PM2.5 emission limits.
Additionally, WVDEP’s 2010
submittal includes provisions allowing
sources to offset emissions increases of
direct PM2.5 emissions or PM2.5
precursors with reductions of either
direct PM2.5 emissions or PM2.5
precursors in accordance with offset
ratios contained in the approved SIP for
the applicable nonattainment area,
including the default interpollutant
trading ratios that were included in
EPA’s 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule. EPA
continues to support the policy of
allowing an interpollutant offset
program, provided that a state develops
a technical demonstration justifying the
ratios to be used, and showing the net
air quality benefits of such ratios for the
PM2.5 nonattainment area in which it
will be applied. WVDEP did not provide
a technical justification or describe a net
air quality benefit of the interpollutant
trading ratios in its 2010 submittal.
However, in the subsequent 2014
submittal, WVDEP removed the
provisions that would have allowed
interpollutant trading for PM2.5. As
previously stated, inclusion of
interpollutant trading ratios is
discretionary on the part of the states,
and only permitted upon approval by
EPA. West Virginia’s inclusion of these
interpollutant trading ratios in the 2010
SIP without proper justification has no
bearing on EPA’s action in this
proposed rule, since the most recent SIP
submitted and current regulations in
effect in West Virginia (i.e. the NSR
regulations at 45CSR19 included in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:44 Feb 04, 2015
Jkt 235001
2014 submittal) do not include these
provisions.
In light of the D.C. Circuit’s remand
of the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule, EPA is in
the process of evaluating the
requirements of subpart 4 as they
pertain to nonattainment NSR. In
particular, subpart 4 includes section
189(e) of the CAA, which requires the
control of major stationary sources of
PM10 precursors (and hence under the
court decision, PM2.5 precursors)
‘‘except where the Administrator
determines that such sources do not
contribute significantly to PM10 levels
which exceed the standard in the area.’’
The evaluation of which precursors
need to be controlled to achieve the
standard in a particular area is typically
conducted in the context of the state’s
preparing and the EPA’s reviewing an
area’s attainment plan SIP.
West Virginia’s nonattainment NSR
regulations at 45CSR19 do not fully
address all potential precursors to PM2.5.
The West Virginia SIP submissions
included revisions to the definition of
‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ at 45CSR19–
2.61.c which identifies precursors to
both ozone and PM2.5 in nonattainment
areas. With respect to PM2.5, the revised
definition of ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’
at 45CSR19–2.61.c identifies SO2 and
NOX as regulated PM2.5 precursors
while volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and ammonia are not identified
as regulated PM2.5 precursors in PM2.5
nonattainment areas in the State. These
revisions, although consistent with the
2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule as developed
consistent with subpart 1, may not
contain the elements necessary to satisfy
the CAA requirements when evaluated
under the subpart 4 CAA statutory
requirements. In particular, West
Virginia’s submission does not include
regulation of VOCs and ammonia as
PM2.5 precursors, nor does it include a
demonstration consistent with section
189(e) showing that major sources of
those precursor pollutants would not
contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels
exceeding the standard in the area.
However, while West Virginia’s
submittals do not yet contain all of the
elements necessary to satisfy the CAA
requirements when evaluated under
subpart 4, there are currently no
designated PM2.5 nonattainment areas in
West Virginia for any PM2.5 NAAQS
since the Martinsburg-Hagerstown
nonattainment area in West Virginia
was redesignated to attainment on
November 25, 2014 (79 FR 70099). As a
result, West Virginia is no longer
obligated to submit an NNSR SIP
revision under section 189 of the CAA
addressing PM2.5 NNSR permitting
requirements, which include the
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
subpart 4 requirements.7 Therefore, EPA
is proposing to grant approval to the
nonattainment NSR provisions in West
Virginia’s 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014
SIP submittals for revisions to 45CSR19
for nonattainment NSR requirements for
PM2.5.
III. Proposed Action
EPA’s review of this material
indicates that the 2010, 2011, 2012 and
2014 SIP submittals collectively meet
the federal counterpart requirements in
40 CFR parts 51 and 52 for a
nonattainment NSR permitting program.
For the reasons stated previously, EPA
is proposing to grant approval to these
WV SIP submissions with the exception
of the revisions to 45CSR19–2.35.e.20
and 3.7.a.20. EPA is taking no action on
45CSR19 regulations relating to the
definition of ‘‘chemical process plants’’
which are at 45CSR19–2.35.e.20 and
3.7.a.20. EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in
this document. These comments will be
considered before taking final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
7 To the extent that any area is designated
nonattainment for PM2.5 in the future in West
Virginia, the State will have to make a submission
within the timeframe provided by section 189(a)(2)
of the CAA addressing how its NNSR permitting
program satisfies the CAA statutory requirements as
to PM2.5, including subpart 4 and any applicable
PM2.5 federal implementation rules.
E:\FR\FM\05FEP1.SGM
05FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule, relating
to West Virginia’s nonattainment NSR
program, does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), because the SIP is not approved
to apply in Indian country located in the
state, and EPA notes that it will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 23, 2015.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2015–02304 Filed 2–4–15; 8:45 am]
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:44 Feb 04, 2015
Jkt 235001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0831; FRL–9922–44–
OAR]
40 CFR Part 98
RIN 2060–AS37
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2015
Revisions and Confidentiality
Determinations for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems; Extension of
Comment Period
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is announcing an
extension of the public comment period
for the proposed rule titled ‘‘Greenhouse
Gas Reporting Program: 2015 Revision
and Confidentiality Determinations for
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems’’.
The public comment period for this
proposal began on December 9, 2014.
This document announces the extension
of the deadline for public comment from
February 9, 2015 to February 24, 2015.
DATES: The comment period for the
proposed rule published on December 9,
2014 (79 FR 73147) has been extended.
Comments must be received on or
before February 24, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit your
comments, identified by Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0831 by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: A-and-R-Docket@epa.gov.
Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2014–0831 or RIN No. 2060–AS37 in the
subject line of the message.
• Fax: (202) 566–9744.
• Mail: Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
Mailcode 28221T, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0831, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20460. In addition, please mail a
copy of your comments on the
information collection provisions to the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for
EPA, 725 17th Street NW., Washington,
DC 20503.
• Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket
Center, Room 3334, EPA WJC West
Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such
deliveries are accepted only during the
normal hours of operation of the Docket
Center, and special arrangements should
be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
6495
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–
0831. 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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or email. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means the EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
comment directly to the EPA without
going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your email
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, the 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 the EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, the EPA may not
be able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available for viewing at
the EPA Docket Center. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Docket, EPA/DC, WJC West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC. This Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566–1744, and the telephone number for
the Air Docket is (202) 566–1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carole Cook, Climate Change Division,
Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC–
6207A), Environmental Protection
E:\FR\FM\05FEP1.SGM
05FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 24 (Thursday, February 5, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6491-6495]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02304]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0792; FRL-9922-51-Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Permits for Construction and Major Modification of Major
Stationary Sources Which Cause or Contribute to Nonattainment Areas
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
grant approval to four State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection
for the State of West Virginia on June 29, 2010, July 8, 2011, July 6,
2012, and July 1, 2014 with the exception of certain revisions related
to ethanol production facilities on which EPA is taking no action at
this time. These revisions proposed for approval pertain to West
Virginia's nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) program, notably
provisions for preconstruction permitting requirements for major
sources of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and NSR reform.
This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 9, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2014-0792 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. Email: kreider.andrew@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0792, Andrew Kreider, Acting Associate
Director, Office of Permits and Air Toxics, Mailcode 3AP10, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
[[Page 6492]]
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2014-0792. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at 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 information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
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 email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
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, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
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. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE., Charleston,
West Virginia 25304.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mike Gordon, (215) 814-2039, or by
email at gordon.mike@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The WVDEP submitted four SIP revisions to EPA on June 29, 2010 (the
2010 submittal), July 8, 2011 (the 2011 submittal), July 6, 2012 (the
2012 submittal) and July 1, 2014 (the 2014 submittal). While each of
the SIP revisions was submitted individually, EPA is acting on these
submittals as a whole. There are some instances where specific language
was added in a West Virginia regulation included in one of the earlier
SIP submittals but the language was subsequently removed from that same
regulation included in a later SIP submittal such that EPA therefore
only assessed the approvability of that portion of the regulation
included in the later SIP submittal. It should be noted that the most
recent version of West Virginia's nonattainment NSR regulations is the
version included for SIP approval in the 2014 submittal, and this
submittal reflects the sum of the changes made from the 2010, 2011, and
2012 submittals as well.\1\ A summary of the changes made in each of
the four submittals has been included in the docket for this action
under ``Summary of West Virginia NSR Changes.'' These SIP revision
requests, if approved, would revise West Virginia's currently approved
nonattainment NSR program by amending Series 19 under Title 45 of West
Virginia Code of State Rules (45CSR19). Generally, the revisions
incorporate provisions related to the 2008 ``Implementation of the New
Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5)'' (2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule; 73 FR
28321), the 2007 ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration,
Nonattainment New Source Review, and Title V: Treatment of Certain
Ethanol Production Facilities Under the `Major Emitting Facility'
Definition'' (2007 Ethanol Rule; 72 FR 24060), as well as updates as a
result of the 2002 rule ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
and Nonattainment NSR (NSR): Baseline Emissions Determination, Actual-
to-Future-Actual Methodology, Plantwide Applicability Limitations,
Clean Units, Pollution Control Projects'' (2002 NSR Reform Rules; 67 FR
80186).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA, however, is proposing to act on all four SIP submittals
in this document because each submittal contains necessary
procedural information related to West Virginia's revisions to its
nonattainment NSR regulations and development of its SIP submittals,
which are required for SIP revisions by 40 CFR parts 51 and 52.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2002 NSR Reform Rules made changes to five areas of the NSR
programs. In summary, the 2002 Rules: (1) Provided a new method for
determining baseline actual emissions; (2) adopted an actual-to-
projected-actual methodology for determining whether a major
modification has occurred; (3) allowed major stationary sources to
comply with a Plantwide Applicability Limit (PAL) to avoid having a
significant emissions increase that triggers the requirements of the
major NSR program; (4) provided a new applicability provision for
emissions units that are designated clean units; and (5) excluded
pollution control projects (PCPs) from the definition of ``physical
change or change in the method of operation.'' On November 7, 2003, EPA
published a notice of final action on its reconsideration of the 2002
NSR Reform Rules,\2\ which added a definition for ``replacement unit''
and clarified an issue regarding PALs. For additional information on
the 2002 NSR Reform Rules, see EPA's December 31, 2002 final rulemaking
action entitled: ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Nonattainment NSR (NSR): Baseline Emissions Determination, Actual-to-
Future-Actual Methodology, Plantwide Applicability Limitations, Clean
Units, Pollution Control Projects'' (67 FR 80186), the 2003 final
reconsideration: ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Non-Attainment New Source Review (NSR): Reconsideration'' (68 FR
63021), and https://www.epa.gov/nsr.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Non-
Attainment New Source Review (NSR): Reconsideration.'' 68 FR 63021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After the 2002 NSR Reform Rules were finalized, industry, state,
and environmental petitioners challenged numerous aspects of the 2002
NSR Reform Rules, along with portions of EPA's 1980 NSR Rules (45 FR
52676, August 7, 1980). On June 24, 2005, the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) issued a decision
on the challenges to the 2002 NSR Reform Rules. New York v. United
States, 413 F.3d 3 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (New York I).
In summary, the D.C. Circuit vacated portions of the rules
pertaining to clean units and PCPs, remanded a portion of the rules
regarding recordkeeping and the term ``reasonable possibility'' found
in 40 CFR 52.21(r)(6) and 40 CFR 51.166(r)(6), and either upheld or did
not comment on the other provisions included as part of the 2002 NSR
Reform Rules. On June 13, 2007 (72 FR 32526), EPA took final action to
revise the 2002 NSR Reform Rules to remove from federal law all
provisions pertaining to clean units and the PCP exemption that were
vacated by the D.C. Circuit.
[[Page 6493]]
The 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule (as well as the 2007 ``Final
Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule'' (2007 PM2.5
Implementation Rule) \3\), was also the subject of litigation before
the D.C. Circuit in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA.\4\ On
January 4, 2013, the court remanded to EPA both the 2007
PM2.5 Implementation Rule and the 2008 NSR PM2.5
Rule. The court found that in both rules EPA erred in implementing the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS solely pursuant to the general
implementation provisions of subpart 1 of part D of title I of the CAA
(subpart 1), rather than pursuant to the additional implementation
provisions specific to particulate matter in subpart 4 of part D of
title I (subpart 4).\5\ As a result, the court remanded both rules and
instructed EPA ``to re-promulgate these rules pursuant to subpart 4
consistent with this opinion.'' \6\ Although the D.C. Circuit declined
to establish a deadline for EPA's response, EPA intends to respond
promptly to the court's remand and to promulgate new generally
applicable implementation regulations for the PM2.5 NAAQS in
accordance with the requirements of subpart 4. In the interim, however,
states and EPA still need to proceed with implementation of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS in a timely and effective fashion in order to
meet statutory obligations under the CAA and to assure the protection
of public health intended by those NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007).
\4\ 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
\5\ The court's opinion did not specifically address the point
that implementation under subpart 4 requirements would still require
consideration of subpart 1 requirements, to the extent that subpart
4 did not override subpart 1.
\6\ Id. at 437.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 25, 2014, the Administrator signed a final rulemaking that
begins to address the remand (see https://www.epa.gov/airquality/particlepollution/actions.html). Upon its effective date, the final
rule classifies all existing PM2.5 nonattainment areas as
``Moderate'' nonattainment areas and sets a deadline of December 31,
2014, for states to submit any SIP submissions, including nonattainment
NSR SIPs, that may be necessary to satisfy the requirements of subpart
4 with respect to PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
In a separate rulemaking process that will follow the April 2014
rule, EPA is evaluating the requirements of subpart 4 as they pertain
to, among other things, nonattainment NSR for PM2.5
emissions. With respect to nonattainment NSR in particular, subpart 4
includes section 189(e) of the CAA, which requires the control of major
stationary sources of coarse particulate matter (PM10)
precursors ``except where the Administrator determines that such
sources do not contribute significantly to PM10 levels which
exceed the standard in the area.'' Under the D.C. Circuit's decision in
NRDC, section 189(e) of the CAA also applies to PM2.5.
Additionally, the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule authorized states
to adopt provisions in their nonattainment NSR rules that would allow
major stationary sources and major modifications locating in areas
designated nonattainment for PM2.5 to offset emissions
increases of direct PM2.5 emissions or PM2.5
precursors with reductions of either direct PM2.5 emissions
or PM2.5 precursors in accordance with offset ratios
contained in the approved SIP for the applicable nonattainment area.
The inclusion, in whole or in part, of the interpollutant offset
provisions for PM2.5 is discretionary on the part of the
states. In the preamble to the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule, EPA
included preferred or presumptive offset ratios, applicable to specific
PM2.5 precursors that states may adopt in conjunction with
the new interpollutant offset provisions for PM2.5, and for
which the state could rely on the EPA's technical work to demonstrate
the adequacy of the ratios for use in any PM2.5
nonattainment area. Alternatively, the preamble indicated that states
may adopt their own ratios, subject to the EPA's approval, that would
have to be substantiated by modeling or other technical demonstrations
of the net air quality benefit for ambient PM2.5
concentrations. The preferred ratios were subsequently the subject of a
petition for reconsideration, which the EPA Administrator granted. EPA
continues to support the basic policy that sources may offset increases
in emissions of direct PM2.5 or of any PM2.5
precursor in a PM2.5 nonattainment area with actual
emissions reductions in direct PM2.5 or PM2.5
precursors in accordance with offset ratios as approved in the SIP for
the applicable nonattainment area. However, we no longer consider the
preferred ratios set forth in the preamble to the 2008 NSR
PM2.5 Rule to be presumptively approvable. Instead, any
ratio involving PM2.5 precursors adopted by the state for
use in the interpollutant offset program for PM2.5
nonattainment areas must be accompanied by a technical demonstration
that shows the net air quality benefits of such ratio for the
PM2.5 nonattainment area in which it will be applied.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
Specifically, the revisions submitted by WVDEP involve amendments
to 45CSR19 (Permits for Construction and Major Modification of Major
Stationary Sources Which Cause or Contribute to Nonattainment Areas) as
a result of Federal regulatory actions previously discussed. A summary
of the changes made in the 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014 submittals are
available in the docket under ``Summary of West Virginia NSR Changes.''
Additionally, several non-substantive, clarifying and organizational
revisions were submitted. WVDEP has included redline/strikeout versions
of the submittals so that all revisions to 45CSR19 can be seen.
Following is EPA's rationale for the proposed approval.
A. NSR Reform
EPA finds West Virginia's regulations dealing with NSR reform
closely mirror the Federal counterpart regulations in 40 CFR parts 51
and 52. Several aspects of NSR reform, including a new method for
determining baseline actual emissions, adoption of actual-to-projected-
actual methodology for determining whether a major modification has
occurred, and the allowance of PALs were submitted to EPA by WVDEP in
prior SIP submissions and subsequently approved by EPA on November 2,
2006 (71 FR 64468). However, in this prior submission, WVDEP
specifically requested that EPA exclude from its SIP approval the
provisions of 45CSR19 pertaining to ``Clean Units'' and ``Pollution
Control Project'' in order to ensure that their Federally-approved
regulations are consistent with the D.C. Circuit's June 24, 2005 ruling
in New York I. West Virginia subsequently removed provisions relating
to ``pollution control projects'' and ``clean unit'' from 45CSR19 at
the state level and updated language relating to ``reasonable
possibility'' provisions, as is reflected in the 2010 submittal. Thus,
EPA finds the SIP revisions including the revised 45CSR19 meet
requirements of NSR Reform for a nonattainment NSR permitting program
in 40 CFR parts 51 and 52, and is proposing to fully approve revisions
relating to NSR reform.
B. Ethanol Rule
West Virginia's proposed SIP revisions include provisions that
exclude facilities that produce ethanol through a natural fermentation
process from the definition of ``chemical process plants'' in the major
NSR source permitting program as amended in the
[[Page 6494]]
2007 Ethanol Rule. The 2010 submittal added provisions at 45CSR19-
2.35.e.20 and 3.7.a.20 that remove certain ethanol production
facilities from the definition of ``chemical process plants.'' These
provisions are also included in the subsequent 2011, 2012, and 2014
submittals. In this rulemaking, we are not at this time proposing to
take action on any of the SIP submittals concerning West Virginia's
submitted regulation revisions at 45CSR19-2.35.e.20 and 3.7.a.20
addressing the 2007 Ethanol Rule.
C. PM2.5
EPA finds the revisions to 45CSR19 submitted by WVDEP for approval
that relate to PM2.5 mirror the 2008 NSR PM2.5
Rule, which: (1) Required NSR permits to address directly emitted
PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; (2) established significant
emission rates for direct PM2.5 and precursor pollutants
(including sulfur dioxide (SO2) and oxides of nitrogen
(NOX)); (3) established PM2.5 emission offsets;
and (4) required states to account for gases that condense to form
particles (condensables) in PM2.5 emission limits.
Additionally, WVDEP's 2010 submittal includes provisions allowing
sources to offset emissions increases of direct PM2.5
emissions or PM2.5 precursors with reductions of either
direct PM2.5 emissions or PM2.5 precursors in
accordance with offset ratios contained in the approved SIP for the
applicable nonattainment area, including the default interpollutant
trading ratios that were included in EPA's 2008 NSR PM2.5
Rule. EPA continues to support the policy of allowing an interpollutant
offset program, provided that a state develops a technical
demonstration justifying the ratios to be used, and showing the net air
quality benefits of such ratios for the PM2.5 nonattainment
area in which it will be applied. WVDEP did not provide a technical
justification or describe a net air quality benefit of the
interpollutant trading ratios in its 2010 submittal. However, in the
subsequent 2014 submittal, WVDEP removed the provisions that would have
allowed interpollutant trading for PM2.5. As previously
stated, inclusion of interpollutant trading ratios is discretionary on
the part of the states, and only permitted upon approval by EPA. West
Virginia's inclusion of these interpollutant trading ratios in the 2010
SIP without proper justification has no bearing on EPA's action in this
proposed rule, since the most recent SIP submitted and current
regulations in effect in West Virginia (i.e. the NSR regulations at
45CSR19 included in the 2014 submittal) do not include these
provisions.
In light of the D.C. Circuit's remand of the 2008 NSR
PM2.5 Rule, EPA is in the process of evaluating the
requirements of subpart 4 as they pertain to nonattainment NSR. In
particular, subpart 4 includes section 189(e) of the CAA, which
requires the control of major stationary sources of PM10
precursors (and hence under the court decision, PM2.5
precursors) ``except where the Administrator determines that such
sources do not contribute significantly to PM10 levels which
exceed the standard in the area.'' The evaluation of which precursors
need to be controlled to achieve the standard in a particular area is
typically conducted in the context of the state's preparing and the
EPA's reviewing an area's attainment plan SIP.
West Virginia's nonattainment NSR regulations at 45CSR19 do not
fully address all potential precursors to PM2.5. The West
Virginia SIP submissions included revisions to the definition of
``regulated NSR pollutant'' at 45CSR19-2.61.c which identifies
precursors to both ozone and PM2.5 in nonattainment areas.
With respect to PM2.5, the revised definition of ``regulated
NSR pollutant'' at 45CSR19-2.61.c identifies SO2 and
NOX as regulated PM2.5 precursors while volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) and ammonia are not identified as regulated
PM2.5 precursors in PM2.5 nonattainment areas in
the State. These revisions, although consistent with the 2008 NSR
PM2.5 Rule as developed consistent with subpart 1, may not
contain the elements necessary to satisfy the CAA requirements when
evaluated under the subpart 4 CAA statutory requirements. In
particular, West Virginia's submission does not include regulation of
VOCs and ammonia as PM2.5 precursors, nor does it include a
demonstration consistent with section 189(e) showing that major sources
of those precursor pollutants would not contribute significantly to
PM2.5 levels exceeding the standard in the area.
However, while West Virginia's submittals do not yet contain all of
the elements necessary to satisfy the CAA requirements when evaluated
under subpart 4, there are currently no designated PM2.5
nonattainment areas in West Virginia for any PM2.5 NAAQS
since the Martinsburg-Hagerstown nonattainment area in West Virginia
was redesignated to attainment on November 25, 2014 (79 FR 70099). As a
result, West Virginia is no longer obligated to submit an NNSR SIP
revision under section 189 of the CAA addressing PM2.5 NNSR
permitting requirements, which include the subpart 4 requirements.\7\
Therefore, EPA is proposing to grant approval to the nonattainment NSR
provisions in West Virginia's 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014 SIP submittals
for revisions to 45CSR19 for nonattainment NSR requirements for
PM2.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ To the extent that any area is designated nonattainment for
PM2.5 in the future in West Virginia, the State will have
to make a submission within the timeframe provided by section
189(a)(2) of the CAA addressing how its NNSR permitting program
satisfies the CAA statutory requirements as to PM2.5,
including subpart 4 and any applicable PM2.5 federal
implementation rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Proposed Action
EPA's review of this material indicates that the 2010, 2011, 2012
and 2014 SIP submittals collectively meet the federal counterpart
requirements in 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 for a nonattainment NSR
permitting program. For the reasons stated previously, EPA is proposing
to grant approval to these WV SIP submissions with the exception of the
revisions to 45CSR19-2.35.e.20 and 3.7.a.20. EPA is taking no action on
45CSR19 regulations relating to the definition of ``chemical process
plants'' which are at 45CSR19-2.35.e.20 and 3.7.a.20. EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These
comments will be considered before taking final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described
[[Page 6495]]
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule, relating to West Virginia's
nonattainment NSR program, does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 23, 2015.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2015-02304 Filed 2-4-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P