Air Plan Approval; North Carolina: New Source Review for Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5, 28789-28795 [2018-13356]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
Copyright Office
2. Add § 165.T07–0463 to read as
follows:
■
37 CFR Part 201
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
§ 165.T07 —0463 Safety Zone; Beaufort
Water Festival Air Show, Beaufort, SC
[Docket No. 2018–4]
(a) Location. This rule establishes a
safety zone on certain waters of the
Beaufort River, Beaufort, SC. The rule
creates a regulated area that will
encompass a portion of the waterway
that is 700 feet wide by 2600 feet in
length on waters of the Beaufort River
encompassed within the following
points: 32°25′47″ N/080°40′44″ W,
32°25′41″ N/080°40′14″ W, 32°25′35″ N/
080°40′16″ W, 32°25′40″ N/080°40′46″
W. All coordinates are North American
Datum 1983.
(b) Definition. The term ‘‘designated
representative’’ means Coast Guard
Patrol Commanders, including Coast
Guard coxswains, petty officers, and
other officers operating Coast Guard
vessels, and Federal, state, and local
officers designated by or assisting the
COTP in the enforcement of the
regulated areas.
(c) Regulations. (1) All persons and
vessels are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the regulated area
unless authorized by the COTP or a
designated representative.
(2) Persons and vessels desiring to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the regulated area may
contact the COTP by telephone at 843–
740–7050, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel
16, to request authorization. If
authorization to enter, transit through,
anchor in, or remain within the
regulated area is granted by the COTP or
a designated representative, all persons
and vessels receiving such authorization
must comply with the instructions of
the COTP or a designated
representative.
(3) The Coast Guard will provide
notice of the regulated area by Local
Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to
Mariners, and on-scene designated
representatives.
(d) Enforcement Period. This rule will
be enforced on July 21, 2018 from 12
p.m. until 5 p.m.
Dated: June 13, 2018.
J.W. Reed,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Charleston.
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office Fees: Extension of
Comment Period
U.S. Copyright Office, Library
of Congress.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;
extension of comment period.
AGENCY:
The Copyright Office is
extending the deadline for the
submission of written comments in
response to its May 24, 2018 notice of
proposed rulemaking proposing the
adoption of a new fee schedule.
DATES: The comment period for the
notice of proposed rulemaking,
published on May 24, 2018 (83 FR
24054), is extended by an additional
sixty days. Comments must be made in
writing and must be received in the U.S.
Copyright Office no later than 11:59
p.m. Eastern Time on September 21,
2018.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government
efficiency, the Copyright Office is using
the regulations.gov system for the
submission and posting of public
comments in this proceeding. All
comments are therefore to be submitted
electronically through regulations.gov.
Specific instructions for submitting
comments are available on the
Copyright Office website at https://
www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/
feestudy2018/. If electronic submission
of comments is not feasible due to lack
of access to a computer and/or the
internet, please contact the Office for
special instructions using the contact
information below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Regan A. Smith, General Counsel and
Associate Register of Copyrights, by
email at regans@copyright.gov, or Jalyce
Mangum, Attorney-Advisor, by email at
jmang@copyright.gov, or either by
telephone at 202–707–8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May
24, 2018, the U.S. Copyright Office
issued a proposed rulemaking
recommending the adoption of a new
fee schedule for services in the
following areas: Registration,
recordation, record retrieval, search, and
certification, the Licensing Division,
and other ancillary services. The
proposed fee schedule would assist the
Office in recovering a significant part,
though not the whole, of its costs.1 The
SUMMARY:
[FR Doc. 2018–13210 Filed 6–20–18; 8:45 am]
1 83
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Jun 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
FR 24054 (May 24, 2018).
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28789
Office invited public comment on the
notice of proposed rulemaking. To
ensure that members of the public have
sufficient time to respond, and to ensure
that the Office has the benefit of a
complete record, the Office is extending
the submission deadline by an
additional sixty days. Written comments
now are due no later than September 21,
2018.
Dated: June 15, 2018.
Regan A. Smith,
General Counsel and Associate Register of
Copyrights.
[FR Doc. 2018–13323 Filed 6–20–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–30–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0501; FRL–9979–
79—Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; North Carolina: New
Source Review for Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
changes to the North Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted
by the North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality (NC DEQ)
through the Division of Air Quality
(DAQ), to EPA on October 17, 2017.
This SIP submittal modifies North
Carolina’s Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) regulations and
includes the adoption of specific federal
provisions needed to meet the New
Source Review (NSR) permitting
program requirements for the fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
In addition, North Carolina’s October
17, 2017, SIP submittal addresses
portions of the PSD requirements for the
infrastructure SIPs for the following
NAAQS: 1997 Annual and 24-hour
PM2.5, 2006 24-hour PM2.5, 2008 lead,
2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 sulfur dioxide
(SO2), 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and
2012 Annual PM2.5. As a result of this
proposed approval of North Carolina’s
modified PSD regulations, EPA is also
proposing to approve North Carolina’s
submittal with respect to the related
PSD infrastructure SIP requirements for
these NAAQS. As discussed in this
notice, EPA previously disapproved
portions of earlier submittals from North
Carolina that were intended to meet
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
28790
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
these requirements. These proposed
approvals, if finalized, will remove
EPA’s obligation to promulgate a
Federal Implementation Plans (FIP) to
meet the relevant Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act) requirements.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 23, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2015–0501 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
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, 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: Joel
Huey of the Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta,
Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Huey can be
reached by telephone at (404) 562–9104
or via electronic mail at huey.joel@
epa.gov.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing?
II. Fine Particulate Matter and the NAAQS
III. What is the background for these
proposed actions?
A. Requirements of the 2010 PSD PM2.5
Rule for PSD SIP Programs
B. Requirements for Infrastructure SIPs
C. EPA’s Previous Action on North
Carolina’s SIP Submittal Related to the
2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule
D. EPA’s Previous Action on North
Carolina’s SIP Submittals Related to
Infrastructure SIP PSD Elements
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of North
Carolina’s October 17, 2017, SIP
submittal for PSD?
V. What is EPA’s analysis of North Carolina’s
October 17, 2017, SIP submittal for the
infrastructure SIP PSD elements?
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Jun 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
VII. Proposed Actions
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What are the actions EPA is
proposing?
EPA is proposing two actions with
regard to North Carolina’s SIP submittal
updating the State’s PSD regulations
found at 15A North Carolina
Administrative Code (NCAC) 02D
.0530.1 First, EPA is proposing to
approve North Carolina’s October 17,
2017, SIP submittal with regard to
changes to the State’s regulation at 15A
NCAC 02D .0530 because EPA has
preliminarily determined that the
State’s changes fully meet the
requirements of EPA’s rulemaking,
‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than
2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments,
Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and
Significant Monitoring Concentration
(SMC),’’ Final Rule, 75 FR 64864
(October 20, 2010) (hereafter referred to
as the ‘‘2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule’’).
Second, as a result of the proposed
approval of North Carolina’s October 17,
2017, SIP submittal for these PSD
requirements, EPA is proposing to
approve this submittal for portions of
the infrastructure SIP PSD elements for
the following NAAQS: 1997 Annual and
24-hour PM2.5, 2006 24-hour PM2.5, 2008
lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 SO2, 2010
NO2 and 2012 Annual PM2.5.2 3
II. Fine Particulate Matter and the
NAAQS
As described in EPA’s May 10, 2016
(81 FR 28801), proposal action to
1 North Carolina’s preconstruction permitting
program for new and modified stationary sources is
codified at 15A NCAC Subchapter 02D.
Specifically, North Carolina’s PSD preconstruction
regulations are found at 15A NCAC 02D .0530 and
apply to major stationary sources or modifications
constructed in areas designated attainment or
unclassifiable for the NAAQS, as required under
part C of title I of the CAA. North Carolina’s
nonattainment new source review (NNSR)
regulations are found at 15A NCAC 02D .0531 and
apply to the construction and modification of any
major stationary source of air pollution located in
or impacting a NAAQS nonattainment area, as
required by part D of title I of the CAA. This
proposed action does not relate to North Carolina’s
NNSR regulations, which are already fully
approved into North Carolina’s SIP.
2 North Carolina’s October 17, 2017, SIP submittal
requested approval of the PSD infrastructure SIPs
for the 2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 SO2,
2010 NO2 and the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. On April 16,
2018, the State submitted a letter to EPA clarifying
that the same submittal is intended to satisfy the
PSD elements of the State’s infrastructure SIP
submittals for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS as
well.
3 The background for various NAAQS is provided
in EPA’s proposed and final rulemaking entitled
‘‘Air Plan Approval and Disapproval; North
Carolina: New Source Review for Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5).’’ See 81 FR 28797 (May 10, 2016)
and 81 FR 63107 (September 14, 2016).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
partially approve and partially
disapprove revisions to North Carolina’s
SIP with regard to the State’s NSR
permitting regulations for PM2.5,
‘‘particulate matter,’’ also known as
particle pollution or PM, is a complex
mixture of extremely small particles and
liquid droplets that can affect the heart
and lungs and cause serious health
effects. EPA currently regulates PM
according to two size categories: PM10,
which comprises all particles smaller
than or equal to 10 micrometers in
diameter and includes ‘‘inhalable coarse
particles,’’ and PM2.5, also known as
‘‘fine particles,’’ which comprises all
particles smaller than or equal to 2.5
micrometers in diameter.
The CAA requires EPA to set air
quality standards to protect both public
health and the public welfare (e.g.,
visibility, crops and vegetation). Particle
pollution, especially fine particles,
affects both. The human health effects
associated with long- or short-term
exposure to PM2.5 are significant and
include premature mortality,
aggravation of respiratory and
cardiovascular disease (as indicated by
increased hospital admissions and
emergency room visits) and
development of chronic respiratory
disease. In addition, welfare effects
associated with elevated PM2.5 levels
include visibility impairment as well as
effects on sensitive ecosystems,
materials damage and soiling and
climatic and radiative processes.
Since July 1, 1987, EPA had used
PM10 as an indicator for the PM
NAAQS. See 52 FR 24634. On July 18,
1997, EPA amended the PM NAAQS by
adding new standards that focus on fine
particles, using PM2.5 as the indicator.
See 62 FR 38652. EPA established
health-based (primary) annual and 24hour standards for PM2.5, setting the
annual standard at a level of 15
micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) and
the 24-hour standard at a level of 65 mg/
m3 (the ‘‘1997 Annual and 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS’’). EPA established
welfare-based (secondary) standards
identical to the primary standards. Id.
On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the
primary and secondary NAAQS for
PM2.5. See 71 FR 61236. In that
rulemaking, EPA reduced the 24-hour
NAAQS for PM2.5 to 35 mg/m3 (the
‘‘2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS’’) and
retained the existing annual PM2.5
NAAQS of 15 mg/m3. Id. On January 15,
2013, EPA revised the primary NAAQS
but not the secondary NAAQS for PM2.5.
See 78 FR 3086. In that rulemaking, EPA
reduced the annual NAAQS for PM2.5 to
12 mg/m3 (the ‘‘2012 Annual PM2.5
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
significant deterioration of air quality in
areas meeting the NAAQS. States are
also required to adopt and submit for
III. What is the background for these
EPA approval revisions to the
proposed actions?
definitions for ‘‘major source baseline
A. Requirements of the 2010 PSD PM2.5
date,’’ ‘‘minor source baseline date,’’
Rule for PSD SIP Programs
and ‘‘baseline area’’ as part of the
implementing regulations for the PM2.5
As established in part C of title I of
increment.
the CAA, EPA’s PSD program protects
For purposes of calculating increment
public health and welfare from adverse
consumption, a baseline area for a
effects of air pollution by ensuring that
particular pollutant includes the
construction of new major sources or
attainment or unclassifiable area in
modifications in attainment or
which the source is located and any
unclassifiable areas does not lead to
other attainment or unclassifiable area
significant deterioration of air quality
in which the source’s emissions of that
while simultaneously ensuring that
economic growth will occur in a manner pollutant are projected (by air quality
consistent with preservation of clean air modeling) to result in a significant
resources. Under section 165(a)(3) of the ambient pollutant increase. See 40 CFR
51.166(b)(15)(i). Once the baseline area
CAA, a PSD permit applicant must
is established, subsequent PSD sources
demonstrate that emissions from the
locating in that area need to consider
proposed construction and operation of
that a portion of the available increment
a facility ‘‘will not cause, or contribute
may have already been consumed by
to, air pollution in excess of any
previous emission increases.
maximum allowable increase or
In general, the submittal date of the
allowable concentration for any
first complete PSD permit application in
pollutant.’’ In other words, when a
a particular area is the operative
source applies for a permit to emit a
‘‘baseline date,’’ after which new
regulated air pollutant in an area that is
sources must evaluate increment
designated as attainment or
consumption.6 On or before the date of
unclassifiable for a NAAQS, the state
the first complete PSD application,
and EPA must determine if the source’s
existing ambient concentration levels of
emissions of that pollutant will cause
a pollutant generally are considered to
significant deterioration in air quality.
represent the baseline concentration
Significant deterioration occurs when
from which increment consumption is
the amount of the new pollution
calculated, except for certain changes in
exceeds the applicable PSD increment,
ambient concentration levels caused by
which is the ‘‘maximum allowable
emission changes from construction at
increase’’ of an air pollutant allowed to
major stationary sources. Increases in
occur above the applicable baseline
ambient concentration levels caused by
concentration 5 for that pollutant.
emission increases that occur after the
Therefore, an increment is the
mechanism used to estimate ‘‘significant baseline date will be counted toward the
amount of increment consumed.
deterioration’’ of air quality for a
Similarly, decreases in ambient
pollutant in an area.
concentration levels caused by emission
EPA finalized the 2010 PSD PM2.5
decreases that occur after the applicable
Rule to provide additional regulatory
baseline date either restore or expand
requirements under the PSD SIP
the amount of increment available.
program regarding the implementation
In practice, three dates related to the
of the PM2.5 NAAQS. See 75 FR 64864.
PSD baseline concept are important in
The 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule required states
understanding how to calculate the
to submit SIP revisions to EPA by July
amount of increment consumed—(1)
20, 2012, adopting provisions
trigger date; (2) major source baseline
equivalent to or at least as stringent as
date; and (3) minor source baseline date.
the PSD increments and associated
The trigger date, as the name implies, is
implementing regulations. Specifically,
the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule requires states a fixed date that initiates the overall
increment consumption process
to adopt and submit for EPA approval
nationwide. See 40 CFR
into their SIP the numerical PM2.5
51.166(b)(14)(ii). The ‘‘major source
increments promulgated pursuant to
baseline date’’ and the ‘‘minor source
section 166(a) of the CAA to prevent
baseline date’’ are necessary to properly
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
NAAQS’’ 4) and retained the existing 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 mg/m3.
4 Signed by the EPA Administrator on December
14, 2012.
5 Section 169(4) of the CAA provides that the
baseline concentration of a pollutant for a particular
baseline area is generally the ambient concentration
levels which exist at the time of the first application
for a PSD permit in the area after the applicable
baseline date.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Jun 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
6 Baseline dates are pollutant-specific. That is, a
complete PSD application establishes the baseline
dates only for those regulated NSR pollutants that
are projected to be emitted in significant amounts
(as defined in the regulations) by the applicant’s
new source or modification. Thus, an area may have
different baseline dates for different pollutants.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28791
account for the increment-affecting
emissions occurring after the trigger
date, in accordance with the statutory
definition of ‘‘baseline concentration’’
in section 169(4) of the Act. The ‘‘major
source baseline date,’’ which precedes
the trigger date, is the date after which
actual changes in emissions associated
with construction at any major
stationary source affect the PSD
increment. Ambient concentration
levels associated with such changes in
emissions are not included in the
baseline concentration, even if the
changes in emissions occur before the
minor source baseline date. In
accordance with the statutory definition
of ‘‘baseline concentration’’ at section
169(4), the PSD regulations define a
fixed date, related to the increments that
EPA established for a particular
pollutant, to represent the major source
baseline date for that pollutant. The
‘‘minor source baseline date,’’ which is
also pollutant-specific, is the earliest
date after the trigger date on which a
source or modification submits the first
complete application for a PSD permit
in a particular area. This is the date on
which the baseline concentration
associated with a particular increment
generally is established. After the minor
source baseline date, any ambient
concentration level changes caused by a
change in actual emissions (from both
major and minor sources) affects the
PSD increment for that area.
Once the minor source baseline date
is established, the ambient pollutant
concentration level increase caused by a
proposed emission increase from the
major source submitting the first PSD
application consumes a portion of the
increment in that area, as do any
subsequent ambient concentration level
increases caused by actual emission
increases that occur from any new or
existing source in the area. When the
maximum pollutant concentration
increase defined by the increment has
been reached, additional PSD permits
cannot be issued until sufficient
amounts of the affected increment are
‘‘freed up’’ via emission reductions of
the pollutant that may occur voluntarily
(e.g., via source shutdowns) or by
mandatory control requirements
imposed by the reviewing authority.
Moreover, the overall air quality for a
pollutant in a region cannot be allowed
to deteriorate to a level in excess of the
applicable NAAQS, even if all the
increment in the area has not been
consumed. Therefore, new or modified
sources located in areas where the
ambient pollutant concentration levels
are near the level allowed by the
NAAQS may not have full use of the
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
28792
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
amount of ambient concentration
increase allowed by the increment.
In the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule, pursuant
to the authority under section 166(a) of
the CAA, EPA promulgated numerical
increments for PM2.5 as a new
pollutant 7 for which NAAQS were
established after August 7, 1977,8 and
derived 24-hour and annual PM2.5
increments for the three area
classifications (Class I, II and III). See 75
FR 64869 and the ambient air increment
table at 40 CFR 51.166(c)(1). EPA also
established the PM2.5 ‘‘trigger date’’ as
October 20, 2011 (40 CFR
51.166(b)(14)(ii)(c)), and the PM2.5
‘‘major source baseline date’’ as October
20, 2010 (40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)). See
75 FR 64903. Finally, EPA amended the
term ‘‘baseline area’’ at 40 CFR
51.166(b)(15)(i) to include a level of
significance of 0.3 mg/m3, annual
average, for establishing a new baseline
area for purposes of PM2.5 increments.
Id.
On May 16, 2008 (73 FR 28321), EPA
finalized the ‘‘Implementation of the
New Source Review (NSR) Program for
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5)’’ (hereafter referred
to as the ‘‘2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule’’) to
implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for
the NSR permitting program. The 2008
NSR PM2.5 Implementation Rule revised
the federal NSR program requirements
to establish the framework for
implementing preconstruction permit
review for the PM2.5 NAAQS in both
attainment and nonattainment areas.
Among other things, the 2008 NSR
PM2.5 Rule directed states to incorporate
into their SIPs the requirement for
applicability determinations and
emission limits in PSD and NNSR
permits to account for gases that
condense to form particles (condensable
PM).
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
B. Requirements for Infrastructure SIPs
By statute, states are required to have
SIPs that provide for the
implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the NAAQS. States are
further required to provide a SIP
submittal meeting the applicable
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and
7 EPA generally characterized the PM
2.5 NAAQS
as a NAAQS for a new indicator of PM. EPA did
not replace the PM10 NAAQS with the NAAQS for
PM2.5 when the PM2.5 NAAQS were promulgated in
1997. EPA rather retained the Annual and 24-hour
NAAQS for PM10 (retaining PM10 as an indicator of
coarse particulate matter) and treated PM2.5 as a
new pollutant for purposes of developing
increments. See 75 FR at 64864.
8 EPA interprets section 166(a) to authorize EPA
to promulgate pollutant-specific PSD regulations
meeting the requirements of section 166(c) and
166(d) for any pollutant for which EPA promulgates
a NAAQS after 1977.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Jun 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
(2) within three years after EPA
promulgates a new or revised NAAQS.9
EPA has historically referred to this type
of submission as an ‘‘infrastructure
SIP.’’ Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require
states to submit infrastructure SIPs that
address basic program elements, such as
air quality planning, permitting, and
enforcement requirements and legal
authority, that are designed to assure
attainment and maintenance of the
newly established or revised NAAQS.
More specifically, section 110(a)(1)
provides the procedural and timing
requirements for infrastructure SIP
submittals. Section 110(a)(2) lists
specific elements that states must meet
to satisfy the infrastructure SIP
requirements related to a newly
established or revised NAAQS. The
contents of an infrastructure SIP
submittal may vary depending upon the
data and analytical tools available to the
state, as well as the provisions already
contained in the state’s existing EPA
approved SIP at the time when the state
develops and submits the infrastructure
SIP submittal for a new or revised
NAAQS.
This action pertains to certain PSDrelated infrastructure SIP requirements
of section 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)
and 110(a)(2)(J), which are relevant in
the context of a state’s development of,
and EPA’s evaluation of, infrastructure
SIP submittals. With the exception of
these PSD-related requirements of
section 110(a)(2) of the CAA, EPA has
already approved or will consider in
separate actions all other elements of
North Carolina’s infrastructure SIP
submittals related to the 1997 Annual
and 24-hour PM2.5, 2006 24-hour PM2.5,
2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 SO2,
2010 NO2, and 2012 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS.
C. EPA’s Previous Action on North
Carolina’s SIP Submittal Related to the
2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule
On September 5, 2013, DAQ
submitted a SIP revision in response to
EPA’s 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule. On
September 14, 2016 (81 FR 63107), EPA
disapproved the portions of that
submittal that pertain to the adoption
and implementation of the PM2.5
increments because the revision did not
fully meet the requirements of the 2010
PSD PM2.5 Rule. This action addresses
only those portions of North Carolina’s
NSR SIP submittals and various
infrastructure SIP submittals that EPA
9 See EPA’s proposed approval of North
Carolina’s December 4, 2015, infrastructure SIP
submittal for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for a
discussion on EPA’s general approach to reviewing
infrastructure SIPs. 81 FR 47314, 47316–18, July 21,
2016.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
disapproved in the September 14, 2016,
final action.10 Specifically, although
paragraphs (e), (q) and (v) of North
Carolina’s revised PSD regulations at
15A NCAC 02D .0530 incorporated the
federally-required numerical PM2.5
increments, North Carolina’s regulations
failed to include other federallyrequired provisions needed to
implement the PM2.5 increments,
including (1) the definition of ‘‘[m]ajor
source baseline date’’ for PM2.5 codified
at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)(c) (defined as
October 20, 2010); (2) the definition of
‘‘[m]inor source baseline date’’ for PM2.5
codified at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(ii)(c)
(which establishes the PM2.5 trigger date
as October 20, 2011); and (3) the
definition of ‘‘[b]aseline area’’ codified
at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i). Without
these definitions, North Carolina’s PSD
regulations did not require PSD sources
to conduct the appropriate analyses
demonstrating that emissions from
proposed construction of new major
stationary sources or major
modifications will not cause or
contribute to air quality deterioration
beyond the amount allowed by the
PM2.5 increments. Therefore, EPA
disapproved all of the PM2.5 increment
provisions set forth in North Carolina’s
September 5, 2013, SIP submittal,
including all of the PM2.5-related
changes to 15A NCAC 02D .0530 at
paragraphs (e), (q), and (v). Id. Under
section 110(c)(1)(B), these disapprovals
started a two-year clock for EPA to
promulgate a FIP to address the PSD
PM2.5 program deficiencies.
D. EPA’s Previous Action on North
Carolina’s SIP Submittals Related to
Infrastructure SIP PSD Elements
In addition to disapproving the
portions of North Carolina’s September
5, 2013, SIP submittal pertaining to
PM2.5 increments, EPA’s September 14,
2016, action partially approved and
10 EPA’s September 14, 2016, action approved the
following portions of the SIP submittals from North
Carolina:
(1) A May 16, 2011, submittal (as revised and
updated by the State’s September 5, 2013, SIP
submittal) as meeting the requirements of EPA’s
rule, ‘‘Implementation of the New Source Review
(NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5),’’ Final Rule, 73 FR 28321 (May
16, 2008);
(2) Administrative changes to North Carolina’s
PSD and NNSR regulations at 15A NCAC 02D .0530
and 15A NCAC 02D .0531 provided by the State in
a SIP submittal also dated May 16, 2011, including
clarification of the applicability of best available
control technology (BACT) and lowest achievable
emission rate (LAER) for electrical generating units
(EGUs) in the State, and the inclusion of an
additional Federal Land Manager (FLM) notification
provision; and
(3) Portions of the PSD elements of North
Carolina’s infrastructure SIP submittals for various
NAAQS as indicated.
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
partially disapproved the following
North Carolina infrastructure submittals
for PSD elements: 1997 Annual and 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS (dated April 1,
2008); 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
(dated September 21, 2009); 2008 lead
NAAQS (received on July 20, 2012);
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (received on
November 2, 2017); 2010 SO2 NAAQS
(received March 18, 2014); 2010 NO2
NAAQS (received on August 23, 2013);
and 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
(received on December 4, 2015). The
partial disapproval was limited to the
PM2.5 increment requirements of the
2010 PM2.5 Rule for these infrastructure
SIP submittals. Under section
110(c)(1)(B), these disapprovals started a
two-year clock for EPA to promulgate a
FIP to address these infrastructure SIP
deficiencies.
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of North
Carolina’s October 17, 2017, SIP
submittal for PSD?
On October 17, 2017, North Carolina
provided a SIP revision to correct the
deficiencies EPA had identified in the
State’s September 5, 2013, SIP submittal
related to the adoption of the PM2.5
increments. The relevant federal PM2.5
permitting requirements for SIPs, set
forth in 40 CFR 51.165 and 51.166, were
promulgated by EPA in the 2010 PSD
PM2.5 Rule. States were required to
make their SIP submittals to address the
requirements of the 2010 PSD PM2.5
Rule no later than July 20, 2012. North
Carolina’s October 17, 2017, SIP
submittal adopts changes in the State’s
PSD permitting program at 15A NCAC
02D .0530 by incorporating by reference
EPA’s PSD regulations as of July 1,
2014. This incorporation by reference
includes the federally-required
provisions of EPA’s 2010 PSD PM2.5
Rule needed to implement the PSD
PM2.5 program in North Carolina.
Adopting the federal rule as of July 1,
2014, has the effect of adding to the
North Carolina SIP the required
definitions of ‘‘major source baseline
date,’’ ‘‘minor source baseline date,’’
and ‘‘baseline area’’ that were lacking in
the State’s previous PM2.5 submittals.
This incorporation by reference as of
July 1, 2014, also captures EPA’s
October 25, 2012 (77 FR 65107),
amendment to the definition of
‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ concerning
condensable particulate matter. In that
action, EPA amended the definition of
‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ to remove an
inadvertent general requirement of the
2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule to include the
condensable portion of PM when
measuring emissions-related indicators
of ‘‘PM emissions’’ in the context of the
NSR regulations. Under the revised
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Jun 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
definition, PM2.5 and PM10 emissions
must include the condensable portion of
particulate matter, but not PM
emissions.11 Because North Carolina’s
current federally-approved NSR rule (a
portion of which was approved by
EPA’s September 14, 2016, action)
adopts the PSD definitions in the CFR
as of May 16, 2008, it currently requires
sources to account for the condensable
fraction in the measurement and
regulation of ‘‘PM emissions’’ (as well as
‘‘PM2.5 emissions’’ and ‘‘PM10
emissions’’). By adopting the PSD
definitions in the CFR as of July 1, 2014,
the revised rule would continue to
require sources to account for the
condensable fraction in the
measurement of ‘‘PM2.5 emissions’’ and
‘‘PM10 emissions’’ but not ‘‘PM
emissions.’’ As discussed in EPA’s May
10, 2016 (81 FR 28801), proposed
action, requiring the inclusion of
condensable PM in measurements of
‘‘PM emissions’’ has little if any effect
on preventing significant air quality
deterioration or on efforts to attain the
primary and secondary PM NAAQS.
Therefore, North Carolina’s
incorporation by reference of EPA’s PSD
regulations as of July 1, 2014, is not only
consistent with the current federal rule,
but it also will not interfere with North
Carolina’s efforts to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality and to attain
and maintain compliance with the PM
NAAQS.12
V. What is EPA’s analysis of North
Carolina’s October 17, 2017, SIP
submittal for the infrastructure SIP PSD
elements?
North Carolina’s October 17, 2017,
SIP submittal addresses certain NSR/
PSD requirements, as described above,
and thereby meets the related
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II),
11 The October 25, 2012, final rule retained the
general requirement to include the condensable
fraction of PM10 and PM2.5 emissions in each case
for purposes of NSR permitting under EPA’s
regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i), 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50)(i), 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii), and 40
CFR part 51 Appendix S.
12 EPA also notes that the version of EPA’s PSD
regulations incorporated by reference excludes the
PSD PM2.5 SILs provisions and SMC provisions,
which EPA had promulgated in the 2010 PSD PM2.5
Rule and later removed on December 9, 2013. The
2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule gave states discretion to adopt
PM2.5 SILs and a SMC. See 75FR at 64900. On
January 22, 2013, the D.C. Circuit vacated and
remanded to EPA the portions of 50 CFR 51.166 and
52.21 addressing the PM2.5 SILs and also vacated
the parts of the rule that established the PM2.5 SMC.
On December 9, 2013 (78 FR 73698), EPA took final
action amending its regulations to remove the PM2.5
SILs and SMC provisions from the PSD regulations.
However, since North Carolina’s October 17, 2017,
submittal does not include SILs or SMC, these
regulatory provisions are not relevant to this
proposed action.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28793
and 110(a)(2)(J). For the remainder of
this proposed rulemaking, EPA’s intent
in referring to ‘‘PSD elements’’ is to
address the PSD requirements in
sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II),
and 110(a)(2)(J). More detail regarding
the aforementioned 110(a)(2)
requirements related to PSD is provided
in the discussion that follows.
Section 110(a)(2)(C) has three
components that must be addressed in
infrastructure SIP submittals:
Enforcement, state-wide regulation of
new and modified minor sources and
minor modifications of major sources,
and PSD permitting of new major
sources and major modifications in
areas designated attainment or
unclassifiable as required by CAA title
I part C (i.e., the major source PSD
program). Regarding section
110(a)(2)(C), this proposed action only
addresses North Carolina’s
infrastructure SIP submittals with
respect to the major source PSD
program.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two
components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these
components has two subparts resulting
in four distinct components, commonly
referred to as ‘‘prongs,’’ that must be
addressed in infrastructure SIP
submittals. The first two prongs, which
are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),
are provisions that prohibit any source
or other type of emission activity in one
state from contributing significantly to
nonattainment of the NAAQS in another
state (‘‘prong 1’’) and from interfering
with maintenance of the NAAQS in
another state (‘‘prong 2’’). The third and
fourth prongs, which are codified in
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions
that prohibit emissions activity in one
state from interfering with measures
required in another state to prevent
significant deterioration of air quality
(‘‘prong 3’’) or to protect visibility
(‘‘prong 4’’). With regard to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i), this proposed action
only addresses North Carolina’s
infrastructure SIP submittals for prong
3.
Section 110(a)(2)(J) has four
components that must be addressed in
infrastructure SIP submittals: (1)
Consultation with government officials;
(2) public notification; (3) PSD; and (4)
visibility protection. With regard to
section 110(a)(2)(J), this proposed action
only addresses North Carolina’s
infrastructure SIP submittals for PSD.
Regarding the PSD elements of
sections 110(a)(2)(C) and (J), EPA
interprets the CAA to require each state
to make, for each new or revised
NAAQS, an infrastructure SIP submittal
that demonstrates that the state has a
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
28794
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
complete PSD permitting program
meeting the current requirements for all
regulated NSR pollutants. The
requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3) may also be
satisfied by demonstrating that the air
agency has a complete PSD permitting
program correctly addressing all
regulated NSR pollutants.
As described in EPA’s guidance dated
September 13, 2013,13 an infrastructure
SIP submittal should demonstrate that
one or more air agencies has the
authority to implement a
comprehensive PSD permit program
under CAA title I part C for all PSDsubject sources located in areas that are
designated attainment or unclassifiable
for one or more NAAQS. EPA interprets
the PSD elements to require that a
state’s infrastructure SIP submittal for a
particular NAAQS demonstrate that the
state has a complete PSD permitting
program in place covering all regulated
NSR pollutants. A state’s PSD
permitting program is complete for the
PSD elements if EPA has already
approved or is simultaneously
approving the state’s implementation
plan with respect to all structural PSD
requirements 14 that are due under the
EPA regulations or the CAA on or before
the date of EPA’s proposed action on the
infrastructure SIP submittal.
On September 14, 2016, EPA partially
approved and partially disapproved the
PSD elements of North Carolina’s
infrastructure SIP submittals for the
following NAAQS: 1997 Annual and 24hour PM2.5; 2006 24-hour PM2.5; 2008
lead; 2008 8-hour ozone; 2010 NO2;
2010 SO2; and 2012 Annual PM2.5. See
81 FR 63107. The partial disapproval
was limited to the PM2.5 increment
requirements of the 2010 PM2.5 Rule for
these infrastructure SIP submittals.
North Carolina submitted its October 17,
2017, SIP revision to EPA to correct the
deficiencies in the State’s PSD
permitting program, and, as previously
discussed, EPA is proposing to approve
this SIP revision. If EPA’s proposed
action is finalized, North Carolina’s SIP
will include a complete PSD program
that addresses all structural PSD
requirements due under the CAA and
13 EPA’s September 13, 2013, guidance, titled
‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections
110(a)(1) and 110(a),’’ provides advice on the
development of infrastructure SIPs for the 2008
ozone NAAQS, the 2010 nitrogen dioxide NAAQS,
the 2010 sulfur dioxide NAAQS, and the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, as well as infrastructure SIPs for new or
revised NAAQS promulgated in the future.
14 Structural PSD program provisions include
provisions necessary for the PSD program to
address all regulated sources and regulated
pollutants but do not include provisions under 40
CFR 51.166 that are considered optional.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Jun 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
EPA regulations. Because EPA proposes
to approve North Carolina’s SIP
revisions for the PSD program, it is also
proposing approval of the October 17,
2017, submittal for the PSD
infrastructure SIP requirements of
sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II),
and 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2008 lead
NAAQS, 2008 ozone NAAQS, 2010 SO2
NAAQS, 2010 NO2 NAAQS, and 1997,
2006 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.15
VI. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
North Carolina’s regulations 15A NCAC
02D .0530, entitled ‘‘Prevention of
Significant Deterioration,’’ effective
September 1, 2017. EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these documents
generally available through
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at the EPA Region 4 office (see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble for
more information).
VII. Proposed Actions
EPA is proposing to approve changes
to the North Carolina SIP, provided by
the NC DEQ, to EPA on October 17,
2017. These changes modify North
Carolina’s NSR permitting regulations
codified at 15A 02D .0530—Prevention
of Significant Deterioration and include
the adoption of some federal
requirements respecting implementation
of the PM2.5 NAAQS through the NSR
permitting program. Specifically, EPA is
proposing to approve North Carolina’s
October 17, 2017, SIP submittal as it
relates to the requirements to comply
with EPA’s 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule. EPA
also notes that North Carolina’s
incorporation by reference of EPA’s PSD
regulations as of July 1, 2014, includes
EPA’s amendment to the definition of
‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ concerning
condensable PM promulgated on
October 25, 2012.
If EPA finalizes all of the actions
proposed in this notice, the version of
15A NCAC 02D .0530 (PSD) that became
effective in the State on September 1,
2017, will be incorporated into North
Carolina’s SIP. As a result of the
proposed approval of North Carolina’s
October 17, 2017, SIP submittal, EPA is
also proposing to approve portions of
the PSD elements of North Carolina’s
15 EPA has already approved or will consider in
separate actions all other elements from North
Carolina infrastructure SIP submissions related to
the 2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010
SO2 NAAQS, and 1997, 2006 and 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
infrastructure SIP submittals (i.e., CAA
sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II),
and 110(a)(2)(J)) for the 1997 Annual
and 24-hour PM2.5, 2006 24-hour PM2.5,
2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 SO2,
2010 NO2 and the 2012 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. If EPA finalizes this proposed
approval action, that final action will
remove EPA’s obligation under section
110(c) to promulgate a FIP to address
the PM2.5 increments requirements of
EPA’s 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule PSD and the
related PSD elements for the above
listed infrastructure SIPs.
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
See 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. This action merely proposes to
approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
these proposed actions:
• Are 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);
• Are not an Executive Order 13771
(82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017)
regulatory action because SIP approvals
are exempted under Executive Order
12866;
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are 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.);
• Do 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);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not a significant regulatory
action subject to Executive Order 13211
(66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 120 / Thursday, June 21, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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
• Do 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).
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 as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 12, 2018.
Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2018–13356 Filed 6–20–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 55
[EPA–R09–OAR–2018–0366; FRL–9979–
36—Region 9]
Outer Continental Shelf Air
Regulations; Consistency Update for
California
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA)
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to update a
portion of the Outer Continental Shelf
(OCS) Air Regulations. Requirements
applying to OCS sources located within
25 miles of states’ seaward boundaries
must be updated periodically to remain
consistent with the requirements of the
corresponding onshore area (COA), as
mandated by section 328(a)(1) of the
Clean Air Act (‘‘the Act’’). The portion
of the OCS air regulations that is being
updated pertains to the requirements for
OCS sources for which the Santa
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Jun 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
Barbara County Air Pollution Control
District (‘‘Santa Barbara County APCD’’)
is the designated COA. The intended
effect of approving the OCS
requirements for the Santa Barbara
County APCD is to regulate emissions
from OCS sources in accordance with
the requirements onshore. The change
to the existing requirements discussed
below is proposed to be incorporated by
reference into the Code of Federal
Regulations and listed in the appendix
to the OCS air regulations.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
July 23, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2018–0366 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Christine Vineyard, at
vineyard.christine@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
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christine Vineyard, Air Division (Air-4),
U.S. EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415)
947–4125, vineyard.christine@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background Information
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
Action
A. What rule was submitted to update 40
CFR part 55?
B. What criteria were used to evaluate the
rule submitted to update 40 CFR part 55?
C. Proposed Action and Public Comment
III. Incorporation by Reference
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
28795
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background Information
On September 4, 1992, the EPA
promulgated 40 CFR part 55,1 which
established requirements to control air
pollution from OCS sources to attain
and maintain federal and state ambient
air quality standards and to comply
with the provisions of part C of title I
of the Act. Part 55 applies to all OCS
sources offshore of the states except
those located in the Gulf of Mexico west
of 87.5 degrees’ longitude. Section 328
of the Act requires that for such sources
located within 25 miles of a state’s
seaward boundary, the requirements
shall be the same as would be
applicable if the sources were located in
the COA. Because the OCS requirements
are based on onshore requirements, and
onshore requirements may change,
section 328(a)(1) requires that the EPA
update the OCS requirements as
necessary to maintain consistency with
onshore requirements.
Pursuant to § 55.12 of the OCS rule,
consistency reviews will occur (1) at
least annually; (2) upon receipt of a
Notice of Intent under § 55.4; or (3)
when a state or local agency submits a
rule to the EPA to be considered for
incorporation by reference in part 55.
This proposed action is being taken in
response to the submittal of
requirements by the Santa Barbara
County APCD. Public comments
received in writing within 30 days of
publication of this document will be
considered by the EPA before
publishing a final rule. Section 328(a) of
the Act requires that the EPA establish
requirements to control air pollution
from OCS sources located within 25
miles of states’ seaward boundaries that
are the same as onshore requirements.
To comply with this statutory mandate,
the EPA must incorporate applicable
onshore rules into part 55 as they exist
onshore. This limits the EPA’s
flexibility in deciding which
requirements will be incorporated into
part 55 and prevents the EPA from
making substantive changes to the
requirements it incorporates. As a
result, the EPA may be incorporating
rules into part 55 that do not conform
to all of the EPA’s state implementation
plan (SIP) guidance or certain
requirements of the Act. Consistency
updates may result in the inclusion of
state or local rules or regulations into
part 55, even though the same rules may
1 The reader may refer to the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, December 5, 1991 (56 FR 63774), and
the preamble to the final rule promulgated
September 4, 1992 (57 FR 40792) for further
background and information on the OCS
regulations.
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 120 (Thursday, June 21, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28789-28795]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13356]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0501; FRL-9979-79--Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; North Carolina: New Source Review for Fine
Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve changes to the North Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP),
submitted by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NC
DEQ) through the Division of Air Quality (DAQ), to EPA on October 17,
2017. This SIP submittal modifies North Carolina's Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations and includes the adoption
of specific federal provisions needed to meet the New Source Review
(NSR) permitting program requirements for the fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). In
addition, North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal addresses
portions of the PSD requirements for the infrastructure SIPs for the
following NAAQS: 1997 Annual and 24-hour PM2.5, 2006 24-hour
PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 sulfur dioxide
(SO2), 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and 2012
Annual PM2.5. As a result of this proposed approval of North
Carolina's modified PSD regulations, EPA is also proposing to approve
North Carolina's submittal with respect to the related PSD
infrastructure SIP requirements for these NAAQS. As discussed in this
notice, EPA previously disapproved portions of earlier submittals from
North Carolina that were intended to meet
[[Page 28790]]
these requirements. These proposed approvals, if finalized, will remove
EPA's obligation to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plans (FIP) to
meet the relevant Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) requirements.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 23, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2015-0501 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 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, 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: Joel Huey of the Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Huey can be reached by telephone at
(404) 562-9104 or via electronic mail at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing?
II. Fine Particulate Matter and the NAAQS
III. What is the background for these proposed actions?
A. Requirements of the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule for PSD
SIP Programs
B. Requirements for Infrastructure SIPs
C. EPA's Previous Action on North Carolina's SIP Submittal
Related to the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule
D. EPA's Previous Action on North Carolina's SIP Submittals
Related to Infrastructure SIP PSD Elements
IV. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP
submittal for PSD?
V. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP
submittal for the infrastructure SIP PSD elements?
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. Proposed Actions
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing?
EPA is proposing two actions with regard to North Carolina's SIP
submittal updating the State's PSD regulations found at 15A North
Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 02D .0530.\1\ First, EPA is
proposing to approve North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal
with regard to changes to the State's regulation at 15A NCAC 02D .0530
because EPA has preliminarily determined that the State's changes fully
meet the requirements of EPA's rulemaking, ``Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers
(PM2.5)--Increments, Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and
Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC),'' Final Rule, 75 FR 64864
(October 20, 2010) (hereafter referred to as the ``2010 PSD
PM2.5 Rule'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North Carolina's preconstruction permitting program for new
and modified stationary sources is codified at 15A NCAC Subchapter
02D. Specifically, North Carolina's PSD preconstruction regulations
are found at 15A NCAC 02D .0530 and apply to major stationary
sources or modifications constructed in areas designated attainment
or unclassifiable for the NAAQS, as required under part C of title I
of the CAA. North Carolina's nonattainment new source review (NNSR)
regulations are found at 15A NCAC 02D .0531 and apply to the
construction and modification of any major stationary source of air
pollution located in or impacting a NAAQS nonattainment area, as
required by part D of title I of the CAA. This proposed action does
not relate to North Carolina's NNSR regulations, which are already
fully approved into North Carolina's SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, as a result of the proposed approval of North Carolina's
October 17, 2017, SIP submittal for these PSD requirements, EPA is
proposing to approve this submittal for portions of the infrastructure
SIP PSD elements for the following NAAQS: 1997 Annual and 24-hour
PM2.5, 2006 24-hour PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 8-hour
ozone, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2 and 2012 Annual
PM2.5.2 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal requested
approval of the PSD infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 lead, 2008 8-
hour ozone, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2 and the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS. On April 16, 2018, the State submitted a
letter to EPA clarifying that the same submittal is intended to
satisfy the PSD elements of the State's infrastructure SIP
submittals for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS as well.
\3\ The background for various NAAQS is provided in EPA's
proposed and final rulemaking entitled ``Air Plan Approval and
Disapproval; North Carolina: New Source Review for Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5).'' See 81 FR 28797 (May 10, 2016) and 81
FR 63107 (September 14, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Fine Particulate Matter and the NAAQS
As described in EPA's May 10, 2016 (81 FR 28801), proposal action
to partially approve and partially disapprove revisions to North
Carolina's SIP with regard to the State's NSR permitting regulations
for PM2.5, ``particulate matter,'' also known as particle
pollution or PM, is a complex mixture of extremely small particles and
liquid droplets that can affect the heart and lungs and cause serious
health effects. EPA currently regulates PM according to two size
categories: PM10, which comprises all particles smaller than
or equal to 10 micrometers in diameter and includes ``inhalable coarse
particles,'' and PM2.5, also known as ``fine particles,''
which comprises all particles smaller than or equal to 2.5 micrometers
in diameter.
The CAA requires EPA to set air quality standards to protect both
public health and the public welfare (e.g., visibility, crops and
vegetation). Particle pollution, especially fine particles, affects
both. The human health effects associated with long- or short-term
exposure to PM2.5 are significant and include premature
mortality, aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular disease (as
indicated by increased hospital admissions and emergency room visits)
and development of chronic respiratory disease. In addition, welfare
effects associated with elevated PM2.5 levels include
visibility impairment as well as effects on sensitive ecosystems,
materials damage and soiling and climatic and radiative processes.
Since July 1, 1987, EPA had used PM10 as an indicator
for the PM NAAQS. See 52 FR 24634. On July 18, 1997, EPA amended the PM
NAAQS by adding new standards that focus on fine particles, using
PM2.5 as the indicator. See 62 FR 38652. EPA established
health-based (primary) annual and 24-hour standards for
PM2.5, setting the annual standard at a level of 15
micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) and the 24-hour standard at a
level of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ (the ``1997 Annual and 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS''). EPA established welfare-based (secondary) standards identical
to the primary standards. Id. On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the
primary and secondary NAAQS for PM2.5. See 71 FR 61236. In
that rulemaking, EPA reduced the 24-hour NAAQS for PM2.5 to
35 [mu]g/m\3\ (the ``2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS'') and
retained the existing annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15 [mu]g/m\3\.
Id. On January 15, 2013, EPA revised the primary NAAQS but not the
secondary NAAQS for PM2.5. See 78 FR 3086. In that
rulemaking, EPA reduced the annual NAAQS for PM2.5 to 12
[mu]g/m\3\ (the ``2012 Annual PM2.5
[[Page 28791]]
NAAQS'' \4\) and retained the existing 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
of 35 [mu]g/m\3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Signed by the EPA Administrator on December 14, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. What is the background for these proposed actions?
A. Requirements of the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule for PSD SIP Programs
As established in part C of title I of the CAA, EPA's PSD program
protects public health and welfare from adverse effects of air
pollution by ensuring that construction of new major sources or
modifications in attainment or unclassifiable areas does not lead to
significant deterioration of air quality while simultaneously ensuring
that economic growth will occur in a manner consistent with
preservation of clean air resources. Under section 165(a)(3) of the
CAA, a PSD permit applicant must demonstrate that emissions from the
proposed construction and operation of a facility ``will not cause, or
contribute to, air pollution in excess of any maximum allowable
increase or allowable concentration for any pollutant.'' In other
words, when a source applies for a permit to emit a regulated air
pollutant in an area that is designated as attainment or unclassifiable
for a NAAQS, the state and EPA must determine if the source's emissions
of that pollutant will cause significant deterioration in air quality.
Significant deterioration occurs when the amount of the new pollution
exceeds the applicable PSD increment, which is the ``maximum allowable
increase'' of an air pollutant allowed to occur above the applicable
baseline concentration \5\ for that pollutant. Therefore, an increment
is the mechanism used to estimate ``significant deterioration'' of air
quality for a pollutant in an area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Section 169(4) of the CAA provides that the baseline
concentration of a pollutant for a particular baseline area is
generally the ambient concentration levels which exist at the time
of the first application for a PSD permit in the area after the
applicable baseline date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA finalized the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule to provide
additional regulatory requirements under the PSD SIP program regarding
the implementation of the PM2.5 NAAQS. See 75 FR 64864. The
2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule required states to submit SIP revisions
to EPA by July 20, 2012, adopting provisions equivalent to or at least
as stringent as the PSD increments and associated implementing
regulations. Specifically, the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule requires
states to adopt and submit for EPA approval into their SIP the
numerical PM2.5 increments promulgated pursuant to section
166(a) of the CAA to prevent significant deterioration of air quality
in areas meeting the NAAQS. States are also required to adopt and
submit for EPA approval revisions to the definitions for ``major source
baseline date,'' ``minor source baseline date,'' and ``baseline area''
as part of the implementing regulations for the PM2.5
increment.
For purposes of calculating increment consumption, a baseline area
for a particular pollutant includes the attainment or unclassifiable
area in which the source is located and any other attainment or
unclassifiable area in which the source's emissions of that pollutant
are projected (by air quality modeling) to result in a significant
ambient pollutant increase. See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i). Once the
baseline area is established, subsequent PSD sources locating in that
area need to consider that a portion of the available increment may
have already been consumed by previous emission increases.
In general, the submittal date of the first complete PSD permit
application in a particular area is the operative ``baseline date,''
after which new sources must evaluate increment consumption.\6\ On or
before the date of the first complete PSD application, existing ambient
concentration levels of a pollutant generally are considered to
represent the baseline concentration from which increment consumption
is calculated, except for certain changes in ambient concentration
levels caused by emission changes from construction at major stationary
sources. Increases in ambient concentration levels caused by emission
increases that occur after the baseline date will be counted toward the
amount of increment consumed. Similarly, decreases in ambient
concentration levels caused by emission decreases that occur after the
applicable baseline date either restore or expand the amount of
increment available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Baseline dates are pollutant-specific. That is, a complete
PSD application establishes the baseline dates only for those
regulated NSR pollutants that are projected to be emitted in
significant amounts (as defined in the regulations) by the
applicant's new source or modification. Thus, an area may have
different baseline dates for different pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In practice, three dates related to the PSD baseline concept are
important in understanding how to calculate the amount of increment
consumed--(1) trigger date; (2) major source baseline date; and (3)
minor source baseline date. The trigger date, as the name implies, is a
fixed date that initiates the overall increment consumption process
nationwide. See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(ii). The ``major source baseline
date'' and the ``minor source baseline date'' are necessary to properly
account for the increment-affecting emissions occurring after the
trigger date, in accordance with the statutory definition of ``baseline
concentration'' in section 169(4) of the Act. The ``major source
baseline date,'' which precedes the trigger date, is the date after
which actual changes in emissions associated with construction at any
major stationary source affect the PSD increment. Ambient concentration
levels associated with such changes in emissions are not included in
the baseline concentration, even if the changes in emissions occur
before the minor source baseline date. In accordance with the statutory
definition of ``baseline concentration'' at section 169(4), the PSD
regulations define a fixed date, related to the increments that EPA
established for a particular pollutant, to represent the major source
baseline date for that pollutant. The ``minor source baseline date,''
which is also pollutant-specific, is the earliest date after the
trigger date on which a source or modification submits the first
complete application for a PSD permit in a particular area. This is the
date on which the baseline concentration associated with a particular
increment generally is established. After the minor source baseline
date, any ambient concentration level changes caused by a change in
actual emissions (from both major and minor sources) affects the PSD
increment for that area.
Once the minor source baseline date is established, the ambient
pollutant concentration level increase caused by a proposed emission
increase from the major source submitting the first PSD application
consumes a portion of the increment in that area, as do any subsequent
ambient concentration level increases caused by actual emission
increases that occur from any new or existing source in the area. When
the maximum pollutant concentration increase defined by the increment
has been reached, additional PSD permits cannot be issued until
sufficient amounts of the affected increment are ``freed up'' via
emission reductions of the pollutant that may occur voluntarily (e.g.,
via source shutdowns) or by mandatory control requirements imposed by
the reviewing authority. Moreover, the overall air quality for a
pollutant in a region cannot be allowed to deteriorate to a level in
excess of the applicable NAAQS, even if all the increment in the area
has not been consumed. Therefore, new or modified sources located in
areas where the ambient pollutant concentration levels are near the
level allowed by the NAAQS may not have full use of the
[[Page 28792]]
amount of ambient concentration increase allowed by the increment.
In the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule, pursuant to the authority
under section 166(a) of the CAA, EPA promulgated numerical increments
for PM2.5 as a new pollutant \7\ for which NAAQS were
established after August 7, 1977,\8\ and derived 24-hour and annual
PM2.5 increments for the three area classifications (Class
I, II and III). See 75 FR 64869 and the ambient air increment table at
40 CFR 51.166(c)(1). EPA also established the PM2.5
``trigger date'' as October 20, 2011 (40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(ii)(c)), and
the PM2.5 ``major source baseline date'' as October 20, 2010
(40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)). See 75 FR 64903. Finally, EPA amended the
term ``baseline area'' at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i) to include a level of
significance of 0.3 [mu]g/m\3\, annual average, for establishing a new
baseline area for purposes of PM2.5 increments. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ EPA generally characterized the PM2.5 NAAQS as a
NAAQS for a new indicator of PM. EPA did not replace the
PM10 NAAQS with the NAAQS for PM2.5 when the
PM2.5 NAAQS were promulgated in 1997. EPA rather retained
the Annual and 24-hour NAAQS for PM10 (retaining
PM10 as an indicator of coarse particulate matter) and
treated PM2.5 as a new pollutant for purposes of
developing increments. See 75 FR at 64864.
\8\ EPA interprets section 166(a) to authorize EPA to promulgate
pollutant-specific PSD regulations meeting the requirements of
section 166(c) and 166(d) for any pollutant for which EPA
promulgates a NAAQS after 1977.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 16, 2008 (73 FR 28321), EPA finalized the ``Implementation
of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than
2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)'' (hereafter referred to as the
``2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule'') to implement the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS for the NSR permitting program. The 2008 NSR
PM2.5 Implementation Rule revised the federal NSR program
requirements to establish the framework for implementing
preconstruction permit review for the PM2.5 NAAQS in both
attainment and nonattainment areas. Among other things, the 2008 NSR
PM2.5 Rule directed states to incorporate into their SIPs
the requirement for applicability determinations and emission limits in
PSD and NNSR permits to account for gases that condense to form
particles (condensable PM).
B. Requirements for Infrastructure SIPs
By statute, states are required to have SIPs that provide for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. States are
further required to provide a SIP submittal meeting the applicable
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) within three years after EPA
promulgates a new or revised NAAQS.\9\ EPA has historically referred to
this type of submission as an ``infrastructure SIP.'' Sections
110(a)(1) and (2) require states to submit infrastructure SIPs that
address basic program elements, such as air quality planning,
permitting, and enforcement requirements and legal authority, that are
designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the newly established
or revised NAAQS. More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the
procedural and timing requirements for infrastructure SIP submittals.
Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet to
satisfy the infrastructure SIP requirements related to a newly
established or revised NAAQS. The contents of an infrastructure SIP
submittal may vary depending upon the data and analytical tools
available to the state, as well as the provisions already contained in
the state's existing EPA approved SIP at the time when the state
develops and submits the infrastructure SIP submittal for a new or
revised NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See EPA's proposed approval of North Carolina's December 4,
2015, infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS for a discussion on EPA's general approach to reviewing
infrastructure SIPs. 81 FR 47314, 47316-18, July 21, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This action pertains to certain PSD-related infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and
110(a)(2)(J), which are relevant in the context of a state's
development of, and EPA's evaluation of, infrastructure SIP submittals.
With the exception of these PSD-related requirements of section
110(a)(2) of the CAA, EPA has already approved or will consider in
separate actions all other elements of North Carolina's infrastructure
SIP submittals related to the 1997 Annual and 24-hour PM2.5,
2006 24-hour PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010
SO2, 2010 NO2, and 2012 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS.
C. EPA's Previous Action on North Carolina's SIP Submittal Related to
the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule
On September 5, 2013, DAQ submitted a SIP revision in response to
EPA's 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule. On September 14, 2016 (81 FR
63107), EPA disapproved the portions of that submittal that pertain to
the adoption and implementation of the PM2.5 increments
because the revision did not fully meet the requirements of the 2010
PSD PM2.5 Rule. This action addresses only those portions of
North Carolina's NSR SIP submittals and various infrastructure SIP
submittals that EPA disapproved in the September 14, 2016, final
action.\10\ Specifically, although paragraphs (e), (q) and (v) of North
Carolina's revised PSD regulations at 15A NCAC 02D .0530 incorporated
the federally-required numerical PM2.5 increments, North
Carolina's regulations failed to include other federally-required
provisions needed to implement the PM2.5 increments,
including (1) the definition of ``[m]ajor source baseline date'' for
PM2.5 codified at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)(c) (defined as
October 20, 2010); (2) the definition of ``[m]inor source baseline
date'' for PM2.5 codified at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(ii)(c)
(which establishes the PM2.5 trigger date as October 20,
2011); and (3) the definition of ``[b]aseline area'' codified at 40 CFR
51.166(b)(15)(i). Without these definitions, North Carolina's PSD
regulations did not require PSD sources to conduct the appropriate
analyses demonstrating that emissions from proposed construction of new
major stationary sources or major modifications will not cause or
contribute to air quality deterioration beyond the amount allowed by
the PM2.5 increments. Therefore, EPA disapproved all of the
PM2.5 increment provisions set forth in North Carolina's
September 5, 2013, SIP submittal, including all of the
PM2.5-related changes to 15A NCAC 02D .0530 at paragraphs
(e), (q), and (v). Id. Under section 110(c)(1)(B), these disapprovals
started a two-year clock for EPA to promulgate a FIP to address the PSD
PM2.5 program deficiencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ EPA's September 14, 2016, action approved the following
portions of the SIP submittals from North Carolina:
(1) A May 16, 2011, submittal (as revised and updated by the
State's September 5, 2013, SIP submittal) as meeting the
requirements of EPA's rule, ``Implementation of the New Source
Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5),'' Final Rule, 73 FR 28321 (May 16,
2008);
(2) Administrative changes to North Carolina's PSD and NNSR
regulations at 15A NCAC 02D .0530 and 15A NCAC 02D .0531 provided by
the State in a SIP submittal also dated May 16, 2011, including
clarification of the applicability of best available control
technology (BACT) and lowest achievable emission rate (LAER) for
electrical generating units (EGUs) in the State, and the inclusion
of an additional Federal Land Manager (FLM) notification provision;
and
(3) Portions of the PSD elements of North Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submittals for various NAAQS as indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. EPA's Previous Action on North Carolina's SIP Submittals Related to
Infrastructure SIP PSD Elements
In addition to disapproving the portions of North Carolina's
September 5, 2013, SIP submittal pertaining to PM2.5
increments, EPA's September 14, 2016, action partially approved and
[[Page 28793]]
partially disapproved the following North Carolina infrastructure
submittals for PSD elements: 1997 Annual and 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS (dated April 1, 2008); 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (dated
September 21, 2009); 2008 lead NAAQS (received on July 20, 2012); 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS (received on November 2, 2017); 2010 SO2
NAAQS (received March 18, 2014); 2010 NO2 NAAQS (received on
August 23, 2013); and 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS (received on
December 4, 2015). The partial disapproval was limited to the
PM2.5 increment requirements of the 2010 PM2.5
Rule for these infrastructure SIP submittals. Under section
110(c)(1)(B), these disapprovals started a two-year clock for EPA to
promulgate a FIP to address these infrastructure SIP deficiencies.
IV. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP
submittal for PSD?
On October 17, 2017, North Carolina provided a SIP revision to
correct the deficiencies EPA had identified in the State's September 5,
2013, SIP submittal related to the adoption of the PM2.5
increments. The relevant federal PM2.5 permitting
requirements for SIPs, set forth in 40 CFR 51.165 and 51.166, were
promulgated by EPA in the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule. States were
required to make their SIP submittals to address the requirements of
the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule no later than July 20, 2012. North
Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal adopts changes in the
State's PSD permitting program at 15A NCAC 02D .0530 by incorporating
by reference EPA's PSD regulations as of July 1, 2014. This
incorporation by reference includes the federally-required provisions
of EPA's 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule needed to implement the PSD
PM2.5 program in North Carolina. Adopting the federal rule
as of July 1, 2014, has the effect of adding to the North Carolina SIP
the required definitions of ``major source baseline date,'' ``minor
source baseline date,'' and ``baseline area'' that were lacking in the
State's previous PM2.5 submittals.
This incorporation by reference as of July 1, 2014, also captures
EPA's October 25, 2012 (77 FR 65107), amendment to the definition of
``regulated NSR pollutant'' concerning condensable particulate matter.
In that action, EPA amended the definition of ``regulated NSR
pollutant'' to remove an inadvertent general requirement of the 2008
NSR PM2.5 Rule to include the condensable portion of PM when
measuring emissions-related indicators of ``PM emissions'' in the
context of the NSR regulations. Under the revised definition,
PM2.5 and PM10 emissions must include the
condensable portion of particulate matter, but not PM emissions.\11\
Because North Carolina's current federally-approved NSR rule (a portion
of which was approved by EPA's September 14, 2016, action) adopts the
PSD definitions in the CFR as of May 16, 2008, it currently requires
sources to account for the condensable fraction in the measurement and
regulation of ``PM emissions'' (as well as ``PM2.5
emissions'' and ``PM10 emissions''). By adopting the PSD
definitions in the CFR as of July 1, 2014, the revised rule would
continue to require sources to account for the condensable fraction in
the measurement of ``PM2.5 emissions'' and ``PM10
emissions'' but not ``PM emissions.'' As discussed in EPA's May 10,
2016 (81 FR 28801), proposed action, requiring the inclusion of
condensable PM in measurements of ``PM emissions'' has little if any
effect on preventing significant air quality deterioration or on
efforts to attain the primary and secondary PM NAAQS. Therefore, North
Carolina's incorporation by reference of EPA's PSD regulations as of
July 1, 2014, is not only consistent with the current federal rule, but
it also will not interfere with North Carolina's efforts to prevent
significant deterioration of air quality and to attain and maintain
compliance with the PM NAAQS.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The October 25, 2012, final rule retained the general
requirement to include the condensable fraction of PM10
and PM2.5 emissions in each case for purposes of NSR
permitting under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i), 40
CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i), 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii), and 40 CFR part 51
Appendix S.
\12\ EPA also notes that the version of EPA's PSD regulations
incorporated by reference excludes the PSD PM2.5 SILs
provisions and SMC provisions, which EPA had promulgated in the 2010
PSD PM2.5 Rule and later removed on December 9, 2013. The
2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule gave states discretion to adopt
PM2.5 SILs and a SMC. See 75FR at 64900. On January 22,
2013, the D.C. Circuit vacated and remanded to EPA the portions of
50 CFR 51.166 and 52.21 addressing the PM2.5 SILs and
also vacated the parts of the rule that established the
PM2.5 SMC. On December 9, 2013 (78 FR 73698), EPA took
final action amending its regulations to remove the PM2.5
SILs and SMC provisions from the PSD regulations. However, since
North Carolina's October 17, 2017, submittal does not include SILs
or SMC, these regulatory provisions are not relevant to this
proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP
submittal for the infrastructure SIP PSD elements?
North Carolina's October 17, 2017, SIP submittal addresses certain
NSR/PSD requirements, as described above, and thereby meets the related
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C),
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J). For the remainder of this
proposed rulemaking, EPA's intent in referring to ``PSD elements'' is
to address the PSD requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C),
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J). More detail regarding the
aforementioned 110(a)(2) requirements related to PSD is provided in the
discussion that follows.
Section 110(a)(2)(C) has three components that must be addressed in
infrastructure SIP submittals: Enforcement, state-wide regulation of
new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major
sources, and PSD permitting of new major sources and major
modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable as
required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source PSD program).
Regarding section 110(a)(2)(C), this proposed action only addresses
North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submittals with respect to the
major source PSD program.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these components has two subparts
resulting in four distinct components, commonly referred to as
``prongs,'' that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP submittals.
The first two prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),
are provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emission
activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment
of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 1'') and from interfering with
maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 2''). The third and
fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are
provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from
interfering with measures required in another state to prevent
significant deterioration of air quality (``prong 3'') or to protect
visibility (``prong 4''). With regard to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), this
proposed action only addresses North Carolina's infrastructure SIP
submittals for prong 3.
Section 110(a)(2)(J) has four components that must be addressed in
infrastructure SIP submittals: (1) Consultation with government
officials; (2) public notification; (3) PSD; and (4) visibility
protection. With regard to section 110(a)(2)(J), this proposed action
only addresses North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submittals for PSD.
Regarding the PSD elements of sections 110(a)(2)(C) and (J), EPA
interprets the CAA to require each state to make, for each new or
revised NAAQS, an infrastructure SIP submittal that demonstrates that
the state has a
[[Page 28794]]
complete PSD permitting program meeting the current requirements for
all regulated NSR pollutants. The requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3) may also be satisfied by demonstrating
that the air agency has a complete PSD permitting program correctly
addressing all regulated NSR pollutants.
As described in EPA's guidance dated September 13, 2013,\13\ an
infrastructure SIP submittal should demonstrate that one or more air
agencies has the authority to implement a comprehensive PSD permit
program under CAA title I part C for all PSD-subject sources located in
areas that are designated attainment or unclassifiable for one or more
NAAQS. EPA interprets the PSD elements to require that a state's
infrastructure SIP submittal for a particular NAAQS demonstrate that
the state has a complete PSD permitting program in place covering all
regulated NSR pollutants. A state's PSD permitting program is complete
for the PSD elements if EPA has already approved or is simultaneously
approving the state's implementation plan with respect to all
structural PSD requirements \14\ that are due under the EPA regulations
or the CAA on or before the date of EPA's proposed action on the
infrastructure SIP submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ EPA's September 13, 2013, guidance, titled ``Guidance on
Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean
Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a),'' provides advice on the
development of infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the
2010 nitrogen dioxide NAAQS, the 2010 sulfur dioxide NAAQS, and the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, as well as infrastructure SIPs for new
or revised NAAQS promulgated in the future.
\14\ Structural PSD program provisions include provisions
necessary for the PSD program to address all regulated sources and
regulated pollutants but do not include provisions under 40 CFR
51.166 that are considered optional.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 14, 2016, EPA partially approved and partially
disapproved the PSD elements of North Carolina's infrastructure SIP
submittals for the following NAAQS: 1997 Annual and 24-hour
PM2.5; 2006 24-hour PM2.5; 2008 lead; 2008 8-hour
ozone; 2010 NO2; 2010 SO2; and 2012 Annual
PM2.5. See 81 FR 63107. The partial disapproval was limited
to the PM2.5 increment requirements of the 2010
PM2.5 Rule for these infrastructure SIP submittals. North
Carolina submitted its October 17, 2017, SIP revision to EPA to correct
the deficiencies in the State's PSD permitting program, and, as
previously discussed, EPA is proposing to approve this SIP revision. If
EPA's proposed action is finalized, North Carolina's SIP will include a
complete PSD program that addresses all structural PSD requirements due
under the CAA and EPA regulations. Because EPA proposes to approve
North Carolina's SIP revisions for the PSD program, it is also
proposing approval of the October 17, 2017, submittal for the PSD
infrastructure SIP requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(C),
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2008 lead NAAQS, 2008
ozone NAAQS, 2010 SO2 NAAQS, 2010 NO2 NAAQS, and
1997, 2006 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ EPA has already approved or will consider in separate
actions all other elements from North Carolina infrastructure SIP
submissions related to the 2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010
NO2, 2010 SO2 NAAQS, and 1997, 2006 and 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference North Carolina's regulations 15A NCAC 02D .0530, entitled
``Prevention of Significant Deterioration,'' effective September 1,
2017. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available through www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at the
EPA Region 4 office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for
more information).
VII. Proposed Actions
EPA is proposing to approve changes to the North Carolina SIP,
provided by the NC DEQ, to EPA on October 17, 2017. These changes
modify North Carolina's NSR permitting regulations codified at 15A 02D
.0530--Prevention of Significant Deterioration and include the adoption
of some federal requirements respecting implementation of the
PM2.5 NAAQS through the NSR permitting program.
Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's October 17,
2017, SIP submittal as it relates to the requirements to comply with
EPA's 2010 PSD PM2.5 Rule. EPA also notes that North
Carolina's incorporation by reference of EPA's PSD regulations as of
July 1, 2014, includes EPA's amendment to the definition of ``regulated
NSR pollutant'' concerning condensable PM promulgated on October 25,
2012.
If EPA finalizes all of the actions proposed in this notice, the
version of 15A NCAC 02D .0530 (PSD) that became effective in the State
on September 1, 2017, will be incorporated into North Carolina's SIP.
As a result of the proposed approval of North Carolina's October 17,
2017, SIP submittal, EPA is also proposing to approve portions of the
PSD elements of North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submittals (i.e.,
CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J)) for
the 1997 Annual and 24-hour PM2.5, 2006 24-hour
PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 SO2,
2010 NO2 and the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. If EPA
finalizes this proposed approval action, that final action will remove
EPA's obligation under section 110(c) to promulgate a FIP to address
the PM2.5 increments requirements of EPA's 2010 PSD
PM2.5 Rule PSD and the related PSD elements for the above
listed infrastructure SIPs.
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 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. This action merely
proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
For that reason, these proposed actions:
Are 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);
Are not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are 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.);
Do 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);
Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Are not an economically significant regulatory action
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Are not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National
[[Page 28795]]
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
Do 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).
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 as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 12, 2018.
Onis ``Trey'' Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2018-13356 Filed 6-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P