Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois; Illinois Power Holdings and AmerenEnergy Medina Valley Cogen Variance, 21681-21685 [2015-08896]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules
(13) A list of key officials.
(g) What concurrence must the
Superintendent obtain? The
superintendent must obtain the written
concurrence of the Regional Director to
any agreement before it can go into
effect, and before any permit may be
issued.
(h) When will the Superintendent
close areas to gathering and removal?
Notwithstanding the terms of any
agreement executed under this section,
the Superintendent may close park
areas, or portions thereof, to gathering
and removal for any of the following
reasons:
(i) Maintenance of public health and
safety;
(ii) Protection of environmental or
scenic values;
(iii) Protection of natural or cultural
resources;
(iv) Aid to scientific research;
(v) Implementation of management
responsibilities;
(vi) Equitable allocation and use of
facilities; or
(vii) Avoidance of conflict among
visitor use activities.
(2) Closed areas may not be reopened
to traditional gathering and removal
until the reasons for the closure have
been resolved.
(3) Except in emergency situations,
the Superintendent will provide public
notice of any closure or reopening under
this section in accordance with § 1.7 of
this chapter.
(i) When will the agreement and
permit be suspended or terminated?
(1) Notwithstanding any remedy
provisions of an agreement, violation of
the terms or conditions of an agreement
or permit issued under this section may
result in suspension or termination of
the agreement and permit, and loss of
authorization to gather and remove.
(2) A Superintendent may suspend an
agreement and implementing permit if
terms or conditions are violated or if
unanticipated or significant impacts
occur. The Superintendent shall prepare
a written determination justifying the
action.
(3) The Superintendent must have the
written concurrence of the Regional
Director before terminating an
agreement or implementing permit.
(j) When is gathering prohibited?
Gathering, possession, or removal from
a park area of plants or plant parts
(including for traditional purposes), is
prohibited except where specifically
authorized by;
(1) Federal statutory law;
(2) Treaty rights;
(3) Other regulations of this chapter;
or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Apr 17, 2015
Jkt 235001
(4) The terms and conditions of an
agreement and permit issued under this
section.
(k) Have the information collection
requirements been approved? The Office
of Management and Budget has
reviewed and approved the information
collection requirements in this section
and assigned OMB Control No. 1024–
XXXX. We will use this information to
determine whether a traditional
association and purpose can be
documented in order to authorize
gathering. We may not conduct or
sponsor and you are not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. You may send
comments on any aspect of this
information collection to the
Information Collection Clearance
Officer, National Park Service, 1849 C
Street NW., Washington, DC 20240.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 2, 2105.
Michael Bean,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish
and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2015–08852 Filed 4–17–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–EJ–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0705; FRL–9926–27–
Region 5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois;
Illinois Power Holdings and
AmerenEnergy Medina Valley Cogen
Variance
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
into the Illinois Regional Haze State
Implementation Plan (SIP) a variance for
the electrical generating units (EGUs)
included in the Ameren multi-pollutant
standard group (Ameren MPS Group).
The Ameren MPS Group consists of five
facilities owned by Illinois Power
Holdings, LLC (IPH) and two facilities
owned by AmerenEnergy Medina Valley
Cogen, LLC (Medina Valley). The
Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency (IEPA) submitted the variance to
EPA for approval on September 3, 2014.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 20, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21681
OAR–2014–0705, by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408–2279.
4. Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Doug Aburano,
Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office normal hours
of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office 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. EPA–R05–OAR–2014–
0705. 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. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Section I of
E:\FR\FM\20APP1.SGM
20APP1
21682
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the 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 only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We
recommend that you telephone
Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental
Engineer, at (312) 886–1767 before
visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental
Engineer, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR–18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604, (312) 886–1767,
dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What should I consider as I prepare my
comments for EPA?
II. What is the background for this action?
III. What is EPA’s analysis of the variance for
IPH and Medina Valley?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
I. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
When submitting comments,
remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
2. Follow directions—EPA may ask
you to respond to specific questions or
organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Apr 17, 2015
Jkt 235001
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. What is the background for this
action?
Regional haze is visibility impairment
that is caused by the cumulative
emissions of fine particles (PM2.5) (e.g.,
sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon,
elemental carbon and dust) and its
precursors (sulfur dioxide (SO2),
nitrogen oxides (NOX), and in some
cases ammonia and volatile organic
compounds) from numerous sources
over a wide geographic area. Fine
particulate precursors react in the
atmosphere to form PM2.5. Aerosol PM2.5
reduces the clarity and distance one can
see by scattering and absorbing light.
The visibility protection program
under sections 169A, 169B, and
110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA is designed to
protect visibility in national parks and
wilderness areas (Class I areas). On
December 2, 1980, EPA promulgated
regulations, known as ‘‘reasonably
attributable visibility impairment
(RAVI), to address visibility impairment
in Class I areas that is reasonably
attributable to a single source or small
group of sources. On July 1, 1999, EPA
promulgated the Regional Haze Rule
which revised existing visibility
regulations to incorporate provisions
addressing regional haze impairment.
EPA’s Regional Haze Rule, as codified
in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations
Part 51.308 (40 CFR 51.308), requires
states to submit regional haze SIPs.
Among other things, the regional haze
SIPs must include provisions requiring
certain sources install and operate best
available retrofit technology (BART).
At 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2), the regional
haze rule allows states to meet BART
requirements by mandating alternative
measures in lieu of mandating sourcespecific BART, so long as the alternative
measures provide better visibility
protection. Given the regional nature of
visibility impairment, an alternative that
results in lower emissions of SO2 and
NOX will generally provide better
visibility protection. Thus, in the
absence of a difference in the spatial
distribution of emissions, a modeling
analysis is generally not necessary to be
able to conclude that an alternative
strategy with lower SO2 and NOX
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
emissions provides better visibility
protection.
On June 24, 2011, Illinois submitted
a plan to address the requirements of
the Regional Haze Rule, as codified at
40 CFR 51.308. EPA approved Illinois’
regional haze SIP on July 6, 2012 (77 FR
39943). In its approval, EPA determined
that the emission reductions from
sources included in the Illinois plan are
significantly greater than even
conservative definitions of BART
applied to BART subject units (77 FR
39945). EPA also addressed whether the
Illinois plan, achieving greater emission
reductions overall than the application
of BART on BART-subject units, can
also be expected to achieve greater
visibility protection than application of
BART on BART-subject units. Given
that, in general, the Illinois power
plants are substantial distances from
any Class I area, and given that the
averaging in Illinois’ plan is only
authorized within the somewhat limited
region within which each utility’s
plants are located, EPA determined that
a reallocation of emission reductions
from one plant to another is unlikely to
change the visibility impact of those
emission reductions significantly.
Consequently, EPA concluded that the
significantly greater emission reductions
that Illinois required in its regional haze
SIP will yield greater progress toward
visibility protection as compared to the
benefits of a conservative estimate of
BART.
One of the rules approved in that
action to meet BART requirements is 35
Illinois Administrative Code (Ill. Adm.
Code) rule 225.233 Multi-Pollutant
Standard (MPS), specifically
subsections (a), (b), (e), and (g). Section
225.233(e)(3)(C) contains the sulfur
dioxide (SO2) emission standards
applicable to the Ameren MPS Group.
Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(i) establishes
an overall SO2 annual emission rate for
EGUs in the Ameren MPS group of 0.50
pounds per million Btu (lb/mmBtu) for
calendar years 2010 through 2013.
Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(ii) establishes
an overall SO2 annual emission rate for
EGUs in the Ameren MPS group of 0.43
lb/mmBtu for calendar year 2014.
Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(iii) establishes
an overall SO2 annual emission rate for
EGUs in the Ameren MPS group of 0.25
lb/mmBtu for calendar years 2015 and
2016. Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(iv)
establishes an overall SO2 annual
emission rate for EGUs in the Ameren
MPS group of 0.23 lb/mmBtu beginning
in calendar year 2017 and continuing
each calendar year thereafter.
On November 21, 2013, the Illinois
Pollution Control Board (IPCB) granted
IPH and Medina Valley a variance from
E:\FR\FM\20APP1.SGM
20APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules
the applicable requirements of Section
225.233(e)(3)(C)(iii) for a period
beginning January 1, 2015, through
December 31, 2019, and Section
225.233(e)(3)(C)(iv) for a period
beginning January 1, 2017, through
December 31, 2019, subject to certain
conditions. IEPA submitted the variance
as a revisions to the Illinois Regional
Haze SIP on September 3, 2014. The IPH
facilities included in the Ameren MPS
group and subject to the variance
include: Coffeen Energy Center
(Montgomery County), Duck Creek
Energy Center (Fulton County), E.D.
Edwards Energy Center (Peoria County),
Joppa Energy Center (Massac County),
and Newton Energy Center (Jasper
County). The two Medina Valley
facilities included in the Ameren MPS
group and subject to the variance are the
Meredosia Energy Center (Morgan
County) and the Hutsonville Energy
Center (Crawford County).
III. What is EPA’s analysis of the
variance for IPH and Medina Valley?
As stated above, the IPCB granted IPH
and Medina Valley a variance from the
requirement of Section
225.233(e)(3)(C)(iii) to comply with an
overall SO2 annual emission rate of 0.25
lb/mmBtu in 2015 and 2016 for the time
period from January 1, 2015, through
December 31, 2019, and from the
requirement of Section
225.233(e)(3)(C)(iv) to comply with an
overall SO2 annual emission rate of 0.23
lb/mmBtu for the time period from
January 1, 2017 through December 31,
2019. This variance was granted subject
to numerous conditions including, but
not limited to, the following:
1. The IPH facilities in the Ameren MPS
group must comply with an overall SO2
annual emission rate of 0.35 lb/million Btu
from January 1, 2015, through December 31,
2019, and an overall SO2 annual emission
rate of 0.23 lb/mmBtu beginning on January
1, 2020.
2. Medina Valley must not operate the
EGUs at Meredosia and Hutsonville Power
stations until after December 31, 2020, except
that the FutureGen project at the Meredosia
Energy Center is exempt from this restriction.
3. Through December 31, 2019, IPH must
continue to burn low sulfur coal at the E.D.
Edwards, Joppa, and Newton Energy Centers.
The combined annual average stack SO2
emissions of these three stations must not
exceed 0.55 lb/mmBtu on a calendar year
annual average basis.
4. Through December 31, 2019, IPH must
operate the existing Flue Gas Desulfurization
systems at the Duck Creek and Coffeen
Energy Centers to achieve a combined SO2
removal rate of at least 98 percent on a
calendar year annual average basis.
5. IPH must permanently retire E.D.
Edwards Unit 1 as soon as allowed by the
Midcontinent Independent Transmission
System Operator, Inc. (now called the
Midcontinent Independent System Operator).
6. From the time period beginning October
1, 2013, through December 31, 2020, IPH
must limit the MPS Group system-wide mass
emissions of SO2 to no more than 327,996
tons.
7. For the time period beginning October
1, 2013, through December 31, 2020, IPH
must report annually to IEPA the combined
tons of mass SO2 emissions and the overall
SO2 annual emissions rate from its five
Ameren MPS group facilities. The report
must show the mass SO2 emissions for each
time period (October 1, 2013 through
December 31, 2013, and each year thereafter)
along with a running total of the remaining
emissions available under the system-wide
mass SO2 emissions limit.
8. The variance also includes a condition
with a schedule for completing the flue gas
21683
desulfurization project at the Newton Power
Station, with major equipment components
in position by September 1, 2019, and
requirements for IPH to file annual progress
reports with IEPA from 2013 through 2019.
In evaluating the variance submitted
by Illinois, EPA assessed the effect the
variance would have on the emissions
reductions expected under the MPS as
currently approved into the Regional
Haze SIP. Under the conditions of the
currently approved Regional Haze SIP,
the Ameren MPS group would be
expected to emit 335,774 tons of SO2 for
the 2013–2020 time period. Under the
variance, the Ameren MPS group is
limited to 327,996 tons of SO2 over that
same time period; 7,778 tons less than
would be expected under the current
SIP.
In addition, EPA evaluated the
variance to ensure that the alternative
measures contained in the variance
continue to provide better visibility
protection than the application of BART
on BART-subject units. Because the
deadline for implementation of BART
level controls in Illinois is 2017 (within
5 years of approval of Illinois’ SIP), EPA
compared the 2017 emissions under the
variance to the application of typical
Best Available Control Technology
(BACT) control levels to the BART
subject units in the Ameren MPS group.
BACT limits are imposed on new units
or units undergoing major
modifications. Therefore, BART limits,
which by definition apply to relatively
old existing units, are unlikely to be
lower than the limits that would apply
to a new unit and would in many cases
be significantly higher.
TABLE 1—COMPARISON OF EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS AT AMEREN MPS GROUP UNITS UNDER THE VARIANCE VERSUS
EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM APPLICATION OF BACT LIMITS TO BART SUBJECT UNITS
Base year
Facility
Unit
MMMBtu
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
#/MMBtu
Cofeen ..............
Cofeen ..............
Duck Creek ......
E D Edwards ....
E D Edwards ....
E D Edwards ....
Hutsonville ........
Hutsonville ........
Joppa ...............
Joppa ...............
Joppa ...............
Joppa ...............
Joppa ...............
Joppa ...............
Meredosia ........
Meredosia ........
Meredosia ........
Meredosia ........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
1
2
1
1
2
3
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
17:02 Apr 17, 2015
18,570
37,545
22,635
6,417
17,222
15,972
3,161
3,443
13,548
16,258
15,396
13,402
15,094
16,063
1,134
1,337
1,069
1,406
Jkt 235001
Emissions
(tons)
1.54
1.49
0.97
3.55
1.70
1.21
4.53
4.53
0.51
0.51
0.51
0.52
0.52
0.52
5.02
5.02
5.04
5.00
PO 00000
BACT
(0.06#/MMBtu)
Frm 00026
Emissions
(tons)
Reduction
(tons)
14,332
27999
11026
11399
14666
9683
7163
7791
3441
4139
3947
3448
3932
4182
2844
3356
2694
3518
557
1,126
679
....................
517
479
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
13,775
26,873
10,347
....................
14,149
9,204
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\20APP1.SGM
Variance
(2017)
#/MMBtu
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0
0
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.35
0
0
0
0
20APP1
Emissions
(tons)
3,250
6,570
3,961
1,123
3,014
2,795
....................
....................
2,371
2,845
2,694
2,345
2,641
2,811
....................
....................
....................
....................
Reduction
(tons)
11,082
21,429
7,065
10,276
11,652
6,888
7,163
7,791
1,070
1,294
1,253
1,143
1,291
1,371
2,844
3,356
2,694
3,518
21684
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—COMPARISON OF EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS AT AMEREN MPS GROUP UNITS UNDER THE VARIANCE VERSUS
EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM APPLICATION OF BACT LIMITS TO BART SUBJECT UNITS—Continued
Base year
Facility
Unit
MMMBtu
#/MMBtu
BACT
(0.06#/MMBtu)
Emissions
(tons)
Emissions
(tons)
Variance
(2017)
Reduction
(tons)
#/MMBtu
Emissions
(tons)
Reduction
(tons)
5
1
2
10,810
40,631
38,533
2.34
0.45
0.46
12639
9046
8823
....................
....................
....................
0
0
0
0
0.35
0.35
....................
7,110
6,743
12,639
1,936
2,080
Totals ........
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Meredosia ........
Newton .............
Newton .............
............
309,646
....................
170,108
....................
74,348
....................
50,275
119,833
Table 1 shows SO2 emissions
reductions of 74,348 tons in 2017 if
typical BACT limits were applied to
BART subject sources in the Ameren
MPS group. With the variance, Table 1
shows SO2 emissions reductions of
119,833 tons in 2017. More reductions
are required in 2017 under the variance
than would be required by the
application of typical BACT limits to
BART subject sources. Even assuming
that the 22,360 MMBtu generated at the
Hudsonville and Meredosia units would
be shifted to other units in the group,
applying the 0.35 pound/MBtu group
average results in an additional 3,913
tons of emissions under the variance in
2017, or a total of 54,188 tons of SO2.
This would result in 2017 SO2
emissions reductions under the variance
of 115,920 tons, which remains 41,572
tons greater than emissions reductions
under the application of BACT at BART
subject sources. In addition, for the
reasons set forth in EPA’s approval of
the Illinois regional haze sip (77 FR
39946) and summarized above, EPA
continues to conclude that the
significantly greater emission reductions
required under the variance will yield
greater progress toward visibility
protection as compared to the benefits
of a conservative estimate of BART.
Therefore, EPA concludes that the
revised limits under the variance
continue to satisfy BART requirements
for the Ameren MPS Group sources.
In evaluating the approvability of the
variance, EPA must also consider
whether the SIP revision meets the
requirements of section 110(l) of the
CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7410(l). To be approved,
a SIP revision must not interfere with
any applicable requirement concerning
attainment, reasonable further progress,
or any other applicable requirement of
the CAA. Currently, the SIP establishes
overall annual SO2 emissions rates for
the Ameren MPS Group, beginning in
2010. The SIP allows flexibility in
achieving these overall emissions rates,
not requiring reductions at any
particular source. It should be noted
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Apr 17, 2015
Jkt 235001
that none of the Ameren MPS Group
sources are located in a PM2.5
nonattainment area and the only source
located in an SO2 nonattainment area is
the E.D. Edwards facility in Peoria
County. The variance adds specific
conditions applicable to this facility,
including the requirement that the E.D.
Edwards, Joppa, and Newton Energy
Centers continue to burn low sulfur coal
through December 31, 2019, and that
E.D. Edwards permanently retire Unit 1
as soon as allowed by the Midcontinent
Independent Transmission System
Operator, Inc. The variance will not
result in any increase in SO2 emissions,
but rather will result in fewer SO2
emissions over the 2013–2020 time
period. In addition, the measures
contained in the variance provide better
visibility protection than the application
of BART on BART-subject units.
Therefore, the variance will not interfere
with attainment, reasonable further
progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve the IPH
and Medina Valley variance, submitted
by IEPA on September 3, 2014, as a
revision to the Illinois Regional Haze
SIP.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
Illinois Pollution Control Board Order
PCB 14–10, effective November, 21,
2013. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically
through www.regulations.gov and/or in
hard copy at the appropriate EPA office
(see the ADDRESSES section of this
preamble for more information).
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
VI. 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 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
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
E:\FR\FM\20APP1.SGM
20APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 75 / Monday, April 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
This rule is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides.
Dated: April 2, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2015–08896 Filed 4–17–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0704; FRL–9926–33–
Region 5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Wisconsin; Infrastructure SIP
Requirements for the 2008 Ozone, 2010
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
some elements of state implementation
plan (SIP) submissions from Wisconsin
regarding the infrastructure
requirements of section 110 of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) for the 2008 ozone, 2010
nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and 2010 sulfur
dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS). The
infrastructure requirements are designed
to ensure that the structural components
of each state’s air quality management
program are adequate to meet the state’s
responsibilities under the CAA.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 20, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2014–0704, by one of the
following methods:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Apr 17, 2015
Jkt 235001
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408–2279.
4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano,
Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office normal hours
of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office 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. EPA–R05–OAR–2014–
0704. 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. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Section I of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this document.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21685
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the 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 only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We
recommend that you telephone Eric
Svingen, Environmental Engineer, at
(312) 353–4489 before visiting the
Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric
Svingen, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–4489,
svingen.eric@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What should I consider as I prepare my
comments for EPA?
II. What is the background of these SIP
submissions?
III. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate
these SIP submissions?
IV. What is the result of EPA’s review of
these SIP submissions?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
When submitting comments,
remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
2. Follow directions—EPA may ask
you to respond to specific questions or
organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
E:\FR\FM\20APP1.SGM
20APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 75 (Monday, April 20, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21681-21685]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08896]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2014-0705; FRL-9926-27-Region 5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Illinois; Illinois Power Holdings and AmerenEnergy Medina Valley Cogen
Variance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve into the Illinois Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP)
a variance for the electrical generating units (EGUs) included in the
Ameren multi-pollutant standard group (Ameren MPS Group). The Ameren
MPS Group consists of five facilities owned by Illinois Power Holdings,
LLC (IPH) and two facilities owned by AmerenEnergy Medina Valley Cogen,
LLC (Medina Valley). The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
(IEPA) submitted the variance to EPA for approval on September 3, 2014.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 20, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2014-0705, by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408-2279.
4. Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Doug Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office 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. EPA-R05-OAR-
2014-0705. 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. For additional
instructions on submitting comments, go to Section I of
[[Page 21682]]
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
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 only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
We recommend that you telephone Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental
Engineer, at (312) 886-1767 before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental
Engineer, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-1767,
dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What is the background for this action?
III. What is EPA's analysis of the variance for IPH and Medina
Valley?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
When submitting comments, remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
2. Follow directions--EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. What is the background for this action?
Regional haze is visibility impairment that is caused by the
cumulative emissions of fine particles (PM2.5) (e.g.,
sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon, elemental carbon and dust) and its
precursors (sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides
(NOX), and in some cases ammonia and volatile organic
compounds) from numerous sources over a wide geographic area. Fine
particulate precursors react in the atmosphere to form
PM2.5. Aerosol PM2.5 reduces the clarity and
distance one can see by scattering and absorbing light.
The visibility protection program under sections 169A, 169B, and
110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA is designed to protect visibility in national
parks and wilderness areas (Class I areas). On December 2, 1980, EPA
promulgated regulations, known as ``reasonably attributable visibility
impairment (RAVI), to address visibility impairment in Class I areas
that is reasonably attributable to a single source or small group of
sources. On July 1, 1999, EPA promulgated the Regional Haze Rule which
revised existing visibility regulations to incorporate provisions
addressing regional haze impairment. EPA's Regional Haze Rule, as
codified in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 51.308 (40 CFR
51.308), requires states to submit regional haze SIPs. Among other
things, the regional haze SIPs must include provisions requiring
certain sources install and operate best available retrofit technology
(BART).
At 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2), the regional haze rule allows states to
meet BART requirements by mandating alternative measures in lieu of
mandating source-specific BART, so long as the alternative measures
provide better visibility protection. Given the regional nature of
visibility impairment, an alternative that results in lower emissions
of SO2 and NOX will generally provide better
visibility protection. Thus, in the absence of a difference in the
spatial distribution of emissions, a modeling analysis is generally not
necessary to be able to conclude that an alternative strategy with
lower SO2 and NOX emissions provides better
visibility protection.
On June 24, 2011, Illinois submitted a plan to address the
requirements of the Regional Haze Rule, as codified at 40 CFR 51.308.
EPA approved Illinois' regional haze SIP on July 6, 2012 (77 FR 39943).
In its approval, EPA determined that the emission reductions from
sources included in the Illinois plan are significantly greater than
even conservative definitions of BART applied to BART subject units (77
FR 39945). EPA also addressed whether the Illinois plan, achieving
greater emission reductions overall than the application of BART on
BART-subject units, can also be expected to achieve greater visibility
protection than application of BART on BART-subject units. Given that,
in general, the Illinois power plants are substantial distances from
any Class I area, and given that the averaging in Illinois' plan is
only authorized within the somewhat limited region within which each
utility's plants are located, EPA determined that a reallocation of
emission reductions from one plant to another is unlikely to change the
visibility impact of those emission reductions significantly.
Consequently, EPA concluded that the significantly greater emission
reductions that Illinois required in its regional haze SIP will yield
greater progress toward visibility protection as compared to the
benefits of a conservative estimate of BART.
One of the rules approved in that action to meet BART requirements
is 35 Illinois Administrative Code (Ill. Adm. Code) rule 225.233 Multi-
Pollutant Standard (MPS), specifically subsections (a), (b), (e), and
(g). Section 225.233(e)(3)(C) contains the sulfur dioxide
(SO2) emission standards applicable to the Ameren MPS Group.
Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(i) establishes an overall SO2
annual emission rate for EGUs in the Ameren MPS group of 0.50 pounds
per million Btu (lb/mmBtu) for calendar years 2010 through 2013.
Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(ii) establishes an overall SO2
annual emission rate for EGUs in the Ameren MPS group of 0.43 lb/mmBtu
for calendar year 2014. Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(iii) establishes an
overall SO2 annual emission rate for EGUs in the Ameren MPS
group of 0.25 lb/mmBtu for calendar years 2015 and 2016. Section
225.233(e)(3)(C)(iv) establishes an overall SO2 annual
emission rate for EGUs in the Ameren MPS group of 0.23 lb/mmBtu
beginning in calendar year 2017 and continuing each calendar year
thereafter.
On November 21, 2013, the Illinois Pollution Control Board (IPCB)
granted IPH and Medina Valley a variance from
[[Page 21683]]
the applicable requirements of Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(iii) for a
period beginning January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2019, and
Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(iv) for a period beginning January 1, 2017,
through December 31, 2019, subject to certain conditions. IEPA
submitted the variance as a revisions to the Illinois Regional Haze SIP
on September 3, 2014. The IPH facilities included in the Ameren MPS
group and subject to the variance include: Coffeen Energy Center
(Montgomery County), Duck Creek Energy Center (Fulton County), E.D.
Edwards Energy Center (Peoria County), Joppa Energy Center (Massac
County), and Newton Energy Center (Jasper County). The two Medina
Valley facilities included in the Ameren MPS group and subject to the
variance are the Meredosia Energy Center (Morgan County) and the
Hutsonville Energy Center (Crawford County).
III. What is EPA's analysis of the variance for IPH and Medina Valley?
As stated above, the IPCB granted IPH and Medina Valley a variance
from the requirement of Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(iii) to comply with an
overall SO2 annual emission rate of 0.25 lb/mmBtu in 2015
and 2016 for the time period from January 1, 2015, through December 31,
2019, and from the requirement of Section 225.233(e)(3)(C)(iv) to
comply with an overall SO2 annual emission rate of 0.23 lb/
mmBtu for the time period from January 1, 2017 through December 31,
2019. This variance was granted subject to numerous conditions
including, but not limited to, the following:
1. The IPH facilities in the Ameren MPS group must comply with
an overall SO2 annual emission rate of 0.35 lb/million
Btu from January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2019, and an overall
SO2 annual emission rate of 0.23 lb/mmBtu beginning on
January 1, 2020.
2. Medina Valley must not operate the EGUs at Meredosia and
Hutsonville Power stations until after December 31, 2020, except
that the FutureGen project at the Meredosia Energy Center is exempt
from this restriction.
3. Through December 31, 2019, IPH must continue to burn low
sulfur coal at the E.D. Edwards, Joppa, and Newton Energy Centers.
The combined annual average stack SO2 emissions of these
three stations must not exceed 0.55 lb/mmBtu on a calendar year
annual average basis.
4. Through December 31, 2019, IPH must operate the existing Flue
Gas Desulfurization systems at the Duck Creek and Coffeen Energy
Centers to achieve a combined SO2 removal rate of at
least 98 percent on a calendar year annual average basis.
5. IPH must permanently retire E.D. Edwards Unit 1 as soon as
allowed by the Midcontinent Independent Transmission System
Operator, Inc. (now called the Midcontinent Independent System
Operator).
6. From the time period beginning October 1, 2013, through
December 31, 2020, IPH must limit the MPS Group system-wide mass
emissions of SO2 to no more than 327,996 tons.
7. For the time period beginning October 1, 2013, through
December 31, 2020, IPH must report annually to IEPA the combined
tons of mass SO2 emissions and the overall SO2
annual emissions rate from its five Ameren MPS group facilities. The
report must show the mass SO2 emissions for each time
period (October 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013, and each year
thereafter) along with a running total of the remaining emissions
available under the system-wide mass SO2 emissions limit.
8. The variance also includes a condition with a schedule for
completing the flue gas desulfurization project at the Newton Power
Station, with major equipment components in position by September 1,
2019, and requirements for IPH to file annual progress reports with
IEPA from 2013 through 2019.
In evaluating the variance submitted by Illinois, EPA assessed the
effect the variance would have on the emissions reductions expected
under the MPS as currently approved into the Regional Haze SIP. Under
the conditions of the currently approved Regional Haze SIP, the Ameren
MPS group would be expected to emit 335,774 tons of SO2 for
the 2013-2020 time period. Under the variance, the Ameren MPS group is
limited to 327,996 tons of SO2 over that same time period;
7,778 tons less than would be expected under the current SIP.
In addition, EPA evaluated the variance to ensure that the
alternative measures contained in the variance continue to provide
better visibility protection than the application of BART on BART-
subject units. Because the deadline for implementation of BART level
controls in Illinois is 2017 (within 5 years of approval of Illinois'
SIP), EPA compared the 2017 emissions under the variance to the
application of typical Best Available Control Technology (BACT) control
levels to the BART subject units in the Ameren MPS group. BACT limits
are imposed on new units or units undergoing major modifications.
Therefore, BART limits, which by definition apply to relatively old
existing units, are unlikely to be lower than the limits that would
apply to a new unit and would in many cases be significantly higher.
Table 1--Comparison of Emissions Reductions at Ameren MPS Group Units Under the Variance Versus Emissions Reductions From Application of BACT Limits to
BART Subject Units
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base year BACT (0.06#/MMBtu) Variance (2017)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility Unit MMMBtu Emissions Emissions Reduction Emissions Reduction
#/MMBtu (tons) (tons) (tons) #/MMBtu (tons) (tons)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cofeen................................. 1 18,570 1.54 14,332 557 13,775 0.35 3,250 11,082
Cofeen................................. 2 37,545 1.49 27999 1,126 26,873 0.35 6,570 21,429
Duck Creek............................. 1 22,635 0.97 11026 679 10,347 0.35 3,961 7,065
E D Edwards............................ 1 6,417 3.55 11399 ........... ........... 0.35 1,123 10,276
E D Edwards............................ 2 17,222 1.70 14666 517 14,149 0.35 3,014 11,652
E D Edwards............................ 3 15,972 1.21 9683 479 9,204 0.35 2,795 6,888
Hutsonville............................ 5 3,161 4.53 7163 ........... 0 0 ........... 7,163
Hutsonville............................ 6 3,443 4.53 7791 ........... 0 0 ........... 7,791
Joppa.................................. 1 13,548 0.51 3441 ........... 0 0.35 2,371 1,070
Joppa.................................. 2 16,258 0.51 4139 ........... 0 0.35 2,845 1,294
Joppa.................................. 3 15,396 0.51 3947 ........... 0 0.35 2,694 1,253
Joppa.................................. 4 13,402 0.52 3448 ........... 0 0.35 2,345 1,143
Joppa.................................. 5 15,094 0.52 3932 ........... 0 0.35 2,641 1,291
Joppa.................................. 6 16,063 0.52 4182 ........... 0 0.35 2,811 1,371
Meredosia.............................. 1 1,134 5.02 2844 ........... 0 0 ........... 2,844
Meredosia.............................. 2 1,337 5.02 3356 ........... 0 0 ........... 3,356
Meredosia.............................. 3 1,069 5.04 2694 ........... 0 0 ........... 2,694
Meredosia.............................. 4 1,406 5.00 3518 ........... 0 0 ........... 3,518
[[Page 21684]]
Meredosia.............................. 5 10,810 2.34 12639 ........... 0 0 ........... 12,639
Newton................................. 1 40,631 0.45 9046 ........... 0 0.35 7,110 1,936
Newton................................. 2 38,533 0.46 8823 ........... 0 0.35 6,743 2,080
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals............................. ....... 309,646 ........... 170,108 ........... 74,348 ........... 50,275 119,833
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 shows SO2 emissions reductions of 74,348 tons in
2017 if typical BACT limits were applied to BART subject sources in the
Ameren MPS group. With the variance, Table 1 shows SO2
emissions reductions of 119,833 tons in 2017. More reductions are
required in 2017 under the variance than would be required by the
application of typical BACT limits to BART subject sources. Even
assuming that the 22,360 MMBtu generated at the Hudsonville and
Meredosia units would be shifted to other units in the group, applying
the 0.35 pound/MBtu group average results in an additional 3,913 tons
of emissions under the variance in 2017, or a total of 54,188 tons of
SO2. This would result in 2017 SO2 emissions
reductions under the variance of 115,920 tons, which remains 41,572
tons greater than emissions reductions under the application of BACT at
BART subject sources. In addition, for the reasons set forth in EPA's
approval of the Illinois regional haze sip (77 FR 39946) and summarized
above, EPA continues to conclude that the significantly greater
emission reductions required under the variance will yield greater
progress toward visibility protection as compared to the benefits of a
conservative estimate of BART. Therefore, EPA concludes that the
revised limits under the variance continue to satisfy BART requirements
for the Ameren MPS Group sources.
In evaluating the approvability of the variance, EPA must also
consider whether the SIP revision meets the requirements of section
110(l) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7410(l). To be approved, a SIP revision
must not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment, reasonable further progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA. Currently, the SIP establishes overall annual
SO2 emissions rates for the Ameren MPS Group, beginning in
2010. The SIP allows flexibility in achieving these overall emissions
rates, not requiring reductions at any particular source. It should be
noted that none of the Ameren MPS Group sources are located in a
PM2.5 nonattainment area and the only source located in an
SO2 nonattainment area is the E.D. Edwards facility in
Peoria County. The variance adds specific conditions applicable to this
facility, including the requirement that the E.D. Edwards, Joppa, and
Newton Energy Centers continue to burn low sulfur coal through December
31, 2019, and that E.D. Edwards permanently retire Unit 1 as soon as
allowed by the Midcontinent Independent Transmission System Operator,
Inc. The variance will not result in any increase in SO2
emissions, but rather will result in fewer SO2 emissions
over the 2013-2020 time period. In addition, the measures contained in
the variance provide better visibility protection than the application
of BART on BART-subject units. Therefore, the variance will not
interfere with attainment, reasonable further progress, or any other
applicable requirement of the CAA.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve the IPH and Medina Valley variance,
submitted by IEPA on September 3, 2014, as a revision to the Illinois
Regional Haze SIP.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference Illinois Pollution Control Board Order PCB 14-10, effective
November, 21, 2013. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available electronically through
www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office
(see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).
VI. 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 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 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
[[Page 21685]]
appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects,
using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
This rule is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that
a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule
does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: April 2, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2015-08896 Filed 4-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
