Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Site-Specific Sulfur Dioxide Requirements for USG Interiors, LLC, 31458-31462 [2017-14212]
Download as PDF
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
31458
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 129 / Friday, July 7, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• 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 Clean Air Act;
and
• does not provide the 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 the 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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. The EPA will
submit a report containing this action
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:43 Jul 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register. This action is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by September 5,
2017. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality
of this action for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time
within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action. This action may not be
challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: April 20, 2017.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart F—California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(270)(i)(E)(2) to
read as follows:
■
§ 52.220
Identification of plan-in part.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(270) * * *
(i) * * *
(E) * * *
(2) Rule 2220, ‘‘Transportation
Outreach Program,’’ adopted on January
19, 1999.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–14203 Filed 7–6–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0081; FRL–9964–49–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; SiteSpecific Sulfur Dioxide Requirements
for USG Interiors, LLC
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving, under the
Clean Air Act (CAA), a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by Wisconsin on January 31,
2017, and supplemented on March 20,
2017. This SIP submittal consists of
Wisconsin Administrative Order AM–
16–01, which imposes a requirement for
a taller cupola exhaust stack, a sulfur
dioxide (SO2) emission limit in
conjunction with a minimum cupola
stack flue gas flow rate, and associated
requirements on the mineral wool
production process at the USG Interiors
LLC facility located in Walworth,
Wisconsin (USG-Walworth). Wisconsin
submitted this SIP revision to enable the
area near USG-Walworth to qualify for
being designated ‘‘attainment’’ of the
2010 primary SO2 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS), a matter
that will be addressed in a separate
future rulemaking. EPA is approving
AM–16–01 into the Wisconsin SIP,
which makes the AM–16–01
requirements federally enforceable.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective September 5, 2017, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by August 7,
2017. If adverse comments are received,
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal
Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2017–0081 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed
from Regulations.gov. For either manner
of submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 129 / Friday, July 7, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the ‘‘For Further
Information Contact’’ section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jenny Liljegren, Physical Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312)886–6832,
Liljegren.Jennifer@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. Why did Wisconsin issue Administrative
Order AM–16–01?
II. What is EPA’s analysis of the SO2
emission limit and associated
requirements in AM–16–01?
III. By which Criteria is EPA reviewing this
SIP revision?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order reviews
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
I. Why Did Wisconsin issue
Administrative Order AM–16–01?
Wisconsin submitted a SIP revision
on January 31, 2017, along with
supplemental information on March 20,
2017. The submittal contains Wisconsin
Administrative Order AM–16–01 signed
on January 31, 2017, by the Director of
the Air Management Bureau of the
Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources, which establishes a
requirement for a taller cupola stack, an
SO2 emission limit, and associated
requirements for the mineral wool
production process at USG-Walworth.
Wisconsin established these
requirements to enable the area near 1
USG-Walworth to qualify in the future
for being designated ‘‘attainment’’ of the
2010 primary SO2 NAAQS.2
1 The specific area will be identified in a future
designations rulemaking to be finalized December
31, 2017, for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
2 On June 3, 2010, EPA revised the primary
(health based) SO2 NAAQS by establishing a new
one-hour standard at a level of 75 parts per billion
(ppb) which is attained when the three-year average
of the 99th percentile of one-hour daily maximum
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:43 Jul 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
USG-Walworth cannot demonstrate
modeled attainment of the 2010 SO2
NAAQS in accordance with EPA’s Draft
SO2 NAAQS Designations Modeling
Technical Assistance Document3 in
absence of new requirements pertaining
to the mineral wool production process.
Therefore, Wisconsin conducted air
dispersion modeling using the
American Meteorological Society/
Environmental Protection Agency
Regulatory Model (AERMOD) version
16216 (released on December 20, 2016)
and 16216r (released on January 17,
2017) in accordance with appendix W of
part 51 of chapter 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) to determine
a new set of requirements, including an
increase in the cupola stack height from
68.5 feet to 175 feet above ground and
an SO2 emission limit for the mineral
wool production process at USGWalworth in conjunction with a
minimum cupola stack flue gas flow
rate. The air quality modeling of these
conditions supports Wisconsin’s
conclusion that these limits provide for
attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to
take action on Wisconsin’s request to
approve AM–16–01 into the Wisconsin
SIP and thereby make federally
enforceable the requirement for the
taller stack, the SO2 emission limit, and
the associated requirements therein.
Once these requirements have become
federally enforceable, Wisconsin
intends to use them to demonstrate
AERMOD-modeled attainment for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS for the area near
USG-Walworth. EPA intends to
designate the area near USG-Walworth
for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, under a
separate future rulemaking to be
finalized by December 31, 2017.4
concentrations does not exceed 75 ppb (75 FR
35520 and 40 CFR 50.17). EPA determined this is
the level necessary to protect public health with an
adequate margin of safety, especially for children,
the elderly, and those with asthma. These groups
are particularly susceptible to the health effects
associated with breathing SO2.
3 Draft SO NAAQS Designations Modeling
2
Technical Assistance Document. December 2013.
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/
pdfs/SO2ModelingTAD.pdf
4 The EPA has issued designations for a total of
94 areas throughout the U.S. for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS in previous final actions signed by the EPA
Administrator in ‘‘Round 1’’ on August 5, 2013 (78
FR 47191) and in ‘‘Round 2’’ on July 12, 2016 (81
FR 45039) and December 13, 2016 (81 FR 89870).
The EPA is under a December 31, 2017, deadline
to designate additional areas as required by the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California
[Sierra Club v. McCarthy, No. 3–13–cv–3953 (SI)
(N.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2015)]. We are referring to the set
of designations being finalized by the December 31,
2017, deadline as ‘‘Round 3’’ of the designations
process for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA intends to
address the area near USG-Walworth as part of the
Round 3 designations.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
31459
II. What is EPA’s analysis of the SO2
emission limit and associated
requirements in AM–16–01?
Wisconsin issued AM–16–01 on
January 31, 2017, for USG-Walworth,
with a compliance date of October 1,
2017. This order established a cupola
stack height increase from 68.5 feet to
175 feet above ground level, a cupola
stack flue gas flow rate of 23,200 actual
cubic feet per minute (ACFM) in
conjunction with an SO2 emission limit
of 301.3 pounds per hour (lbs/hr), and
other associated requirements for the
mineral wool production process at
USG-Walworth.
Dispersion techniques, such as
increasing the final exhaust plume rise
by manipulation of source parameters
like increasing stack heights and flue
gas flow rates, are not approvable in
most circumstances. EPA’s stack height
provisions codified at 40 CFR 51.118
arise out of CAA section 123(a), which
states that the degree of emission
limitation required for control of any air
pollutant under an applicable
implementation plan under this
subchapter shall not be affected in any
manner by so much of the stack height
of any source as exceeds good
engineering practice (as determined
under regulations promulgated by the
Administrator), or any other dispersion
technique.
‘‘Dispersion technique,’’ as defined at
40 CFR 51.100(hh)(1), means any
technique which attempts to affect the
concentration of a pollutant in the
ambient air by: Using that portion of a
stack which exceeds good engineering
practice stack height; varying the rate of
emission of a pollutant according to
atmospheric conditions or ambient
concentrations of that pollutant; or
increasing final exhaust gas plume rise
by manipulating source process
parameters, exhaust gas parameters,
stack parameters, or combining exhaust
gases from several existing stacks into
one stack; or other selective handling of
exhaust gas streams so as to increase the
exhaust gas plume rise.
In the case of USG-Walworth, the
raising of the stack to 175 feet does not
exceed good engineering practice stack
height as defined at § 51.100(ii), and
AM–16–01 does not provide for the
allowable rate of emissions to vary
according to atmospheric conditions or
ambient pollutant concentrations as per
§ 51.100(hh)(1)(ii). In some cases,
increasing the final exhaust plume rise
by manipulation of the stack height and
flue gas flow rate is a dispersion
technique as per § 51.100(hh)(1)(iii).
However, there is an exception under 40
CFR 51.100(hh)(2)(v) where dispersion
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
31460
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 129 / Friday, July 7, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
techniques under § 51.100(hh)(1)(iii) do
not include techniques that increase the
final exhaust gas plume rise where the
resulting allowable emissions of sulfur
dioxide from the facility do not exceed
5,000 tons per year. Such an increase of
plume rise is not considered a
dispersion technique when the resulting
allowable emissions of SO2 from the
facility do not exceed 5,000 tons per
year (TPY). The AM–16–01 SO2
emission limit of 301.3 lbs/hr is
equivalent to 1,319.69 TPY, which
accounts for over 99% of the allowable
SO2 emitted by all emission units at
USG-Walworth. Additionally, AM–16–
01 includes a requirement that USGWalworth only fire natural gas in the
other emission units at the facility,
including the boiler (B10), the
acoustical tile dryer (P32), and the
finishing/curing ovens (P34A and
P38A). Therefore, the facility-wide
allowable SO2 emissions from USGWalworth resulting from the AM–16–01
requirement to increase the cupola stack
height from 68.5 feet to 175 feet above
ground level do not exceed 5,000 TPY.
Therefore, EPA proposes to approve the
increase in the cupola stack height.
Wisconsin set an SO2 emission limit
of 301.3 lbs/hr for the mineral wool
production process in conjunction with
a cupola stack flue gas flow rate of
23,200 ACFM. For emission rates less
than 301.3 lbs/hr, Wisconsin established
a required minimum cupola stack flue
gas flow rate which varies based on the
SO2 emission rate. AM–16–01 requires
that the cupola stack flue gas flow rate
in ACFM shall be equal to or greater
than the flow rate calculated according
to Equation 1.
Equation 1: Required Flue Gas Flow
Rate (ACFM) = [SO2 Emission Rate
(lbs/hr) × 79.192] ¥ 664.62
To develop Equation 1, Wisconsin
plotted the worst case (highest) SO2
emissions versus worst case (lowest)
flue gas flow rates as estimated from
information contained in 2015 and 2010
stack testing reports and an August
2014–August 2016 dataset provided by
USG-Walworth. Wisconsin fit a trend
line (Equation 1) to the plot and
included this equation in AM–16–01 as
the minimum flue gas flow rate
requirement for USG-Walworth (e.g. for
a given SO2 emission rate less than
301.3 lbs/hr, USG-Walworth must use
Equation 1 to determine the
corresponding required minimum flue
gas flow rate under which it must
operate). When emissions are the full
allowable 301.3 lbs/hr, the minimum
flow rate is 23,200 ACFM; lower
minimum flow rates apply at lower
emission levels.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:43 Jul 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
Wisconsin’s AM–16–01 method of
determining compliance with the
minimum flue gas flow rate (EPA
Method 2) is to be conducted on the
same schedule, described below, as that
for compliance with the SO2 emission
limit (EPA Method 6C). AM–16–01 also
requires operation of the thermal
oxidizer and baghouse whenever the
cupola is in operation/fired and
additional requirements for monitoring
and maintaining these control devices to
ensure they are functioning properly,
including an interlock system which
only allows operation of the cupola if
the thermal oxidizer incinerator
chamber temperature is at or above
1,300 degrees Fahrenheit averaged over
any one-hour period.
In addition to the 1-hour limit of
301.3 lbs/hour in AM–16–01, Wisconsin
opted to set a 30-day rolling average
limit of 238.0 lbs/hour. EPA’s April
2014 ‘‘Guidance for 1-Hour SO2
Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions’’
discusses the option to establish limits
with averaging times up to 30 days in
length, recommends that any such limit
be established at a level that is
comparably stringent to the one-hour
average limit, and recommends a
detailed procedure for determining such
a comparably stringent limit. Wisconsin
followed the recommendations of the
2014 guidance in determining an
appropriate level for this limit.
Therefore, the state has applied an
appropriate adjustment, yielding a 30day rolling average emission limit that
has comparable stringency to the onehour average limit. Wisconsin used an
adjustment factor of 0.79, which EPA
identified in its 2014 guidance as an
appropriate adjustment factor for
determining equivalent emission
limitation between 1-hour and 30-day
rolling average timeframes for
uncontrolled coal-fired boilers based on
a national analysis of utility coal boiler
emissions.
Wisconsin’s method of determining
compliance with the 301.3 lbs/hr limit
as set forth in AM–16–01 uses EPAapproved stack testing methods, and
includes an initial stack test that must
be conducted no later than April 1,
2018, which is 180 days after the AM–
16–01 compliance date of October 1,
2017, and periodic stack testing
conducted every five years within 90
days of the anniversary date of the
initial stack test. Wisconsin’s method of
determining continuous compliance, as
set forth in AM–16–01, requires a mass
balance calculation to demonstrate
compliance with the 238.0 lbs/hr limit
on a 30-day rolling average basis. Under
this rule, stack tests at the facility must
show compliance with the 1-hour
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
emission limit of 301.3 lbs/hr, but
continuous emissions data, collected
from routine mass balance calculations,
are used to assess compliance with the
30-day average emission limit of 238.0
lbs/hr. Wisconsin has thereby
established a two-tiered enforcement
regime, in which stack tests provide
occasional assessment of compliance,
tested against a 1-hour limit, and
continuous emissions data, as collected
via routine mass balance calculations,
provide a continuous assessment of
compliance, tested against a 30-day
average limit.
Wisconsin’s mass balance equation in
AM–16–01 is the difference between the
sum of the estimated sulfur content of
all the materials loaded into the cupola
and the sum of the estimated sulfur
content in the mineral wool product
output from the cupola in lbs/day
divided by the operating hours per day
and multiplied by the molecular weight
ratio of SO2 to sulfur. AM–16–01
requires USG-Walworth to develop a
compliance and monitoring plan and to
monitor, record, and report the
information necessary for calculating
the 30-day rolling average SO2 emission
limit via the mass balance equation,
such as operating hours, operating days,
coke and all other material usage
amounts. AM–16–01 includes
requirements to sample the sulfur,
moisture, and heat content of each of
the materials input to the cupola and
the sulfur content of the mineral wool
product or waste material output from
the cupola. The sampling requirements
include initial material sampling,
ongoing material sampling, ongoing low
sulfur material sampling, mineral wool
product and waste sampling, alternate
sampling frequency which increases if
the 30-day rolling average SO2 emission
rate is equal to or greater than 95% of
the limit for three or more operating
days during the previous 12 calendar
months. Likewise, sampling frequency
can be decreased if the 30-day rolling
average SO2 emission rate is equal to or
less than 70% of the limit for 12
consecutive months. The sampling
requirements include sample collection
and preparation methods as per those of
ASTM International, formerly the
American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM). Finally, AM–16–01
includes a requirement for USGWalworth to submit a revision request
to incorporate the applicable
requirements of AM–16–01 into the
USG-Walworth operating permit by June
23, 2019.
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 129 / Friday, July 7, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
III. By which criteria is EPA reviewing
this SIP revision?
EPA is evaluating AM–16–01 on the
basis of whether its requirements are
measurable (and thus enforceable) and
whether it strengthens Wisconsin’s SIP.
When imposing quantitative
requirements such as emission limits, it
is important that these requirements be
measurable so as to determine
compliance. While the use of an
electronic continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) would be an
ideal way to measure the SO2 emission
rate from the mineral wool production
process and the flue gas flow rate from
the cupola stack for compliance
determination purposes, EPA’s analysis,
above, of Wisconsin’s AM–16–01
compliance requirements shows that
Wisconsin has developed a conservative
mass balance approach that allows for
the ongoing measurement of the USGWalworth mineral wool production
process SO2 emission rate to determine
compliance with the SO2 emission limit
contained in AM–16–01. The AM–16–
01 requirements are carefully designed
such that compliance with the SO2
emission limit can be determined via a
combination of testing, sampling,
monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting making the SO2 emission limit
and associated requirements contained
in AM–16–01 measureable and
enforceable. Therefore, in the absence of
a CEMS, EPA finds acceptable the AM–
16–01 mass balance approach of
compliance monitoring in conjunction
with required periodic stack testing.
The USG-Walworth mineral wool
production process is already subject to
Wisconsin rule NR 417.07(2)(b), which
is a statewide SO2 emission limit of 5.5
pounds per Million British Thermal
Units (lbs/MMBTU) that applies to any
steam generating unit or other fuelburning equipment firing solid fossil
fuel at a facility that has a total heat
input capacity on solid fossil fuel of less
than 250 MMBTU/hr and which was
incorporated into the Wisconsin SIP in
1993 (58 FR 29537). This SIP
requirement will not be removed with
the approval of AM–16–01 into the
Wisconsin SIP. AM–16–01 provides
additional requirements to the 5.5 lbs/
MMBTU emission limit already in the
Wisconsin SIP. Therefore, EPA’s
approval of AM–16–01 would
strengthen the Wisconsin SIP. Since the
current SO2 emission limit of 5.5 lbs/
MMBTU will remain in the SIP (58 FR
29537), EPA’s approval of AM–16–01
into the Wisconsin SIP would not cause
there to be any relaxation of the SO2
emission limit in the Wisconsin SIP
with respect to USG-Walworth and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:43 Jul 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
would, therefore, not interfere with
CAA section 110(l), which is the antibacksliding provision of the CAA.
Therefore, EPA is approving AM–16–01
into the Wisconsin SIP.
As previously stated, EPA intends to
designate the area near USG-Walworth
for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS under a
separate future rulemaking to be
finalized by December 31, 2017. If AM–
16–01 becomes SIP-approved and
thereby federally enforceable in a timely
fashion, EPA will formally evaluate the
adequacy of the AM–16–01
requirements to provide for attainment
as part of the rulemaking on the 2010
SO2 NAAQS designation for the area
near USG-Walworth.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving into the Wisconsin
SIP AM–16–01, which contains a
requirement for a taller cupola stack, an
SO2 emission limit, and associated
requirements for the mineral wool
production process at USG-Walworth.
EPA confirms that the requirements
contained in AM–16–01 are
measureable, enforceable, and
strengthen the Wisconsin SIP. By
approving AM–16–01 into the
Wisconsin SIP, the stack height
requirement, the SO2 emission limit,
and the associated requirements will
become Federally enforceable.
We are publishing this action without
prior proposal because we view this as
a noncontroversial amendment and
anticipate no adverse comments.
However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, we
are publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to approve the
state plan if relevant adverse written
comments are filed. This rule will be
effective September 5, 2017 without
further notice unless we receive relevant
adverse written comments by August 7,
2017. If we receive such comments, we
will withdraw this action before the
effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will
withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. If we do not receive any
comments, this action will be effective
September 5, 2017.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
31461
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation
by reference of the Wisconsin
Regulations described in the
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. EPA has made, and will continue
to make, these documents generally
available through www.regulations.gov
and/or at the EPA Region 5 Office
(please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• 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
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
31462
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 129 / Friday, July 7, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by September 5, 2017. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. Parties with
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register, rather than file
an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:43 Jul 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: June 20, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. Section 52.2570 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(136) to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.2570
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(136) On January 31, 2017
(supplemented on March 20, 2017), the
Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources submitted a request to
incorporate Wisconsin Administrative
Order AM–16–01 into its State
Implementation Plan. AM–16–01
imposes a requirement for a taller
cupola exhaust stack, a sulfur dioxide
(SO2) emission limit in conjunction
with a minimum cupola stack flue gas
flow rate, and associated requirements
on the mineral wool production process
at the USG Interiors LLC facility located
in Walworth, Wisconsin (USGWalworth). Wisconsin intends to use
the requirements of AM–16–01 to
support an attainment designation.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
Wisconsin Administrative Order AM–
16–01, issued by the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources on
January 31, 2017, to USG Interiors LLC
for its facility located in Walworth,
Wisconsin.
[FR Doc. 2017–14212 Filed 7–6–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0136; FRL–9964–56–
Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; TN: NonInterference Demonstration for Federal
Low-Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement
in Shelby County
AGENCY:
Environmental Protection
Agency.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ACTION:
Final rule.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving a
noninterference demonstration that
evaluates whether the change for the
Federal Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)
requirements in Shelby County
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Area’’)
would interfere with the Area’s ability
to meet the requirements of the Clean
Air Act (CAA or Act). Tennessee
submitted through the Tennessee
Department of Environment and
Conservation (TDEC), on April 12, 2017,
a noninterference demonstration on
behalf of the Shelby County Health
Department requesting that EPA change
the RVP requirements for Shelby
County. Specifically, Tennessee’s
noninterference demonstration
concludes that relaxing the federal RVP
requirement from 7.8 pounds per square
inch (psi) to 9.0 psi for gasoline sold
between June 1 and September 15 of
each year in Shelby County would not
interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS or standards)
or with any other CAA requirement.
DATES: This rule is effective July 7,
2017.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2017–0136. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information 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 through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Regulatory Management Section,
Air Planning and Implementation
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sean Lakeman, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07JYR1.SGM
07JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 129 (Friday, July 7, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31458-31462]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-14212]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2017-0081; FRL-9964-49-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Site-Specific Sulfur Dioxide
Requirements for USG Interiors, LLC
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving, under
the Clean Air Act (CAA), a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by Wisconsin on January 31, 2017, and supplemented on March
20, 2017. This SIP submittal consists of Wisconsin Administrative Order
AM-16-01, which imposes a requirement for a taller cupola exhaust
stack, a sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission limit in conjunction
with a minimum cupola stack flue gas flow rate, and associated
requirements on the mineral wool production process at the USG
Interiors LLC facility located in Walworth, Wisconsin (USG-Walworth).
Wisconsin submitted this SIP revision to enable the area near USG-
Walworth to qualify for being designated ``attainment'' of the 2010
primary SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS),
a matter that will be addressed in a separate future rulemaking. EPA is
approving AM-16-01 into the Wisconsin SIP, which makes the AM-16-01
requirements federally enforceable.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective September 5, 2017,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by August 7, 2017. If adverse
comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2017-0081 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment.
[[Page 31459]]
The written comment is considered the official comment and should
include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally
not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the ``For Further Information Contact'' section. For the
full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jenny Liljegren, Physical Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312)886-6832,
Liljegren.Jennifer@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. Why did Wisconsin issue Administrative Order AM-16-01?
II. What is EPA's analysis of the SO2 emission limit and associated
requirements in AM-16-01?
III. By which Criteria is EPA reviewing this SIP revision?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order reviews
I. Why Did Wisconsin issue Administrative Order AM-16-01?
Wisconsin submitted a SIP revision on January 31, 2017, along with
supplemental information on March 20, 2017. The submittal contains
Wisconsin Administrative Order AM-16-01 signed on January 31, 2017, by
the Director of the Air Management Bureau of the Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources, which establishes a requirement for a taller
cupola stack, an SO2 emission limit, and associated
requirements for the mineral wool production process at USG-Walworth.
Wisconsin established these requirements to enable the area near \1\
USG-Walworth to qualify in the future for being designated
``attainment'' of the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The specific area will be identified in a future
designations rulemaking to be finalized December 31, 2017, for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS.
\2\ On June 3, 2010, EPA revised the primary (health based)
SO2 NAAQS by establishing a new one-hour standard at a
level of 75 parts per billion (ppb) which is attained when the
three-year average of the 99th percentile of one-hour daily maximum
concentrations does not exceed 75 ppb (75 FR 35520 and 40 CFR
50.17). EPA determined this is the level necessary to protect public
health with an adequate margin of safety, especially for children,
the elderly, and those with asthma. These groups are particularly
susceptible to the health effects associated with breathing
SO2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USG-Walworth cannot demonstrate modeled attainment of the 2010
SO2 NAAQS in accordance with EPA's Draft SO2
NAAQS Designations Modeling Technical Assistance Document\3\ in absence
of new requirements pertaining to the mineral wool production process.
Therefore, Wisconsin conducted air dispersion modeling using the
American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency
Regulatory Model (AERMOD) version 16216 (released on December 20, 2016)
and 16216r (released on January 17, 2017) in accordance with appendix W
of part 51 of chapter 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to
determine a new set of requirements, including an increase in the
cupola stack height from 68.5 feet to 175 feet above ground and an
SO2 emission limit for the mineral wool production process
at USG-Walworth in conjunction with a minimum cupola stack flue gas
flow rate. The air quality modeling of these conditions supports
Wisconsin's conclusion that these limits provide for attainment of the
2010 SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Draft SO2 NAAQS Designations Modeling Technical
Assistance Document. December 2013. https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/
sulfurdioxide/pdfs/SO2ModelingTAD.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of this rulemaking is to take action on Wisconsin's
request to approve AM-16-01 into the Wisconsin SIP and thereby make
federally enforceable the requirement for the taller stack, the
SO2 emission limit, and the associated requirements therein.
Once these requirements have become federally enforceable, Wisconsin
intends to use them to demonstrate AERMOD-modeled attainment for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS for the area near USG-Walworth. EPA intends
to designate the area near USG-Walworth for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS, under a separate future rulemaking to be finalized by December
31, 2017.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The EPA has issued designations for a total of 94 areas
throughout the U.S. for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in previous
final actions signed by the EPA Administrator in ``Round 1'' on
August 5, 2013 (78 FR 47191) and in ``Round 2'' on July 12, 2016 (81
FR 45039) and December 13, 2016 (81 FR 89870). The EPA is under a
December 31, 2017, deadline to designate additional areas as
required by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California [Sierra Club v. McCarthy, No. 3-13-cv-3953 (SI) (N.D.
Cal. Mar. 2, 2015)]. We are referring to the set of designations
being finalized by the December 31, 2017, deadline as ``Round 3'' of
the designations process for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA
intends to address the area near USG-Walworth as part of the Round 3
designations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. What is EPA's analysis of the SO2 emission limit and
associated requirements in AM-16-01?
Wisconsin issued AM-16-01 on January 31, 2017, for USG-Walworth,
with a compliance date of October 1, 2017. This order established a
cupola stack height increase from 68.5 feet to 175 feet above ground
level, a cupola stack flue gas flow rate of 23,200 actual cubic feet
per minute (ACFM) in conjunction with an SO2 emission limit
of 301.3 pounds per hour (lbs/hr), and other associated requirements
for the mineral wool production process at USG-Walworth.
Dispersion techniques, such as increasing the final exhaust plume
rise by manipulation of source parameters like increasing stack heights
and flue gas flow rates, are not approvable in most circumstances.
EPA's stack height provisions codified at 40 CFR 51.118 arise out of
CAA section 123(a), which states that the degree of emission limitation
required for control of any air pollutant under an applicable
implementation plan under this subchapter shall not be affected in any
manner by so much of the stack height of any source as exceeds good
engineering practice (as determined under regulations promulgated by
the Administrator), or any other dispersion technique.
``Dispersion technique,'' as defined at 40 CFR 51.100(hh)(1), means
any technique which attempts to affect the concentration of a pollutant
in the ambient air by: Using that portion of a stack which exceeds good
engineering practice stack height; varying the rate of emission of a
pollutant according to atmospheric conditions or ambient concentrations
of that pollutant; or increasing final exhaust gas plume rise by
manipulating source process parameters, exhaust gas parameters, stack
parameters, or combining exhaust gases from several existing stacks
into one stack; or other selective handling of exhaust gas streams so
as to increase the exhaust gas plume rise.
In the case of USG-Walworth, the raising of the stack to 175 feet
does not exceed good engineering practice stack height as defined at
Sec. 51.100(ii), and AM-16-01 does not provide for the allowable rate
of emissions to vary according to atmospheric conditions or ambient
pollutant concentrations as per Sec. 51.100(hh)(1)(ii). In some cases,
increasing the final exhaust plume rise by manipulation of the stack
height and flue gas flow rate is a dispersion technique as per Sec.
51.100(hh)(1)(iii). However, there is an exception under 40 CFR
51.100(hh)(2)(v) where dispersion
[[Page 31460]]
techniques under Sec. 51.100(hh)(1)(iii) do not include techniques
that increase the final exhaust gas plume rise where the resulting
allowable emissions of sulfur dioxide from the facility do not exceed
5,000 tons per year. Such an increase of plume rise is not considered a
dispersion technique when the resulting allowable emissions of
SO2 from the facility do not exceed 5,000 tons per year
(TPY). The AM-16-01 SO2 emission limit of 301.3 lbs/hr is
equivalent to 1,319.69 TPY, which accounts for over 99% of the
allowable SO2 emitted by all emission units at USG-Walworth.
Additionally, AM-16-01 includes a requirement that USG-Walworth only
fire natural gas in the other emission units at the facility, including
the boiler (B10), the acoustical tile dryer (P32), and the finishing/
curing ovens (P34A and P38A). Therefore, the facility-wide allowable
SO2 emissions from USG-Walworth resulting from the AM-16-01
requirement to increase the cupola stack height from 68.5 feet to 175
feet above ground level do not exceed 5,000 TPY. Therefore, EPA
proposes to approve the increase in the cupola stack height.
Wisconsin set an SO2 emission limit of 301.3 lbs/hr for
the mineral wool production process in conjunction with a cupola stack
flue gas flow rate of 23,200 ACFM. For emission rates less than 301.3
lbs/hr, Wisconsin established a required minimum cupola stack flue gas
flow rate which varies based on the SO2 emission rate. AM-
16-01 requires that the cupola stack flue gas flow rate in ACFM shall
be equal to or greater than the flow rate calculated according to
Equation 1.
Equation 1: Required Flue Gas Flow Rate (ACFM) = [SO2
Emission Rate (lbs/hr) x 79.192] - 664.62
To develop Equation 1, Wisconsin plotted the worst case (highest)
SO2 emissions versus worst case (lowest) flue gas flow rates
as estimated from information contained in 2015 and 2010 stack testing
reports and an August 2014-August 2016 dataset provided by USG-
Walworth. Wisconsin fit a trend line (Equation 1) to the plot and
included this equation in AM-16-01 as the minimum flue gas flow rate
requirement for USG-Walworth (e.g. for a given SO2 emission
rate less than 301.3 lbs/hr, USG-Walworth must use Equation 1 to
determine the corresponding required minimum flue gas flow rate under
which it must operate). When emissions are the full allowable 301.3
lbs/hr, the minimum flow rate is 23,200 ACFM; lower minimum flow rates
apply at lower emission levels.
Wisconsin's AM-16-01 method of determining compliance with the
minimum flue gas flow rate (EPA Method 2) is to be conducted on the
same schedule, described below, as that for compliance with the
SO2 emission limit (EPA Method 6C). AM-16-01 also requires
operation of the thermal oxidizer and baghouse whenever the cupola is
in operation/fired and additional requirements for monitoring and
maintaining these control devices to ensure they are functioning
properly, including an interlock system which only allows operation of
the cupola if the thermal oxidizer incinerator chamber temperature is
at or above 1,300 degrees Fahrenheit averaged over any one-hour period.
In addition to the 1-hour limit of 301.3 lbs/hour in AM-16-01,
Wisconsin opted to set a 30-day rolling average limit of 238.0 lbs/
hour. EPA's April 2014 ``Guidance for 1-Hour SO2
Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions'' discusses the option to establish
limits with averaging times up to 30 days in length, recommends that
any such limit be established at a level that is comparably stringent
to the one-hour average limit, and recommends a detailed procedure for
determining such a comparably stringent limit. Wisconsin followed the
recommendations of the 2014 guidance in determining an appropriate
level for this limit. Therefore, the state has applied an appropriate
adjustment, yielding a 30-day rolling average emission limit that has
comparable stringency to the one-hour average limit. Wisconsin used an
adjustment factor of 0.79, which EPA identified in its 2014 guidance as
an appropriate adjustment factor for determining equivalent emission
limitation between 1-hour and 30-day rolling average timeframes for
uncontrolled coal-fired boilers based on a national analysis of utility
coal boiler emissions.
Wisconsin's method of determining compliance with the 301.3 lbs/hr
limit as set forth in AM-16-01 uses EPA-approved stack testing methods,
and includes an initial stack test that must be conducted no later than
April 1, 2018, which is 180 days after the AM-16-01 compliance date of
October 1, 2017, and periodic stack testing conducted every five years
within 90 days of the anniversary date of the initial stack test.
Wisconsin's method of determining continuous compliance, as set forth
in AM-16-01, requires a mass balance calculation to demonstrate
compliance with the 238.0 lbs/hr limit on a 30-day rolling average
basis. Under this rule, stack tests at the facility must show
compliance with the 1-hour emission limit of 301.3 lbs/hr, but
continuous emissions data, collected from routine mass balance
calculations, are used to assess compliance with the 30-day average
emission limit of 238.0 lbs/hr. Wisconsin has thereby established a
two-tiered enforcement regime, in which stack tests provide occasional
assessment of compliance, tested against a 1-hour limit, and continuous
emissions data, as collected via routine mass balance calculations,
provide a continuous assessment of compliance, tested against a 30-day
average limit.
Wisconsin's mass balance equation in AM-16-01 is the difference
between the sum of the estimated sulfur content of all the materials
loaded into the cupola and the sum of the estimated sulfur content in
the mineral wool product output from the cupola in lbs/day divided by
the operating hours per day and multiplied by the molecular weight
ratio of SO2 to sulfur. AM-16-01 requires USG-Walworth to
develop a compliance and monitoring plan and to monitor, record, and
report the information necessary for calculating the 30-day rolling
average SO2 emission limit via the mass balance equation,
such as operating hours, operating days, coke and all other material
usage amounts. AM-16-01 includes requirements to sample the sulfur,
moisture, and heat content of each of the materials input to the cupola
and the sulfur content of the mineral wool product or waste material
output from the cupola. The sampling requirements include initial
material sampling, ongoing material sampling, ongoing low sulfur
material sampling, mineral wool product and waste sampling, alternate
sampling frequency which increases if the 30-day rolling average
SO2 emission rate is equal to or greater than 95% of the
limit for three or more operating days during the previous 12 calendar
months. Likewise, sampling frequency can be decreased if the 30-day
rolling average SO2 emission rate is equal to or less than
70% of the limit for 12 consecutive months. The sampling requirements
include sample collection and preparation methods as per those of ASTM
International, formerly the American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM). Finally, AM-16-01 includes a requirement for USG-Walworth to
submit a revision request to incorporate the applicable requirements of
AM-16-01 into the USG-Walworth operating permit by June 23, 2019.
[[Page 31461]]
III. By which criteria is EPA reviewing this SIP revision?
EPA is evaluating AM-16-01 on the basis of whether its requirements
are measurable (and thus enforceable) and whether it strengthens
Wisconsin's SIP. When imposing quantitative requirements such as
emission limits, it is important that these requirements be measurable
so as to determine compliance. While the use of an electronic
continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) would be an ideal way to
measure the SO2 emission rate from the mineral wool
production process and the flue gas flow rate from the cupola stack for
compliance determination purposes, EPA's analysis, above, of
Wisconsin's AM-16-01 compliance requirements shows that Wisconsin has
developed a conservative mass balance approach that allows for the
ongoing measurement of the USG-Walworth mineral wool production process
SO2 emission rate to determine compliance with the
SO2 emission limit contained in AM-16-01. The AM-16-01
requirements are carefully designed such that compliance with the
SO2 emission limit can be determined via a combination of
testing, sampling, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting making the
SO2 emission limit and associated requirements contained in
AM-16-01 measureable and enforceable. Therefore, in the absence of a
CEMS, EPA finds acceptable the AM-16-01 mass balance approach of
compliance monitoring in conjunction with required periodic stack
testing.
The USG-Walworth mineral wool production process is already subject
to Wisconsin rule NR 417.07(2)(b), which is a statewide SO2
emission limit of 5.5 pounds per Million British Thermal Units (lbs/
MMBTU) that applies to any steam generating unit or other fuel-burning
equipment firing solid fossil fuel at a facility that has a total heat
input capacity on solid fossil fuel of less than 250 MMBTU/hr and which
was incorporated into the Wisconsin SIP in 1993 (58 FR 29537). This SIP
requirement will not be removed with the approval of AM-16-01 into the
Wisconsin SIP. AM-16-01 provides additional requirements to the 5.5
lbs/MMBTU emission limit already in the Wisconsin SIP. Therefore, EPA's
approval of AM-16-01 would strengthen the Wisconsin SIP. Since the
current SO2 emission limit of 5.5 lbs/MMBTU will remain in
the SIP (58 FR 29537), EPA's approval of AM-16-01 into the Wisconsin
SIP would not cause there to be any relaxation of the SO2
emission limit in the Wisconsin SIP with respect to USG-Walworth and
would, therefore, not interfere with CAA section 110(l), which is the
anti-backsliding provision of the CAA. Therefore, EPA is approving AM-
16-01 into the Wisconsin SIP.
As previously stated, EPA intends to designate the area near USG-
Walworth for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS under a separate future
rulemaking to be finalized by December 31, 2017. If AM-16-01 becomes
SIP-approved and thereby federally enforceable in a timely fashion, EPA
will formally evaluate the adequacy of the AM-16-01 requirements to
provide for attainment as part of the rulemaking on the 2010
SO2 NAAQS designation for the area near USG-Walworth.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving into the Wisconsin SIP AM-16-01, which contains a
requirement for a taller cupola stack, an SO2 emission
limit, and associated requirements for the mineral wool production
process at USG-Walworth. EPA confirms that the requirements contained
in AM-16-01 are measureable, enforceable, and strengthen the Wisconsin
SIP. By approving AM-16-01 into the Wisconsin SIP, the stack height
requirement, the SO2 emission limit, and the associated
requirements will become Federally enforceable.
We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective September 5,
2017 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by August 7, 2017. If we receive such comments, we will
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective
September 5, 2017.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Wisconsin
Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA
Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the For
Further Information Contact 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 Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
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
[[Page 31462]]
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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by September 5, 2017. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of this Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: June 20, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. Section 52.2570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(136) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2570 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(136) On January 31, 2017 (supplemented on March 20, 2017), the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources submitted a request to
incorporate Wisconsin Administrative Order AM-16-01 into its State
Implementation Plan. AM-16-01 imposes a requirement for a taller cupola
exhaust stack, a sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission limit in
conjunction with a minimum cupola stack flue gas flow rate, and
associated requirements on the mineral wool production process at the
USG Interiors LLC facility located in Walworth, Wisconsin (USG-
Walworth). Wisconsin intends to use the requirements of AM-16-01 to
support an attainment designation.
(i) Incorporation by reference. Wisconsin Administrative Order AM-
16-01, issued by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources on
January 31, 2017, to USG Interiors LLC for its facility located in
Walworth, Wisconsin.
[FR Doc. 2017-14212 Filed 7-6-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P