Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Cleveland, PM2.5, 25608-25615 [2018-11748]
Download as PDF
25608
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 107 / Monday, June 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba
Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code
Ann. 27–16–120, ‘‘all state and local
environmental laws and regulations
apply to the [Catawba Indian Nation]
and Reservation and are fully
enforceable by all relevant state and
local agencies and authorities.’’
However, EPA has determined that this
proposed rule does not have substantial
direct effects on an Indian Tribe
because, as it relates to prong 4, this
proposed action is not approving any
specific rule, but rather proposing to
determine that South Carolina’s already
approved SIP meets certain CAA
requirements. As it relates to the
regional haze SIP, the proposal to
replace reliance on CAIR with reliance
on CSAPR has no substantial direct
effects because the reliance on CSAPR
for regional haze purposes in South
Carolina already existed through a FIP.
EPA notes that these proposed actions
will not impose substantial direct costs
on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
Matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 18, 2018.
Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2018–11824 Filed 6–1–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0644; FRL–9978–87Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Cleveland,
PM2.5 Attainment Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
On October 14, 2016, the
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA) submitted a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submission
for the 2012 Fine Particle (PM2.5)
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(‘‘NAAQS’’ or ‘‘standards’’) for the
Cleveland nonattainment area. As
required by the Clean Air Act (CAA),
OEPA developed an attainment plan to
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Jun 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
address the Cleveland nonattainment
area and evaluate the area’s ability to
attain the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by the
‘‘Moderate’’ attainment date of
December 31, 2021. The SIP submission
addresses specific requirements as
outlined in the CAA including:
Attainment demonstration; reasonable
available control measure (RACM)
analysis; emissions inventory
requirements; reasonable further
progress (RFP) with quantitative
milestones; and nonattainment new
source review (NNSR). Additionally, the
SIP submission includes optional PM2.5
precursor demonstrations for NNSR and
attainment planning purposes. EPA has
evaluated the SIP submission and is
proposing to approve portions of the
submission as meeting the applicable
CAA requirements for RACM, emissions
inventory, attainment demonstration
modeling, and precursor insignificance
demonstrations for NNSR and
attainment planning purposes. EPA is
not acting on the other elements of the
submission, including reasonable
further progress (RFP), with quantitative
milestones, and motor vehicle emission
budgets (MVEBs).
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 5, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2016–0644 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
blakley.pamela@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.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carolyn Persoon, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR 18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8290,
persoon.carolyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, wherever
‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. Background for EPA’s Proposed Action
A. History of the PM2.5 NAAQS
B. CAA PM2.5 Moderate Area
Nonattainment SIP Requirements
II. EPA’s Evaluation of Submission
III. EPA’s Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background for EPA’s Proposed
Action
A. History of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
On December 15, 2012, EPA
promulgated the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS,
including a revision of the annual
standard to 12.0 micrograms per cubic
meter (mg/m3) based on a 3-year average
of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations,
and maintaining the current 24-hour (or
daily) standard of 35 mg/m3 based on a
3-year average of the 98th percentile of
24-hour concentrations (78 FR 3086,
January 15, 2013). EPA established the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS based on significant
evidence and numerous health studies
demonstrating the serious health effects
associated with exposures to PM2.5. The
Cleveland, Ohio area was designated
‘‘Moderate’’ nonattainment for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS based on ambient
monitoring data showing that the area
was above the 12.0 mg/m3 standard. At
the time of designations, the Cleveland
area had a design value of 12.5 mg/m3
for the 2011–2013 monitoring period (80
FR 2206, January 15, 2015).
To provide guidance on the CAA
requirements for state and tribal
implementation plans to implement the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA promulgated
the ‘‘Fine Particle Matter National
Ambient Air Quality Standard: State
Implementation Plan Requirements;
Final Rule’’ (81 FR 58010, August 24,
2016) (hereinafter, the ‘‘PM2.5 SIP
Requirements Rule’’). As part of the
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, EPA has
interpreted the requirements of the CAA
to allow the state to provide a
‘‘precursor demonstration’’ to EPA that
supports the determination that one or
more PM2.5 precursors need not be
subject to control and planning
requirements in a given nonattainment
area. EPA has determined that sulfur
dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX),
E:\FR\FM\04JNP1.SGM
04JNP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 107 / Monday, June 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and
ammonia (NH3) are precursors to PM,
and thus the attainment plan
requirements of subpart 4 initially apply
equally to emissions of direct PM2.5 and
all of its identified precursors. Section
189(e) of the CAA explicitly requires the
control of major stationary sources of
PM2.5 precursors, unless there is a
demonstration to the satisfaction of the
EPA Administrator that such major
stationary sources do not contribute
significantly to PM levels that exceed
the standards in the area. Accordingly,
a state can also provide a precursor
demonstration for attainment planning
purposes which finds that reducing a
precursor does not significantly reduce
PM2.5 concentrations, and therefore
determines that controls are not needed
for any sources of that precursor (not
just major sources) for attainment
purposes. EPA has long recognized the
scientific basis for concluding that there
are multiple precursors to PM10, and in
particular to PM2.5 (Section III of
Preamble of PM2.5 SIP Requirements
Rule).
After Ohio’s submission of the
attainment plan by the CAA required
date of October 14, 2016, EPA released
a November 17, 2016 memorandum
from Steve Page entitled ‘‘Draft PM2.5
Precursor Demonstration Guidance’’
(precursor guidance), which provides
guidance to states on methods to
evaluate if sources of a particular
precursor contribute significantly to
PM2.5 levels in the nonattainment area.
The precursor guidance provides a
detailed description of potential
modeling approaches and presents
possible thresholds to use in
determining whether sources of a
particular precursor contribute
significantly to PM2.5 levels in the area.
Although there is no explicit
concentration which EPA has
determined represents a significant
contribution for PM2.5 precursor
demonstrations, the precursor guidance
suggests that a contribution level of 0.2
mg/m3, for annual average PM2.5, could
be considered an air quality change that
is ‘‘insignificant.’’ The specific methods
and analysis utilized by Ohio regarding
precursors are generally consistent with
the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule and
precursor guidance and are described in
detail in the sections below regarding
planning requirements and NNSR
requirements.
B. CAA PM2.5 Moderate Area
Nonattainment SIP Requirements
With respect to the requirements for
an attainment plan for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, the general CAA part D
nonattainment area planning
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Jun 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
requirements are found in subpart 1,
and the Moderate area planning
requirements specifically for particulate
matter are found in subpart 4.
EPA utilizes a longstanding general
guidance document that interprets the
1990 amendments to the CAA
commonly referred to as the ‘‘General
Preamble’’ (57 FR 13498, April 16,
1992). The General Preamble addresses
the relationship between the subpart 1
and the subpart 4 requirements and
provides recommendations to states for
meeting statutory requirements for
particulate matter attainment planning.
Specifically, the General Preamble
explains that requirements applicable to
Moderate area attainment plan SIP
submissions are set forth in subpart 4,
but such SIP submissions must also
meet the general attainment planning
provisions in subpart 1, to the extent
these provisions ‘‘are not otherwise
subsumed by, or integrally related to,’’
the more specific subpart 4
requirements (57 FR 13538).
Additionally, EPA finalized the PM2.5
SIP Requirements Rule to clarify our
interpretations of the statutory
requirements that apply to Moderate
and ‘‘Serious’’ PM2.5 nonattainment
areas under subparts 1 and 4.
The CAA requirements of subpart 1
for attainment plans include: (i) The
section 172(c)(1) RACM/reasonably
available control technology (RACT)
and attainment demonstrations; (ii) the
section 172(c)(2) requirement to
demonstrate RFP; (iii) the section
172(c)(3) requirement for emission
inventories; (iv) the section 172(c)(5)
requirements for a NNSR permitting
program; and (v) the section 172(c)(9)
requirement for contingency measures.
The CAA subpart 4 requirements for
Moderate areas are generally
comparable with the subpart 1
requirements and include: (i) The
section 189(a)(1)(A) NNSR permit
program requirements; (ii) the section
189(a)(1)(B) requirements for attainment
demonstration; (iii) the section
189(a)(1)(C) requirements for RACM;
and (iv) the section 189(c) requirements
for RFP and quantitative milestones.
Section 189(e) also requires that states
regulate major sources of PM2.5
precursors in a nonattainment area,
unless EPA approves a demonstration
excusing the state from regulating such
sources. In addition, under subpart 4
Moderate areas must provide for
attainment of the current PM2.5 annual
standard as expeditiously as practicable
but no later than the end of the 6th
calendar year after designation, which is
December 31, 2021.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25609
II. EPA’s Evaluation of the Submission
OEPA, in coordination with the Lake
Michigan Air Directors Consortium
(LADCO), developed the attainment
plan SIP submission for the Cleveland
area. This plan was subsequently put
through public process, adopted by the
state, and submitted by the OEPA to
EPA. This section describes the relevant
contents of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
attainment plan SIP submission and
EPA’s rationale for proposing approval
of the required SIP elements of RACM,
attainment demonstration, emissions
inventory, and precursor
demonstrations for both NNSR and
attainment planning purposes.
The 2012 PM2.5 attainment plan
contains SIP provisions to address the
requirements for a Moderate PM2.5
nonattainment area, including RACT/
RACM, emissions inventory, modeling,
attainment demonstration,
transportation conformity and motor
vehicle emissions budgets, RFP with
quantitative milestones, and
contingency measures. EPA is proposing
to approve the RACM, emissions
inventory, attainment demonstration,
and precursor demonstrations for NNSR
and attainment planning purposes, as
fully meeting the requirements of the
CAA and the applicable Federal
regulations. Preliminary monitoring
data indicate that the area is attaining
the standard for the 2015–2017 design
value period. If confirmed, certain
planning requirements may be
suspended per the clean data policy (40
CFR 51.1015(a)). EPA will continue to
review other elements of the attainment
plan submission in order to determine
if they are necessary for the area to
attain the standard and act on them
accordingly.
Emissions Inventory 1
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires
the development of an emissions
inventory for nonattainment areas. In
addition, the planning and associated
modeling requirements set forth in CAA
section 189(a) make the development of
an accurate and up-to-date emissions
inventory a critical element of any
viable attainment plan. EPA guidance
specifies the best practices for
developing an emissions inventory for
PM2.5 nonattainment areas per EPA’s
‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for
Implementation of Ozone and
Particulate Matter National Ambient Air
1 Note that this guidance was also updated in
2017. See ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for
Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and Regional Haze Regulations’’ (EPA–454/B–17–
003, July 2017).
E:\FR\FM\04JNP1.SGM
04JNP1
25610
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 107 / Monday, June 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and
Regional Haze Regulations’’ (EPA–454/
B–07–002, April 2007). The 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS SIP submission contains
planning inventories of emission
sources and emission rates for the base
year of 2011 and the projected
attainment year of 2021. OEPA selected
the year 2011 as the base year because
it is one of the three years for which air
quality data was used to designate the
area as nonattainment. Additionally,
OEPA and LADCO determined that
high-quality emissions information was
already available from the National
Emissions Inventory (NEI) for 2011.
LADCO developed the base year
emissions inventory for the
nonattainment area using the NEI, with
additional information for on-road and
nonroad mobile sources, marine,
aircraft, and rail sources. Table 1
provides a summary of the annual 2011
emissions inventory for the Cleveland
nonattainment area for direct PM2.5 and
all PM2.5 precursors.
OEPA’s submission included detailed
information for the sources in the
emissions inventory including facility
name, ID, location, and emissions, as
well as documentation on mobile source
model inputs for both on-road and
nonroad sources (See Docket submission
and Appendix C).
TABLE 1—ANNUAL EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR CLEVELAND AREA FOR DIRECT PM2.5 AND PRECURSORS
[tpy]
PM2.5
County/source sector
NOX
Filterable
Cuyahoga:
Area (nonpoint) .................................
Marine, Aircraft, Rail (MAR) .............
Nonroad ............................................
Onroad ..............................................
Point EGU .........................................
Point Non-EGU .................................
Prescribed Fire .................................
Lorain:
Area (nonpoint) .................................
Marine, Aircraft, Rail (MAR) .............
Nonroad ............................................
Onroad ..............................................
Point EGU .........................................
Point Non-EGU .................................
Prescribed Fire .................................
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
234.61
0.02
0.00
0.00
33.50
407.26
0.00
4989.24
2822.27
6045.40
18764.59
771.22
2404.05
1.20
188.94
187.78
17.35
132.17
1941.86
4461.80
0.54
670.62
0.99
8.66
428.60
0.10
65.87
0.88
12116.58
288.66
8349.38
8568.15
11.40
986.52
12.61
72.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
298.62
175.78
0.00
844.19
1289.44
1971.11
4580.85
4673.50
705.89
0.00
44.37
55.68
5.39
31.75
32041.30
374.63
0.00
448.73
0.57
2.66
101.84
0.54
3.01
0.00
2721.24
73.94
3009.78
2177.01
31.82
916.35
0.00
4615.72
Attainment Demonstration and
Modeling
Section 189(a)(1)(B) requires that a
PM2.5 Moderate area SIP contain either
a demonstration that the plan will
provide for attainment by the applicable
attainment date, or a demonstration that
attainment by such date is
impracticable. In the attainment
demonstration of the 2016 SIP
submission, OEPA described how the
attainment plan would provide for
attainment of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by
the attainment date of December 31,
2021.
Using air quality modeling, an
attainment demonstration must project
that future air quality levels in the
nonattainment area will be below the
standard. OEPA and LADCO conducted
Jkt 244001
VOC
477.68
44.39
160.82
195.49
94.90
156.45
0.00
EPA has reviewed the base-year
emissions inventory and finds that it
satisfies the CAA section 172(c)(3)
requirement for a comprehensive,
accurate and current inventory of actual
2011 emissions of the relevant
pollutants for PM2.5 in the Cleveland
area. Thus, EPA proposes to approve the
base year emissions inventory in the SIP
submission.
16:57 Jun 01, 2018
NH3
1143.13
96.88
508.69
800.00
32.90
599.48
4.92
Total ...........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
SO2
Condensable
1521.80
49862.95
39483.56
1736.07
39263.44
modeling in accordance with EPA’s
April 2007 (and where appropriate,
draft December 2014) ‘‘Guidance on the
Use of Models and Other Analyses for
Demonstrating Attainment of Air
Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5, and
Regional Haze.’’ (attainment
demonstration modeling guidance)
(EPA–454/B–07–002, April 2007). OEPA
modeling is also consistent with the
November 2005 Appendix W
requirement used at the time by OEPA
and is still consistent with the updated
January 2017 (82 FR 5182) ‘‘Guideline
on Air Quality Models.’’ (CFR Title 40,
Part 51, Appendix W.) In addition,
OEPA submitted a precursor
demonstration that is consistent with
the recommendations contained in
EPA’s precursor guidance document
released in November 2016. (‘‘PM2.5
Precursor Demonstration Guidance,’’
memorandum issued by Steven Page,
Director of EPA Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, November 17,
2016).
Per the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule,
the attainment demonstration modeling
guidance provides recommendations
that include: Developing a conceptual
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
description of the problem to be
addressed; developing a modeling/
analysis protocol; selecting an
appropriate model to support the
demonstration; selecting appropriate
meteorological episodes or time periods
to model; choosing an appropriate area
to model with appropriate horizontal/
vertical resolution; generating
meteorological and air quality inputs to
the air quality model; generating
emissions inputs to the air quality
model; and, evaluating performance of
the air quality model. After these steps
are completed, the state can apply a
model to simulate effects of future year
emissions and candidate control
strategies.
OEPA and LADCO calculated the
baseline design value for PM2.5 using the
procedures contained in appendix N to
40 CFR 50, ‘‘Interpretation of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Particulate Matter,’’ and EPA
attainment demonstration modeling
guidance. Ambient PM2.5 concentrations
for the 2009–2013 time frame (a
weighted average of the 2009–2011,
2010–2012, and 2011–2013 design value
periods, as recommended by the
E:\FR\FM\04JNP1.SGM
04JNP1
25611
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 107 / Monday, June 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Modeling Guidance) were used to
calculate baseline design values ranging
from 9.64–12.82 mg/m3 for the seven
PM2.5 monitoring locations in the
nonattainment area (see Table 2).
Detailed methods for the baseline design
value calculations are in Appendix B of
the 2016 SIP submission (See Docket).
Next, OEPA and LADCO compiled
base-year emission inventories (as
discussed above) and projected
emission inventories for the attainment
year 2021. LADCO utilized emission
inventories compiled by EPA for the
years 2011, 2017, and 2025 as the
starting point. EPA’s 2011 emissions
inventory (Version 2011eh) is based on
the 2011 NEI, version 2 (2011NEIv2).
The inventory uses hourly 2011
continuous emissions monitoring
system (CEMS) data for electric
generating units (EGUs) emissions,
hourly on-road mobile emissions, and
2011 day-specific wild and prescribed
fire data. Emissions include all criteria
pollutants and precursors (CAPs), and a
few hazardous air pollutants (HAPs).
See EPA’s Technical Support Document
(EPA, 2015A) for a thorough description
of the methodology used to develop the
2011 emissions inventory.
EPA projected future emission
inventories for the years 2017 and 2025
based on the 2011 baseline inventory.
The future-year scenarios incorporate
current ‘‘on-the-books’’ regulations, and
do not include any additional measures
or controls. See, EPA (2015A) for a
thorough description of the
methodology used to project future
emissions. For most emissions
categories, LADCO developed the 2021
future-year emissions inventory by
interpolating between EPA’s 2017 and
2025 inventories. The interpolation was
done for each model species at each
model cell for every model hour.
However, LADCO developed updated
2021 EGU emissions by using the
Eastern Regional Technical Advisory
Committee EGU Tool (ERTAC) and
updated 2021 regional on-road mobile
emissions using EPA’s Motor Vehicle
Emission Simulator (MOVES2014) and
Ramboll-Environ emissions (See
Appendix B and C for detailed
discussion).
For EGU projections, Ohio and
LADCO relied on the U.S. Energy
Information Administration’s ‘‘High Oil
and Gas Resource’’ (See Docket for
detailed discussion). The projected
emissions inventory not only accounts
for growth in economic sectors, but also
includes emissions controls (existing or
future regulations) that will impact
sources in the area. In this case, OEPA
and LADCO only modeled controls that
have been promulgated, with no new
future controls being added since OEPA
has determined that additional RACT
and RACM would not be necessary for
expeditious attainment, and that current
controls in the area are sufficient to
meet the RACM requirement. For
modeling purposes no additional
RACM/RACT was applied to future year
inventories.
The base-year and projected emission
inventories were used in a
photochemical grid model, the
Comprehensive Air Quality Model with
extensions (CAMx), to project the
expected change from base-year to
future year design values. The modeled
attainment demonstration results in a
predicted future-year concentration at
each PM2.5 ambient monitor location
within the Cleveland nonattainment
area. The results from the CAMx
modeling were then used as inputs to
EPA’s Modeled Attainment Test
Software (MATS) to calculate the design
values for each monitored location in
the attainment year 2021 using
information on current PM2.5 speciation.
Modeled attainment year results show
that the area is expected to meet the
standard (all 2021 values at existing
monitor locations are below 12.0 mg/m3)
by the 2021 attainment date (See Table
2).
TABLE 2—PROJECTED PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES (μg/m3) FOR 2021
County
Monitor ID
Cuyahoga .....................................................................................................................................
Lorain ...........................................................................................................................................
Based on the above, EPA is proposing
to approve OEPA’s demonstration of
attainment for 2021 as meeting the
statutory requirement in CAA
189(a)(1)(B).
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
RACM/RACT Requirements
The general SIP planning
requirements for nonattainment areas
under subpart 1 include CAA section
172(c)(1), which requires
implementation of all RACM (including
RACT). Section 172(c)(1) requires that
attainment plans provide for the
implementation of RACM (including
RACT) to provide for attainment of the
NAAQS. Therefore, what constitutes
RACM and RACT is related to what is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Jun 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
necessary for attainment, as well as
expeditious attainment, in a given area.
Subpart 4 also requires states to
develop attainment plans that evaluate
potential control measures and impose
RACM and RACT on sources within a
Moderate nonattainment area that are
necessary to expeditiously attain the
NAAQS. Specifically, CAA section
189(a)(1)(C) requires that Moderate
nonattainment plans provide for
implementation of RACM and RACT no
later than four years after the area is
designated as nonattainment. As with
subpart 1, the terms RACM and RACT
are not defined within subpart 4. Nor do
the provisions of subpart 4 specify how
states are to meet the RACM and RACT
requirements. However, EPA’s
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
39–035–0034
39–035–0038
39–035–0045
39–035–0060
39–035–0065
39–035–1002
39–093–3002
2011 Baseline
design value
10.02
12.82
11.99
12.79
12.49
10.36
9.64
2021
Projected
design value
8.07
10.69
9.84
10.45
10.32
8.41
8.08
longstanding guidance in the General
Preamble provides recommendations for
determining which control measures
constitute RACM and RACT for
purposes of meeting the statutory
requirements of subpart 4 (57 FR 13540–
13541).
For both RACM and RACT, EPA notes
that an overarching principle is that if
a given control measure is not needed
to attain the relevant NAAQS in a given
area as expeditiously as practicable,
then that control measure would not be
required as RACM or RACT because it
would not be reasonable to impose
controls that are not in fact needed for
attainment purposes. Accordingly, a
RACM and RACT analysis is a process
to identify emission sources, evaluate
E:\FR\FM\04JNP1.SGM
04JNP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
25612
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 107 / Monday, June 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
potential emission controls, and impose
those control measures and technologies
that are reasonable and necessary to
bring the area into attainment as
expeditiously as practicable, but by no
later than the statutory attainment date
for the area.
EPA has long applied a policy that
states must evaluate the combined effect
of reasonably available control measures
that, if implemented collectively, would
advance the attainment date by at least
one year and should be adopted. Since
the area’s preliminary data indicate that
it will attain the NAAQs based on the
2015–2017 design value period, it is not
necessary to implement additional
controls. The data indicates that the area
is attaining the standard with current
Federal, state, and local permanent and
enforceable measures.
OEPA provided a RACM and RACT
analysis in Appendix E of the 2012
PM2.5 attainment plan SIP submission.
Ohio has found that existing measures
for PM2.5, SO2 and NOX for area sources,
mobile sources and stationary sources
constitute RACT/RACM (80 FR 68253;
81 FR 58402; 82 FR 16938). Some of the
current controls for the area that are
sufficient to meet the RACM/RACT
requirement include: Existing PM2.5 and
ozone RACT rules, mobile source
controls, SO2 reductions from 2010 SO2
nonattainment areas including a large
EGU in neighboring Lake County,
Federal interstate transport rules, and
regional haze.
OEPA provided an attainment
analysis that consisted of: First, a
modeling demonstration that the area
would attain by the attainment date in
2021 with current on-the-books controls
and measures; and second, a
demonstration showing that by
interpolating modeled future values
from 2021 with 2016 design values at
the monitored sites, the area would be
attaining the standard in both 2020 (at
11.0 mg/m3) and 2019 (at 11.3 mg/m3) at
the design value monitor prior to the
2021 statutory attainment date. The
interpolation suggested that the area
would attain at the end of 2017, similar
to EPA modeling analysis discussed
below, and is now verified by the
preliminary 2015–2017 design values
that indicate the area is likely attaining
as of the end of 2017. In addition, the
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule outlines
the option for states to do an additional
modeling demonstration to show that
specific PM2.5 precursors are not
significant contributors to PM2.5 levels
that exceed the standard in the area.
OEPA provided a precursor
demonstration modeling analysis that
was intended to demonstrate that
emissions of NH3 and VOC are not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Jun 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
significant PM2.5 precursors for
attainment planning purposes.
Precursor Demonstration for Attainment
Planning Purposes
For the precursor demonstration,
OEPA and LADCO initially performed a
‘‘concentration-based’’ contribution
analysis using speciated monitoring
data to determine whether NH3 or VOC
contribute significantly to PM2.5
concentrations in the area, based on
monitored values alone. However, using
the assumption suggested in the draft
precursor demonstration guidance that
all NH3 emissions are associated with
the nitrate portion of PM2.5 mass, and
that all VOC emissions are associated
with the organic carbon portion of PM2.5
mass, the state could not determine that
these precursors did not make a
significant contribution.
Therefore, the state proceeded with a
sensitivity analysis to determine the
impact of reducing NH3 and VOC
emissions on PM2.5 concentrations in
the nonattainment area. OEPA and
LADCO performed a modeled
sensitivity analysis for attainment
planning purposes using the 2021
attainment year concentrations at each
monitor in the Cleveland area. LADCO
applied a 40% emission reduction to
anthropogenic sources of NH3 and VOC
emissions for all source categories in the
Cleveland nonattainment area. The
OEPA submission indicated that the
40% comprehensive reduction was
chosen because it was within the range
of a previously published,
comprehensive sensitivity analysis done
in photochemical modeling which
typically uses 30–50% when applying
the reduction across all emission
sectors—as done for this analysis.2
The submission was made by the state
prior to the date that the precursor
guidance was issued by EPA; however,
the modeled reduction levels are still
within the suggested range of 30–70%
reductions found in the precursor
guidance.
The results of the 2021 attainment
planning sensitivity analyses show
modeled impacts from reducing NH3 by
40% on PM2.5 concentrations at the
monitors ranging from 0.10–0.21 mg/m3,
and modeled impacts from reducing
VOC ranging from 0.0–0.01 mg/m3.
2 EPA examined examples in the published
literature of general sensitivity modeling studies
that look at the impact of across-the-board
percentage reductions in precursor emissions on
secondary pollutants (including PM2.5, PM10, and
ozone) (Vieno, 2016; Megaritis, 2013; Harrison,
2013; Derwent, 2014; Liu, 2010; Pun, 2001). The
majority of studies have used across the board
percentage precursor emissions reductions of
between 30% and 60%, with the most common
reduction percentages being 30% and 50%.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Although there is no explicit
concentration which EPA has
determined represents a significant
contribution, the current draft precursor
guidance suggests that a contribution
level of 0.2 mg/m3 is an appropriate
recommended threshold to identify an
air quality change that is ‘‘insignificant’’
for annual average PM2.5. In this case, all
modeled impacts for VOC emissions are
well below the recommended threshold,
and most of the modeled NH3 impacts
are at or below the threshold as well,
with only one ambient air quality
monitor showing modeled ambient
PM2.5 levels slightly above the
recommended threshold (at 0.21 mg/m3).
EPA’s precursor guidance noted that
there may be cases where precursor
emissions have an impact above the
recommended contribution thresholds,
yet do not ‘‘significantly contribute’’ to
levels that exceed the standard in the
area (pursuant to section 189(e)). Under
the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, the
significance of a precursor’s
contribution is to be determined ‘‘based
on the facts and circumstances of the
area.’’ Air agencies may thus provide
EPA with information related to other
factors they believe should be
considered in determining whether the
contribution of emissions of a particular
precursor to levels that exceed the
NAAQS is ‘‘significant’’ or not. Such
factors may include: The amount by
which a precursor’s contribution
exceeds the recommended contribution
thresholds; the severity of
nonattainment at relevant monitors and/
or grid cell locations in the area; trends
in ambient speciation data and
precursor emissions; and any other
relevant information.
Based on a number of factors, in this
case EPA believes that NH3 is not a
significant precursor. The relevant
factors include: The magnitude of the
amount above the threshold is small
compared to the total threshold amount
(5% of the total threshold amount); the
area continues to trend downward in
both ambient monitoring data and
emissions in direct PM2.5 and
precursors; current preliminary
monitoring data shows the area is
attaining the standard; and additionally,
this small amount of PM2.5 resulting
from NH3 would not interfere with the
area’s ability to attain the standard, as
evidenced by the fact that the
preliminary 2015–2017 design value is
0.7 mg/m3 below the NAAQS. Regardless
of the finding of significance for these
precursors, the area is expected to attain
(based on preliminary design values)
with only current controls in place, and
it would not be required to control any
sources further. Additionally, the area
E:\FR\FM\04JNP1.SGM
04JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 107 / Monday, June 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
has preliminary 2015–2017 data
indicating that it has a three-year design
value below the level of the NAAQS, so
that any additional controls would not
be implemented until well after the area
has attained the standard.
Based on the above, EPA agrees with
the determination by Ohio that for
attainment planning purposes,
additional controls on existing sources
of NH3 and VOC emissions do not need
to be imposed.
RACM/RACT Analysis
OEPA conducted a six-step RACM
analysis that focused on direct PM2.5,
NOX, and SO2: (1) Identify sources in
the area for PM2.5, NOX, and SO2—that
comprised over 90% of the emissions
for each pollutant over all source
categories; (2) identify potential control
measures; (3) evaluate technological
feasibility; (4) evaluate economic
feasibility; (5) determine if the measures
can be implemented within both four
and five years; (6) evaluate the earliest
practical year for attainment.
As detailed in OEPA’s RACT/RACM
analysis in Appendix E, many of the
sources are already well controlled. The
state then identified current controls for
each source as well as any additional
measures or controls that are potentially
available to each of the identified
sources using EPA’s ‘‘Menu of Control
Measures’’ document, available online
at https://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html
and the RACT/BACT/LAER
Clearinghouse (RBLC) at https://
cfpub.epa.gov/rblc/. OEPA then
determined if any of the identified
controls were technologically or
economically feasible using EPA’s the
method outlined in the PM2.5 SIP
Requirements Rule, which can include
factors such as a source’s process and
operating procedures, raw materials,
physical plant layout, and potential
environmental impacts such as
increased water pollution, waste
disposal and energy requirements (see
40 CFR 51.1009(a)(3)(i)).
In regard to area and mobile sources,
a state may tailor the analysis to the
considerations that are relevant to the
local circumstances, such as the
condition and extent of needed
infrastructure, population size, and
workforce type and habits, all of which
may impact the availability of potential
control measures in the area. (81 FR
58010)
OEPA also determined economic
feasibility of each identified measure or
technology. That analysis included
consideration of the cost of reducing
emissions in the area and the difference
between the cost of an emissions
reduction measure at a particular source
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Jun 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
in the area and the cost of emissions
reduction measures that have been
implemented at similar sources in the
same or other areas.
OEPA determined that the
technologically feasible measures that
were identified were not economically
feasible. For example, the state
determined that the cost-effectiveness
ranged from $5800 per ton to more than
$40,000 per ton for measures that were
found to be technologically feasible for
major stationary sources. In addition,
the highest costs of reductions were
generally linked to controls of direct
PM2.5, and OEPA has determined that
reductions in direct PM2.5 would be the
most effective at reducing the monitored
concentrations in the Cleveland area.
Thus, the state found that the most
effective controls are not reasonable to
implement based on cost.
Finally, OEPA analyzed the
implementation time frame of controls
within four years and the earliest
applicable attainment date, which by
interpolation would be the end of 2017,
and determined that the area would
attain the standard prior to the state
rulemaking and implementation of
additional controls in the area. In fact,
the area has preliminary 2015–2017 data
indicating that it has a three-year design
value below the level of the NAAQS,
making implementation of additional
controls to achieve attainment moot.
As noted by OEPA, both the Federal
and state ‘‘on the books’’ controls have
led to additional control and will lead
to additional emissions reductions in
the future. Because of the historic
nonattainment status of this area for
both ozone and PM2.5, the Cleveland
nonattainment area is one of the most
well controlled areas in the state for
pollutants contributing to formation of
both PM2.5 and ozone. Ohio’s current
rules, current controls and the Federal
‘‘on the books’’ controls continue to
satisfy RACT/RACM for the annual
PM2.5 standard. Some of the current
controls that are sufficient to meet the
RACT/RACM requirement are Ohio’s
current RACT program found in Ohio
Administrative Code (OAC) Chapter
3745–17, which controls NOX; rules
under OAC Chapter 3745–18 which
control SO2 sources for the state; and
the inspection and maintenance
program contained in OAC Chapter
3745–26, which reduces emissions of
NOX and VOC from on-road vehicles.
OEPA has determined that no additional
controls are feasible to implement as
RACM/RACT in the Cleveland area, and
that current controls meet the
requirement for RACM under 172(c)(1)
and 189(a)(1)(C).
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25613
EPA finds OEPA’s determination
reasonable, and is proposing to approve
OEPA’s determination that current
controls meet the RACM/RACT
requirement and that additional controls
are not reasonable for other sources in
the area or necessary to expeditiously
attain the NAAQS.
As noted above, the attainment
demonstration modeling analysis
reflecting 2021 projected emissions
based on only current controls shows
that projected 2021 air quality values at
monitoring sites in the area range from
8.07–10.69 mg/m3, well below the
standard. Monitoring data for the 2014–
2016 design values show only one
monitor in the area is above the
standard at 12.2 mg/m3, and is trending
downward. Interpolation between
current and projected monitor values
indicates that the area is likely to attain
the standard with current controls by
the end of the 2017 calendar year.
Current, preliminary monitored design
values for the years 2015–2017 shows
the highest values being monitored in
the Cleveland area is 11.3 mg/m3. EPA
also conducted modeling in 2015 in
support of regulatory initiatives
regarding the revised ozone NAAQS and
interstate transport (Appendix B), and
these analyses also indicate that the
Cleveland area will attain the PM2.5
NAAQS well before the outermost
attainment date of December 31, 2021.
Based on the above, EPA is proposing
to find that current controls on sources
in the nonattainment area meet the
requirements of section 172(c)(1) and
section 189(a)(1)(C) of the CAA.
Accordingly, EPA is proposing to
approve current controls: Federal
mobile source standards, transport
rules, Regional Haze plans, and state
VOC RACT rules as meeting the RACM/
RACT provisions.
Nonattainment NSR Precursor
Demonstration
In addition to the attainment planning
precursor demonstrations, which
showed that neither existing sources of
VOC nor existing sources of NH3 have
a significant contribution to PM2.5
concentrations, OEPA provided an
analysis for both VOC and NH3 intended
to show that increases in emissions of
these precursors that may result from
new or modified sources would not
make a significant contribution to PM2.5
concentrations in the area. This
demonstration is intended to justify the
state’s determination that major
stationary sources of these precursors do
not need to be regulated under the
NNSR program for the area. For NNSR
permitting purposes, CAA section
189(e), as interpreted by the PM2.5 SIP
E:\FR\FM\04JNP1.SGM
04JNP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
25614
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 107 / Monday, June 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Requirements Rule, provides an option
for the state to provide a precursor
demonstration intended to show that
increases in emissions from potential
new and existing major stationary
sources of a particular precursor would
not contribute significantly to levels that
exceed the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in a
particular nonattainment area. 40 CFR
51.1006(a)(3). In particular, EPA’s
regulations provide that a state choosing
to submit an NNSR precursor
demonstration should evaluate the
sensitivity of PM2.5 levels in the
nonattainment area to an increase in
emissions of the precursor. If the state
demonstrates that the estimated air
quality changes determined through
such an analysis are not significant,
based on the facts and circumstances of
the area, the state may use this
information to identify new major
stationary sources and major
modifications of a precursor that will
not be considered to contribute
significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed
the standard in the nonattainment area
under CAA section 189(e). Id.
51.1006(a)(3)(i). If EPA approves the
state’s NNSR precursor demonstration
for a nonattainment area, major sources
of the relevant precursor can be
exempted from the NNSR major source
permitting requirements for PM2.5 with
respect to that precursor. Id.
51.1006(a)(3)(ii).
For NNSR permitting purposes,
sensitivity analyses examine potential
increases in emissions through a model
simulation that evaluates the effect on
PM2.5 concentrations in the area
resulting from a given set of precursor
emission increases from one or more
new or modified stationary sources.
Ohio’s 2011 and 2021 comprehensive
modeling inventories were used for this
analysis. To help determine a
theoretical growth scenario as a result of
major source expansion (new or
modified), Ohio first prepared
inventories for VOC and NH3 for 2008
to 2014 for the entire State from Ohio’s
annual emissions reporting program.
Ohio used inventories for the entire
State in order to determine what types
of major sources/source categories are
likely to expand (new or modified)
within the Cleveland area and at what
magnitude (tons per year) those
expansions are likely to occur. These
inventories and the full detailed
analysis are contained in Appendix F of
Ohio’s submission.
Consistent with EPA’s regulation and
draft guidance, OEPA and LADCO have
performed sensitivity analyses of
potential increases in emissions through
a model simulation that evaluates the
effect on PM2.5 concentrations in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Jun 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
nonattainment area (including
unmonitored areas) resulting from a
given set of hypothetical NH3 or VOC
precursor emission increases from
modified major stationary sources of the
respective precursors in the
nonattainment area. The inventories and
the full detailed analysis are contained
in Appendix F of Ohio’s submission.
For the NH3 analysis, Ohio assumed
emissions increases at three existing
locations of NH3 in the area, as these
would be the most likely future areas of
growth in the Cleveland area. EPA
believes that the use of the historical
inventories to predict growth is
reflective of the future potential
increases specific to the Cleveland area
given the current types of facilities and
their respective locations, the urban
density and ability to expand or build,
as well as the types of state regulation
or other Federal requirements (such as
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants) on facility
types and controls required for other
pollutants. EPA believes that this is an
acceptable approach to estimating
potential future growth.
In addition to the modeled emissions
increases based on historical growth at
sources, LADCO and OEPA did an
additional NH3 modeling analysis
(submitted July 18, 2017) based on a 100
tpy emissions increase (to represent
major sources) in each modeled grid cell
in the nonattainment area. EPA believes
that this is a sufficiently conservative
analysis that exceeds the level of actual
potential NH3 emissions growth likely
to occur in the area. Both of these
approaches are consistent with
suggested modeling in EPA’s precursor
guidance. Thus, EPA finds that this
analysis serves as a reasonable
evaluation of the sensitivity of PM2.5
concentrations to a large emissions
increase across the spatial area.
For the VOC analysis, Ohio added
1,486 tpy of VOC emissions at 3 existing
source locations where VOC emissions
increases potentially could occur in the
nonattainment area. Compared to the
2011 inventory, this represents a 75%
increase in VOC emissions from existing
stationary sources (EGU and non-EGU).
Compared to the 2021 projected
inventory, this represents an 80%
increase in stationary source emissions.
For the NH3 analysis, Ohio added 325
tpy of NH3 emissions (scenario 1) to 3
existing source locations where NH3
emissions increases potentially could
occur in the nonattainment area.
Compared to the 2011 inventory, this
represents a 447% increase in NH3
emissions from existing stationary
sources. Compared to the 2021 projected
inventory, this represents a 449%
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
increase in NH3 from stationary sources.
The additional NH3 analysis (scenario 2)
had a total emissions increase of 1,700
tpy, which is over 500% higher growth
than the historical NH3 growth (scenario
1).
Ohio found the addition of the NH3
emissions (approximately 350 tpy) into
the model based on historical growth
(scenario 1) would result in a peak
impact of 0.08 mg/m3, and the addition
of the above VOC emissions would
result in a peak impact of 0.02 mg/m3.
The modeled impacts are well below the
recommended significance contribution
threshold of 0.2 mg/m3; for VOC it is an
order of magnitude difference, and for
NH3 the maximum value is less than
half the recommended significant
contribution threshold level. The results
of NH3 modeling for scenario 2 indicate
that, even with a conservatively large
NH3 increase, the maximum impact was
0.24 mg/m3, which is only slightly above
the recommended contribution
threshold of 0.2 mg/m3.
While the increase is slightly above
the recommended contribution
threshold, EPA believes that it is
reasonable to conclude that NH3
emissions from major stationary sources
(in the context of a NNSR precursor
demonstration) do not contribute
significantly to PM2.5 concentrations in
the nonattainment area for the following
reasons: Historical growth of NH3
sources in the area are significantly less
than what was modeled for scenario 2;
the only likely future increases of NH3
emissions from major sources in the
area are from the increased use of NH3
for EGU NOX control (ammonia slip)
and would likely occur at existing EGUs
(as modeled in scenario 1); the area
continues to trend downward in both
monitored PM2.5 concentrations and
PM2.5 (direct and precursor) emissions;
current preliminary monitoring data
shows the area is attaining the standard;
and, this small amount of additional
ambient PM2.5 concentration, based on
the modeling analysis, would therefore
not interfere with the area’s ability to
attain the standard given that the
current preliminary design value for
2015–2017 is 11.3 mg/m3; and the
additional modeled increase of 0.24
mg/m3 would not impact the area’s
ability to attain or maintain the NAAQS.
Based on the results of the modeling
demonstration and the additional
factors described in this section, EPA is
proposing to approve Ohio’s
determination that emissions increases
of either VOC or NH3 from new and
modified major stationary sources
would not contribute significantly to
PM2.5 levels that exceed the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS in the Cleveland nonattainment
E:\FR\FM\04JNP1.SGM
04JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 107 / Monday, June 4, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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);
III. EPA’s Proposed Action
• Is not a significant regulatory action
Ohio’s attainment demonstration
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
modeling, and precursor analysis for
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
both attainment planning RACM and
Section 12(d) of the National
nonattainment NNSR determined that
Technology Transfer and Advancement
VOCs and NH3 do not significantly
contribute to PM2.5 concentrations in the Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
area. EPA finds that Ohio’s analysis is
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
reasonable and well supported. EPA is
• Does not provide EPA with the
thus proposing to approve the following
discretionary authority to address, as
elements of the 2012 SIP submission:
The base year 2011 emissions inventory appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
to meet the section 172(c)(3)
practicable and legally permissible
requirement for emission inventories;
methods, under Executive Order 12898
the demonstration of attainment for
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
2021 as meeting the statutory
In addition, the SIP is not approved
requirement in CAA 189(a)(1)(B);
to apply on any Indian reservation land
current controls as meeting RACM
or in any other area where EPA or an
requirements of 172(c)(1) and
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
189(a)(1(C).
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Indian country, the rule does not have
Reviews
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
governments or preempt tribal law as
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
CAA and applicable Federal regulations. FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
Environmental protection, Air
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
pollution control, Incorporation by
provided that they meet the criteria of
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
Particulate matter, Reporting and
merely approves state law as meeting
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
those imposed by state law. For that
Dated: May 21, 2018.
reason, this action:
Cathy Stepp,
• Is not a significant regulatory action Regional Administrator, Region 5.
subject to review by the Office of
[FR Doc. 2018–11748 Filed 6–1–18; 8:45 am]
Management and Budget under
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
AGENCY
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
40 CFR Part 52
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
[EPA–R01–OAR–2018–0099; FRL–9978–
• Does not impose an information
26—Region 1]
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
Air Plan Approval; Connecticut;
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Volatile Organic Compound Emissions
• Is certified as not having a
From Consumer Products and
significant economic impact on a
Architectural and Industrial
substantial number of small entities
Maintenance Coatings
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
• Does not contain any unfunded
Agency (EPA).
mandate or significantly or uniquely
ACTION: Proposed rule.
affect small governments, as described
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
implications as specified in Executive
revision submitted by the State of
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
area. Accordingly, new or modified
major sources of VOC and NH3 may be
exempted from the state’s NNSR
program requirements for PM2.5 in the
Cleveland PM2.5 nonattainment area.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Jun 01, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25615
Connecticut. The SIP revision amends
requirements for controlling volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions
from consumer products and
architectural and industrial
maintenance (AIM) coatings by revising
Regulations of Connecticut State
Agencies (RCSA) sections 22a–174–40,
22a–174–41, and adding section 22a–
174–41a. The intended effect of this
action is to propose approval of these
regulations into the Connecticut SIP.
This action is being taken in accordance
with the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before July 5, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
OAR–2018–0099 at
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
mackintosh.david@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, the EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The 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
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets. Publicly available docket
materials are available at
www.regulations.gov or at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, Office of
Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality
Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—
Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests
that if at all possible, you contact the
contact 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 legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Mackintosh, Air Quality Planning
E:\FR\FM\04JNP1.SGM
04JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 107 (Monday, June 4, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25608-25615]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11748]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0644; FRL-9978-87-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Cleveland, PM2.5 Attainment Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On October 14, 2016, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA) submitted a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission for the
2012 Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (``NAAQS'' or ``standards'') for the Cleveland nonattainment
area. As required by the Clean Air Act (CAA), OEPA developed an
attainment plan to address the Cleveland nonattainment area and
evaluate the area's ability to attain the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
by the ``Moderate'' attainment date of December 31, 2021. The SIP
submission addresses specific requirements as outlined in the CAA
including: Attainment demonstration; reasonable available control
measure (RACM) analysis; emissions inventory requirements; reasonable
further progress (RFP) with quantitative milestones; and nonattainment
new source review (NNSR). Additionally, the SIP submission includes
optional PM2.5 precursor demonstrations for NNSR and
attainment planning purposes. EPA has evaluated the SIP submission and
is proposing to approve portions of the submission as meeting the
applicable CAA requirements for RACM, emissions inventory, attainment
demonstration modeling, and precursor insignificance demonstrations for
NNSR and attainment planning purposes. EPA is not acting on the other
elements of the submission, including reasonable further progress
(RFP), with quantitative milestones, and motor vehicle emission budgets
(MVEBs).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 5, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0644 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. 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. 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: Carolyn Persoon, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR 18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8290, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we'',
``us'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. Background for EPA's Proposed Action
A. History of the PM2.5 NAAQS
B. CAA PM2.5 Moderate Area Nonattainment SIP
Requirements
II. EPA's Evaluation of Submission
III. EPA's Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background for EPA's Proposed Action
A. History of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
On December 15, 2012, EPA promulgated the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, including a revision of the annual standard to 12.0 micrograms
per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) based on a 3-year average of annual
mean PM2.5 concentrations, and maintaining the current 24-
hour (or daily) standard of 35 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a 3-year average
of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations (78 FR 3086, January
15, 2013). EPA established the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS based on
significant evidence and numerous health studies demonstrating the
serious health effects associated with exposures to PM2.5.
The Cleveland, Ohio area was designated ``Moderate'' nonattainment for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS based on ambient monitoring data
showing that the area was above the 12.0 [micro]g/m\3\ standard. At the
time of designations, the Cleveland area had a design value of 12.5
[micro]g/m\3\ for the 2011-2013 monitoring period (80 FR 2206, January
15, 2015).
To provide guidance on the CAA requirements for state and tribal
implementation plans to implement the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA
promulgated the ``Fine Particle Matter National Ambient Air Quality
Standard: State Implementation Plan Requirements; Final Rule'' (81 FR
58010, August 24, 2016) (hereinafter, the ``PM2.5 SIP
Requirements Rule''). As part of the PM2.5 SIP Requirements
Rule, EPA has interpreted the requirements of the CAA to allow the
state to provide a ``precursor demonstration'' to EPA that supports the
determination that one or more PM2.5 precursors need not be
subject to control and planning requirements in a given nonattainment
area. EPA has determined that sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen
oxides (NOX),
[[Page 25609]]
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and ammonia (NH3) are
precursors to PM, and thus the attainment plan requirements of subpart
4 initially apply equally to emissions of direct PM2.5 and
all of its identified precursors. Section 189(e) of the CAA explicitly
requires the control of major stationary sources of PM2.5
precursors, unless there is a demonstration to the satisfaction of the
EPA Administrator that such major stationary sources do not contribute
significantly to PM levels that exceed the standards in the area.
Accordingly, a state can also provide a precursor demonstration for
attainment planning purposes which finds that reducing a precursor does
not significantly reduce PM2.5 concentrations, and therefore
determines that controls are not needed for any sources of that
precursor (not just major sources) for attainment purposes. EPA has
long recognized the scientific basis for concluding that there are
multiple precursors to PM10, and in particular to
PM2.5 (Section III of Preamble of PM2.5 SIP
Requirements Rule).
After Ohio's submission of the attainment plan by the CAA required
date of October 14, 2016, EPA released a November 17, 2016 memorandum
from Steve Page entitled ``Draft PM2.5 Precursor
Demonstration Guidance'' (precursor guidance), which provides guidance
to states on methods to evaluate if sources of a particular precursor
contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels in the
nonattainment area. The precursor guidance provides a detailed
description of potential modeling approaches and presents possible
thresholds to use in determining whether sources of a particular
precursor contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels in the
area. Although there is no explicit concentration which EPA has
determined represents a significant contribution for PM2.5
precursor demonstrations, the precursor guidance suggests that a
contribution level of 0.2 [micro]g/m\3\, for annual average
PM2.5, could be considered an air quality change that is
``insignificant.'' The specific methods and analysis utilized by Ohio
regarding precursors are generally consistent with the PM2.5
SIP Requirements Rule and precursor guidance and are described in
detail in the sections below regarding planning requirements and NNSR
requirements.
B. CAA PM2.5 Moderate Area Nonattainment SIP Requirements
With respect to the requirements for an attainment plan for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, the general CAA part D nonattainment area
planning requirements are found in subpart 1, and the Moderate area
planning requirements specifically for particulate matter are found in
subpart 4.
EPA utilizes a longstanding general guidance document that
interprets the 1990 amendments to the CAA commonly referred to as the
``General Preamble'' (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992). The General
Preamble addresses the relationship between the subpart 1 and the
subpart 4 requirements and provides recommendations to states for
meeting statutory requirements for particulate matter attainment
planning. Specifically, the General Preamble explains that requirements
applicable to Moderate area attainment plan SIP submissions are set
forth in subpart 4, but such SIP submissions must also meet the general
attainment planning provisions in subpart 1, to the extent these
provisions ``are not otherwise subsumed by, or integrally related to,''
the more specific subpart 4 requirements (57 FR 13538). Additionally,
EPA finalized the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule to clarify our
interpretations of the statutory requirements that apply to Moderate
and ``Serious'' PM2.5 nonattainment areas under subparts 1
and 4.
The CAA requirements of subpart 1 for attainment plans include: (i)
The section 172(c)(1) RACM/reasonably available control technology
(RACT) and attainment demonstrations; (ii) the section 172(c)(2)
requirement to demonstrate RFP; (iii) the section 172(c)(3) requirement
for emission inventories; (iv) the section 172(c)(5) requirements for a
NNSR permitting program; and (v) the section 172(c)(9) requirement for
contingency measures.
The CAA subpart 4 requirements for Moderate areas are generally
comparable with the subpart 1 requirements and include: (i) The section
189(a)(1)(A) NNSR permit program requirements; (ii) the section
189(a)(1)(B) requirements for attainment demonstration; (iii) the
section 189(a)(1)(C) requirements for RACM; and (iv) the section 189(c)
requirements for RFP and quantitative milestones. Section 189(e) also
requires that states regulate major sources of PM2.5
precursors in a nonattainment area, unless EPA approves a demonstration
excusing the state from regulating such sources. In addition, under
subpart 4 Moderate areas must provide for attainment of the current
PM2.5 annual standard as expeditiously as practicable but no
later than the end of the 6th calendar year after designation, which is
December 31, 2021.
II. EPA's Evaluation of the Submission
OEPA, in coordination with the Lake Michigan Air Directors
Consortium (LADCO), developed the attainment plan SIP submission for
the Cleveland area. This plan was subsequently put through public
process, adopted by the state, and submitted by the OEPA to EPA. This
section describes the relevant contents of the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS attainment plan SIP submission and EPA's rationale for proposing
approval of the required SIP elements of RACM, attainment
demonstration, emissions inventory, and precursor demonstrations for
both NNSR and attainment planning purposes.
The 2012 PM2.5 attainment plan contains SIP provisions
to address the requirements for a Moderate PM2.5
nonattainment area, including RACT/RACM, emissions inventory, modeling,
attainment demonstration, transportation conformity and motor vehicle
emissions budgets, RFP with quantitative milestones, and contingency
measures. EPA is proposing to approve the RACM, emissions inventory,
attainment demonstration, and precursor demonstrations for NNSR and
attainment planning purposes, as fully meeting the requirements of the
CAA and the applicable Federal regulations. Preliminary monitoring data
indicate that the area is attaining the standard for the 2015-2017
design value period. If confirmed, certain planning requirements may be
suspended per the clean data policy (40 CFR 51.1015(a)). EPA will
continue to review other elements of the attainment plan submission in
order to determine if they are necessary for the area to attain the
standard and act on them accordingly.
Emissions Inventory 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Note that this guidance was also updated in 2017. See
``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and
Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and Regional Haze Regulations'' (EPA-454/B-17-003, July 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires the development of an
emissions inventory for nonattainment areas. In addition, the planning
and associated modeling requirements set forth in CAA section 189(a)
make the development of an accurate and up-to-date emissions inventory
a critical element of any viable attainment plan. EPA guidance
specifies the best practices for developing an emissions inventory for
PM2.5 nonattainment areas per EPA's ``Emissions Inventory
Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National
Ambient Air
[[Page 25610]]
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations'' (EPA-454/B-
07-002, April 2007). The 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS SIP submission
contains planning inventories of emission sources and emission rates
for the base year of 2011 and the projected attainment year of 2021.
OEPA selected the year 2011 as the base year because it is one of the
three years for which air quality data was used to designate the area
as nonattainment. Additionally, OEPA and LADCO determined that high-
quality emissions information was already available from the National
Emissions Inventory (NEI) for 2011. LADCO developed the base year
emissions inventory for the nonattainment area using the NEI, with
additional information for on-road and nonroad mobile sources, marine,
aircraft, and rail sources. Table 1 provides a summary of the annual
2011 emissions inventory for the Cleveland nonattainment area for
direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5 precursors.
OEPA's submission included detailed information for the sources in
the emissions inventory including facility name, ID, location, and
emissions, as well as documentation on mobile source model inputs for
both on-road and nonroad sources (See Docket submission and Appendix
C).
Table 1--Annual Emissions Inventory for Cleveland Area for Direct PM2.5 and Precursors
[tpy]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5
County/source sector -------------------------------- NOX SO2 NH3 VOC
Filterable Condensable
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cuyahoga:
Area (nonpoint)..................................... 1143.13 234.61 4989.24 188.94 670.62 12116.58
Marine, Aircraft, Rail (MAR)........................ 96.88 0.02 2822.27 187.78 0.99 288.66
Nonroad............................................. 508.69 0.00 6045.40 17.35 8.66 8349.38
Onroad.............................................. 800.00 0.00 18764.59 132.17 428.60 8568.15
Point EGU........................................... 32.90 33.50 771.22 1941.86 0.10 11.40
Point Non-EGU....................................... 599.48 407.26 2404.05 4461.80 65.87 986.52
Prescribed Fire..................................... 4.92 0.00 1.20 0.54 0.88 12.61
Lorain:
Area (nonpoint)..................................... 477.68 72.00 844.19 44.37 448.73 2721.24
Marine, Aircraft, Rail (MAR)........................ 44.39 0.00 1289.44 55.68 0.57 73.94
Nonroad............................................. 160.82 0.00 1971.11 5.39 2.66 3009.78
Onroad.............................................. 195.49 0.00 4580.85 31.75 101.84 2177.01
Point EGU........................................... 94.90 298.62 4673.50 32041.30 0.54 31.82
Point Non-EGU....................................... 156.45 175.78 705.89 374.63 3.01 916.35
Prescribed Fire..................................... 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................................... 4615.72 1521.80 49862.95 39483.56 1736.07 39263.44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has reviewed the base-year emissions inventory and finds that
it satisfies the CAA section 172(c)(3) requirement for a comprehensive,
accurate and current inventory of actual 2011 emissions of the relevant
pollutants for PM2.5 in the Cleveland area. Thus, EPA
proposes to approve the base year emissions inventory in the SIP
submission.
Attainment Demonstration and Modeling
Section 189(a)(1)(B) requires that a PM2.5 Moderate area
SIP contain either a demonstration that the plan will provide for
attainment by the applicable attainment date, or a demonstration that
attainment by such date is impracticable. In the attainment
demonstration of the 2016 SIP submission, OEPA described how the
attainment plan would provide for attainment of the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS by the attainment date of December 31, 2021.
Using air quality modeling, an attainment demonstration must
project that future air quality levels in the nonattainment area will
be below the standard. OEPA and LADCO conducted modeling in accordance
with EPA's April 2007 (and where appropriate, draft December 2014)
``Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating
Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5, and
Regional Haze.'' (attainment demonstration modeling guidance) (EPA-454/
B-07-002, April 2007). OEPA modeling is also consistent with the
November 2005 Appendix W requirement used at the time by OEPA and is
still consistent with the updated January 2017 (82 FR 5182) ``Guideline
on Air Quality Models.'' (CFR Title 40, Part 51, Appendix W.) In
addition, OEPA submitted a precursor demonstration that is consistent
with the recommendations contained in EPA's precursor guidance document
released in November 2016. (``PM2.5 Precursor Demonstration
Guidance,'' memorandum issued by Steven Page, Director of EPA Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, November 17, 2016).
Per the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, the attainment
demonstration modeling guidance provides recommendations that include:
Developing a conceptual description of the problem to be addressed;
developing a modeling/analysis protocol; selecting an appropriate model
to support the demonstration; selecting appropriate meteorological
episodes or time periods to model; choosing an appropriate area to
model with appropriate horizontal/vertical resolution; generating
meteorological and air quality inputs to the air quality model;
generating emissions inputs to the air quality model; and, evaluating
performance of the air quality model. After these steps are completed,
the state can apply a model to simulate effects of future year
emissions and candidate control strategies.
OEPA and LADCO calculated the baseline design value for
PM2.5 using the procedures contained in appendix N to 40 CFR
50, ``Interpretation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Particulate Matter,'' and EPA attainment demonstration modeling
guidance. Ambient PM2.5 concentrations for the 2009-2013
time frame (a weighted average of the 2009-2011, 2010-2012, and 2011-
2013 design value periods, as recommended by the
[[Page 25611]]
Modeling Guidance) were used to calculate baseline design values
ranging from 9.64-12.82 [micro]g/m\3\ for the seven PM2.5
monitoring locations in the nonattainment area (see Table 2). Detailed
methods for the baseline design value calculations are in Appendix B of
the 2016 SIP submission (See Docket).
Next, OEPA and LADCO compiled base-year emission inventories (as
discussed above) and projected emission inventories for the attainment
year 2021. LADCO utilized emission inventories compiled by EPA for the
years 2011, 2017, and 2025 as the starting point. EPA's 2011 emissions
inventory (Version 2011eh) is based on the 2011 NEI, version 2
(2011NEIv2). The inventory uses hourly 2011 continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) data for electric generating units (EGUs)
emissions, hourly on-road mobile emissions, and 2011 day-specific wild
and prescribed fire data. Emissions include all criteria pollutants and
precursors (CAPs), and a few hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). See EPA's
Technical Support Document (EPA, 2015A) for a thorough description of
the methodology used to develop the 2011 emissions inventory.
EPA projected future emission inventories for the years 2017 and
2025 based on the 2011 baseline inventory. The future-year scenarios
incorporate current ``on-the-books'' regulations, and do not include
any additional measures or controls. See, EPA (2015A) for a thorough
description of the methodology used to project future emissions. For
most emissions categories, LADCO developed the 2021 future-year
emissions inventory by interpolating between EPA's 2017 and 2025
inventories. The interpolation was done for each model species at each
model cell for every model hour. However, LADCO developed updated 2021
EGU emissions by using the Eastern Regional Technical Advisory
Committee EGU Tool (ERTAC) and updated 2021 regional on-road mobile
emissions using EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2014) and
Ramboll-Environ emissions (See Appendix B and C for detailed
discussion).
For EGU projections, Ohio and LADCO relied on the U.S. Energy
Information Administration's ``High Oil and Gas Resource'' (See Docket
for detailed discussion). The projected emissions inventory not only
accounts for growth in economic sectors, but also includes emissions
controls (existing or future regulations) that will impact sources in
the area. In this case, OEPA and LADCO only modeled controls that have
been promulgated, with no new future controls being added since OEPA
has determined that additional RACT and RACM would not be necessary for
expeditious attainment, and that current controls in the area are
sufficient to meet the RACM requirement. For modeling purposes no
additional RACM/RACT was applied to future year inventories.
The base-year and projected emission inventories were used in a
photochemical grid model, the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with
extensions (CAMx), to project the expected change from base-year to
future year design values. The modeled attainment demonstration results
in a predicted future-year concentration at each PM2.5
ambient monitor location within the Cleveland nonattainment area. The
results from the CAMx modeling were then used as inputs to EPA's
Modeled Attainment Test Software (MATS) to calculate the design values
for each monitored location in the attainment year 2021 using
information on current PM2.5 speciation. Modeled attainment
year results show that the area is expected to meet the standard (all
2021 values at existing monitor locations are below 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\) by
the 2021 attainment date (See Table 2).
Table 2--Projected PM2.5 Design Values ([mu]g/m\3\) for 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2021
County Monitor ID 2011 Baseline Projected
design value design value
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cuyahoga.......................................... 39-035-0034 10.02 8.07
39-035-0038 12.82 10.69
39-035-0045 11.99 9.84
39-035-0060 12.79 10.45
39-035-0065 12.49 10.32
39-035-1002 10.36 8.41
Lorain............................................ 39-093-3002 9.64 8.08
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the above, EPA is proposing to approve OEPA's
demonstration of attainment for 2021 as meeting the statutory
requirement in CAA 189(a)(1)(B).
RACM/RACT Requirements
The general SIP planning requirements for nonattainment areas under
subpart 1 include CAA section 172(c)(1), which requires implementation
of all RACM (including RACT). Section 172(c)(1) requires that
attainment plans provide for the implementation of RACM (including
RACT) to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. Therefore, what
constitutes RACM and RACT is related to what is necessary for
attainment, as well as expeditious attainment, in a given area.
Subpart 4 also requires states to develop attainment plans that
evaluate potential control measures and impose RACM and RACT on sources
within a Moderate nonattainment area that are necessary to
expeditiously attain the NAAQS. Specifically, CAA section 189(a)(1)(C)
requires that Moderate nonattainment plans provide for implementation
of RACM and RACT no later than four years after the area is designated
as nonattainment. As with subpart 1, the terms RACM and RACT are not
defined within subpart 4. Nor do the provisions of subpart 4 specify
how states are to meet the RACM and RACT requirements. However, EPA's
longstanding guidance in the General Preamble provides recommendations
for determining which control measures constitute RACM and RACT for
purposes of meeting the statutory requirements of subpart 4 (57 FR
13540-13541).
For both RACM and RACT, EPA notes that an overarching principle is
that if a given control measure is not needed to attain the relevant
NAAQS in a given area as expeditiously as practicable, then that
control measure would not be required as RACM or RACT because it would
not be reasonable to impose controls that are not in fact needed for
attainment purposes. Accordingly, a RACM and RACT analysis is a process
to identify emission sources, evaluate
[[Page 25612]]
potential emission controls, and impose those control measures and
technologies that are reasonable and necessary to bring the area into
attainment as expeditiously as practicable, but by no later than the
statutory attainment date for the area.
EPA has long applied a policy that states must evaluate the
combined effect of reasonably available control measures that, if
implemented collectively, would advance the attainment date by at least
one year and should be adopted. Since the area's preliminary data
indicate that it will attain the NAAQs based on the 2015-2017 design
value period, it is not necessary to implement additional controls. The
data indicates that the area is attaining the standard with current
Federal, state, and local permanent and enforceable measures.
OEPA provided a RACM and RACT analysis in Appendix E of the 2012
PM2.5 attainment plan SIP submission. Ohio has found that
existing measures for PM2.5, SO2 and
NOX for area sources, mobile sources and stationary sources
constitute RACT/RACM (80 FR 68253; 81 FR 58402; 82 FR 16938). Some of
the current controls for the area that are sufficient to meet the RACM/
RACT requirement include: Existing PM2.5 and ozone RACT
rules, mobile source controls, SO2 reductions from 2010
SO2 nonattainment areas including a large EGU in neighboring
Lake County, Federal interstate transport rules, and regional haze.
OEPA provided an attainment analysis that consisted of: First, a
modeling demonstration that the area would attain by the attainment
date in 2021 with current on-the-books controls and measures; and
second, a demonstration showing that by interpolating modeled future
values from 2021 with 2016 design values at the monitored sites, the
area would be attaining the standard in both 2020 (at 11.0 [mu]g/m\3\)
and 2019 (at 11.3 [mu]g/m\3\) at the design value monitor prior to the
2021 statutory attainment date. The interpolation suggested that the
area would attain at the end of 2017, similar to EPA modeling analysis
discussed below, and is now verified by the preliminary 2015-2017
design values that indicate the area is likely attaining as of the end
of 2017. In addition, the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule
outlines the option for states to do an additional modeling
demonstration to show that specific PM2.5 precursors are not
significant contributors to PM2.5 levels that exceed the
standard in the area. OEPA provided a precursor demonstration modeling
analysis that was intended to demonstrate that emissions of
NH3 and VOC are not significant PM2.5 precursors
for attainment planning purposes.
Precursor Demonstration for Attainment Planning Purposes
For the precursor demonstration, OEPA and LADCO initially performed
a ``concentration-based'' contribution analysis using speciated
monitoring data to determine whether NH3 or VOC contribute
significantly to PM2.5 concentrations in the area, based on
monitored values alone. However, using the assumption suggested in the
draft precursor demonstration guidance that all NH3
emissions are associated with the nitrate portion of PM2.5
mass, and that all VOC emissions are associated with the organic carbon
portion of PM2.5 mass, the state could not determine that
these precursors did not make a significant contribution.
Therefore, the state proceeded with a sensitivity analysis to
determine the impact of reducing NH3 and VOC emissions on
PM2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area. OEPA and
LADCO performed a modeled sensitivity analysis for attainment planning
purposes using the 2021 attainment year concentrations at each monitor
in the Cleveland area. LADCO applied a 40% emission reduction to
anthropogenic sources of NH3 and VOC emissions for all
source categories in the Cleveland nonattainment area. The OEPA
submission indicated that the 40% comprehensive reduction was chosen
because it was within the range of a previously published,
comprehensive sensitivity analysis done in photochemical modeling which
typically uses 30-50% when applying the reduction across all emission
sectors--as done for this analysis.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EPA examined examples in the published literature of general
sensitivity modeling studies that look at the impact of across-the-
board percentage reductions in precursor emissions on secondary
pollutants (including PM2.5, PM10, and ozone)
(Vieno, 2016; Megaritis, 2013; Harrison, 2013; Derwent, 2014; Liu,
2010; Pun, 2001). The majority of studies have used across the board
percentage precursor emissions reductions of between 30% and 60%,
with the most common reduction percentages being 30% and 50%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The submission was made by the state prior to the date that the
precursor guidance was issued by EPA; however, the modeled reduction
levels are still within the suggested range of 30-70% reductions found
in the precursor guidance.
The results of the 2021 attainment planning sensitivity analyses
show modeled impacts from reducing NH3 by 40% on
PM2.5 concentrations at the monitors ranging from 0.10-0.21
[micro]g/m\3\, and modeled impacts from reducing VOC ranging from 0.0-
0.01 [micro]g/m\3\. Although there is no explicit concentration which
EPA has determined represents a significant contribution, the current
draft precursor guidance suggests that a contribution level of 0.2
[micro]g/m\3\ is an appropriate recommended threshold to identify an
air quality change that is ``insignificant'' for annual average
PM2.5. In this case, all modeled impacts for VOC emissions
are well below the recommended threshold, and most of the modeled
NH3 impacts are at or below the threshold as well, with only
one ambient air quality monitor showing modeled ambient
PM2.5 levels slightly above the recommended threshold (at
0.21 [micro]g/m\3\).
EPA's precursor guidance noted that there may be cases where
precursor emissions have an impact above the recommended contribution
thresholds, yet do not ``significantly contribute'' to levels that
exceed the standard in the area (pursuant to section 189(e)). Under the
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, the significance of a
precursor's contribution is to be determined ``based on the facts and
circumstances of the area.'' Air agencies may thus provide EPA with
information related to other factors they believe should be considered
in determining whether the contribution of emissions of a particular
precursor to levels that exceed the NAAQS is ``significant'' or not.
Such factors may include: The amount by which a precursor's
contribution exceeds the recommended contribution thresholds; the
severity of nonattainment at relevant monitors and/or grid cell
locations in the area; trends in ambient speciation data and precursor
emissions; and any other relevant information.
Based on a number of factors, in this case EPA believes that
NH3 is not a significant precursor. The relevant factors
include: The magnitude of the amount above the threshold is small
compared to the total threshold amount (5% of the total threshold
amount); the area continues to trend downward in both ambient
monitoring data and emissions in direct PM2.5 and
precursors; current preliminary monitoring data shows the area is
attaining the standard; and additionally, this small amount of
PM2.5 resulting from NH3 would not interfere with
the area's ability to attain the standard, as evidenced by the fact
that the preliminary 2015-2017 design value is 0.7 [micro]g/m\3\ below
the NAAQS. Regardless of the finding of significance for these
precursors, the area is expected to attain (based on preliminary design
values) with only current controls in place, and it would not be
required to control any sources further. Additionally, the area
[[Page 25613]]
has preliminary 2015-2017 data indicating that it has a three-year
design value below the level of the NAAQS, so that any additional
controls would not be implemented until well after the area has
attained the standard.
Based on the above, EPA agrees with the determination by Ohio that
for attainment planning purposes, additional controls on existing
sources of NH3 and VOC emissions do not need to be imposed.
RACM/RACT Analysis
OEPA conducted a six-step RACM analysis that focused on direct
PM2.5, NOX, and SO2: (1) Identify
sources in the area for PM2.5, NOX, and
SO2--that comprised over 90% of the emissions for each
pollutant over all source categories; (2) identify potential control
measures; (3) evaluate technological feasibility; (4) evaluate economic
feasibility; (5) determine if the measures can be implemented within
both four and five years; (6) evaluate the earliest practical year for
attainment.
As detailed in OEPA's RACT/RACM analysis in Appendix E, many of the
sources are already well controlled. The state then identified current
controls for each source as well as any additional measures or controls
that are potentially available to each of the identified sources using
EPA's ``Menu of Control Measures'' document, available online at https://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html and the RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse
(RBLC) at https://cfpub.epa.gov/rblc/. OEPA then determined if any of
the identified controls were technologically or economically feasible
using EPA's the method outlined in the PM2.5 SIP
Requirements Rule, which can include factors such as a source's process
and operating procedures, raw materials, physical plant layout, and
potential environmental impacts such as increased water pollution,
waste disposal and energy requirements (see 40 CFR 51.1009(a)(3)(i)).
In regard to area and mobile sources, a state may tailor the
analysis to the considerations that are relevant to the local
circumstances, such as the condition and extent of needed
infrastructure, population size, and workforce type and habits, all of
which may impact the availability of potential control measures in the
area. (81 FR 58010)
OEPA also determined economic feasibility of each identified
measure or technology. That analysis included consideration of the cost
of reducing emissions in the area and the difference between the cost
of an emissions reduction measure at a particular source in the area
and the cost of emissions reduction measures that have been implemented
at similar sources in the same or other areas.
OEPA determined that the technologically feasible measures that
were identified were not economically feasible. For example, the state
determined that the cost-effectiveness ranged from $5800 per ton to
more than $40,000 per ton for measures that were found to be
technologically feasible for major stationary sources. In addition, the
highest costs of reductions were generally linked to controls of direct
PM2.5, and OEPA has determined that reductions in direct
PM2.5 would be the most effective at reducing the monitored
concentrations in the Cleveland area. Thus, the state found that the
most effective controls are not reasonable to implement based on cost.
Finally, OEPA analyzed the implementation time frame of controls
within four years and the earliest applicable attainment date, which by
interpolation would be the end of 2017, and determined that the area
would attain the standard prior to the state rulemaking and
implementation of additional controls in the area. In fact, the area
has preliminary 2015-2017 data indicating that it has a three-year
design value below the level of the NAAQS, making implementation of
additional controls to achieve attainment moot.
As noted by OEPA, both the Federal and state ``on the books''
controls have led to additional control and will lead to additional
emissions reductions in the future. Because of the historic
nonattainment status of this area for both ozone and PM2.5,
the Cleveland nonattainment area is one of the most well controlled
areas in the state for pollutants contributing to formation of both
PM2.5 and ozone. Ohio's current rules, current controls and
the Federal ``on the books'' controls continue to satisfy RACT/RACM for
the annual PM2.5 standard. Some of the current controls that
are sufficient to meet the RACT/RACM requirement are Ohio's current
RACT program found in Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) Chapter 3745-17,
which controls NOX; rules under OAC Chapter 3745-18 which
control SO2 sources for the state; and the inspection and
maintenance program contained in OAC Chapter 3745-26, which reduces
emissions of NOX and VOC from on-road vehicles. OEPA has
determined that no additional controls are feasible to implement as
RACM/RACT in the Cleveland area, and that current controls meet the
requirement for RACM under 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C).
EPA finds OEPA's determination reasonable, and is proposing to
approve OEPA's determination that current controls meet the RACM/RACT
requirement and that additional controls are not reasonable for other
sources in the area or necessary to expeditiously attain the NAAQS.
As noted above, the attainment demonstration modeling analysis
reflecting 2021 projected emissions based on only current controls
shows that projected 2021 air quality values at monitoring sites in the
area range from 8.07-10.69 [micro]g/m\3\, well below the standard.
Monitoring data for the 2014-2016 design values show only one monitor
in the area is above the standard at 12.2 [micro]g/m\3\, and is
trending downward. Interpolation between current and projected monitor
values indicates that the area is likely to attain the standard with
current controls by the end of the 2017 calendar year. Current,
preliminary monitored design values for the years 2015-2017 shows the
highest values being monitored in the Cleveland area is 11.3 [mu]g/
m\3\. EPA also conducted modeling in 2015 in support of regulatory
initiatives regarding the revised ozone NAAQS and interstate transport
(Appendix B), and these analyses also indicate that the Cleveland area
will attain the PM2.5 NAAQS well before the outermost
attainment date of December 31, 2021.
Based on the above, EPA is proposing to find that current controls
on sources in the nonattainment area meet the requirements of section
172(c)(1) and section 189(a)(1)(C) of the CAA. Accordingly, EPA is
proposing to approve current controls: Federal mobile source standards,
transport rules, Regional Haze plans, and state VOC RACT rules as
meeting the RACM/RACT provisions.
Nonattainment NSR Precursor Demonstration
In addition to the attainment planning precursor demonstrations,
which showed that neither existing sources of VOC nor existing sources
of NH3 have a significant contribution to PM2.5
concentrations, OEPA provided an analysis for both VOC and
NH3 intended to show that increases in emissions of these
precursors that may result from new or modified sources would not make
a significant contribution to PM2.5 concentrations in the
area. This demonstration is intended to justify the state's
determination that major stationary sources of these precursors do not
need to be regulated under the NNSR program for the area. For NNSR
permitting purposes, CAA section 189(e), as interpreted by the
PM2.5 SIP
[[Page 25614]]
Requirements Rule, provides an option for the state to provide a
precursor demonstration intended to show that increases in emissions
from potential new and existing major stationary sources of a
particular precursor would not contribute significantly to levels that
exceed the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in a particular nonattainment
area. 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(3). In particular, EPA's regulations provide
that a state choosing to submit an NNSR precursor demonstration should
evaluate the sensitivity of PM2.5 levels in the
nonattainment area to an increase in emissions of the precursor. If the
state demonstrates that the estimated air quality changes determined
through such an analysis are not significant, based on the facts and
circumstances of the area, the state may use this information to
identify new major stationary sources and major modifications of a
precursor that will not be considered to contribute significantly to
PM2.5 levels that exceed the standard in the nonattainment
area under CAA section 189(e). Id. 51.1006(a)(3)(i). If EPA approves
the state's NNSR precursor demonstration for a nonattainment area,
major sources of the relevant precursor can be exempted from the NNSR
major source permitting requirements for PM2.5 with respect
to that precursor. Id. 51.1006(a)(3)(ii).
For NNSR permitting purposes, sensitivity analyses examine
potential increases in emissions through a model simulation that
evaluates the effect on PM2.5 concentrations in the area
resulting from a given set of precursor emission increases from one or
more new or modified stationary sources. Ohio's 2011 and 2021
comprehensive modeling inventories were used for this analysis. To help
determine a theoretical growth scenario as a result of major source
expansion (new or modified), Ohio first prepared inventories for VOC
and NH3 for 2008 to 2014 for the entire State from Ohio's
annual emissions reporting program. Ohio used inventories for the
entire State in order to determine what types of major sources/source
categories are likely to expand (new or modified) within the Cleveland
area and at what magnitude (tons per year) those expansions are likely
to occur. These inventories and the full detailed analysis are
contained in Appendix F of Ohio's submission.
Consistent with EPA's regulation and draft guidance, OEPA and LADCO
have performed sensitivity analyses of potential increases in emissions
through a model simulation that evaluates the effect on
PM2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area (including
unmonitored areas) resulting from a given set of hypothetical
NH3 or VOC precursor emission increases from modified major
stationary sources of the respective precursors in the nonattainment
area. The inventories and the full detailed analysis are contained in
Appendix F of Ohio's submission. For the NH3 analysis, Ohio
assumed emissions increases at three existing locations of
NH3 in the area, as these would be the most likely future
areas of growth in the Cleveland area. EPA believes that the use of the
historical inventories to predict growth is reflective of the future
potential increases specific to the Cleveland area given the current
types of facilities and their respective locations, the urban density
and ability to expand or build, as well as the types of state
regulation or other Federal requirements (such as National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) on facility types and controls
required for other pollutants. EPA believes that this is an acceptable
approach to estimating potential future growth.
In addition to the modeled emissions increases based on historical
growth at sources, LADCO and OEPA did an additional NH3
modeling analysis (submitted July 18, 2017) based on a 100 tpy
emissions increase (to represent major sources) in each modeled grid
cell in the nonattainment area. EPA believes that this is a
sufficiently conservative analysis that exceeds the level of actual
potential NH3 emissions growth likely to occur in the area.
Both of these approaches are consistent with suggested modeling in
EPA's precursor guidance. Thus, EPA finds that this analysis serves as
a reasonable evaluation of the sensitivity of PM2.5
concentrations to a large emissions increase across the spatial area.
For the VOC analysis, Ohio added 1,486 tpy of VOC emissions at 3
existing source locations where VOC emissions increases potentially
could occur in the nonattainment area. Compared to the 2011 inventory,
this represents a 75% increase in VOC emissions from existing
stationary sources (EGU and non-EGU). Compared to the 2021 projected
inventory, this represents an 80% increase in stationary source
emissions. For the NH3 analysis, Ohio added 325 tpy of
NH3 emissions (scenario 1) to 3 existing source locations
where NH3 emissions increases potentially could occur in the
nonattainment area. Compared to the 2011 inventory, this represents a
447% increase in NH3 emissions from existing stationary
sources. Compared to the 2021 projected inventory, this represents a
449% increase in NH3 from stationary sources. The additional
NH3 analysis (scenario 2) had a total emissions increase of
1,700 tpy, which is over 500% higher growth than the historical
NH3 growth (scenario 1).
Ohio found the addition of the NH3 emissions
(approximately 350 tpy) into the model based on historical growth
(scenario 1) would result in a peak impact of 0.08 [mu]g/m\3\, and the
addition of the above VOC emissions would result in a peak impact of
0.02 [mu]g/m\3\. The modeled impacts are well below the recommended
significance contribution threshold of 0.2 [mu]g/m\3\; for VOC it is an
order of magnitude difference, and for NH3 the maximum value
is less than half the recommended significant contribution threshold
level. The results of NH3 modeling for scenario 2 indicate
that, even with a conservatively large NH3 increase, the
maximum impact was 0.24 [mu]g/m\3\, which is only slightly above the
recommended contribution threshold of 0.2 [mu]g/m\3\.
While the increase is slightly above the recommended contribution
threshold, EPA believes that it is reasonable to conclude that
NH3 emissions from major stationary sources (in the context
of a NNSR precursor demonstration) do not contribute significantly to
PM2.5 concentrations in the nonattainment area for the
following reasons: Historical growth of NH3 sources in the
area are significantly less than what was modeled for scenario 2; the
only likely future increases of NH3 emissions from major
sources in the area are from the increased use of NH3 for
EGU NOX control (ammonia slip) and would likely occur at
existing EGUs (as modeled in scenario 1); the area continues to trend
downward in both monitored PM2.5 concentrations and
PM2.5 (direct and precursor) emissions; current preliminary
monitoring data shows the area is attaining the standard; and, this
small amount of additional ambient PM2.5 concentration,
based on the modeling analysis, would therefore not interfere with the
area's ability to attain the standard given that the current
preliminary design value for 2015-2017 is 11.3 [mu]g/m\3\; and the
additional modeled increase of 0.24 [mu]g/m\3\ would not impact the
area's ability to attain or maintain the NAAQS.
Based on the results of the modeling demonstration and the
additional factors described in this section, EPA is proposing to
approve Ohio's determination that emissions increases of either VOC or
NH3 from new and modified major stationary sources would not
contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the Cleveland nonattainment
[[Page 25615]]
area. Accordingly, new or modified major sources of VOC and
NH3 may be exempted from the state's NNSR program
requirements for PM2.5 in the Cleveland PM2.5
nonattainment area.
III. EPA's Proposed Action
Ohio's attainment demonstration modeling, and precursor analysis
for both attainment planning RACM and nonattainment NNSR determined
that VOCs and NH3 do not significantly contribute to
PM2.5 concentrations in the area. EPA finds that Ohio's
analysis is reasonable and well supported. EPA is thus proposing to
approve the following elements of the 2012 SIP submission: The base
year 2011 emissions inventory to meet the section 172(c)(3) requirement
for emission inventories; the demonstration of attainment for 2021 as
meeting the statutory requirement in CAA 189(a)(1)(B); current controls
as meeting RACM requirements of 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1(C).
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this 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);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
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 appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: May 21, 2018.
Cathy Stepp,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2018-11748 Filed 6-1-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P