Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; New Hampshire; Redesignation of the Central New Hampshire Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area, 37187-37193 [2019-16271]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Will not have disproportionate
human health or environmental effects
under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994).
These proposed actions do not 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, these proposed actions do not
have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), nor will they
impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping, Sulfur
dioxide.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 18, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2019–16070 Filed 7–30–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
[EPA–R01–OAR–2019–0352; FRL–9997–35–
Region 1]
Air Plan Approval and Air Quality
Designation; New Hampshire;
Redesignation of the Central New
Hampshire Sulfur Dioxide
Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Jul 30, 2019
Jkt 247001
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
the maintenance plan and redesignation
request submitted by the State of New
Hampshire for the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area for the
2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2)
national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS). This nonattainment area
consists of portions of Hillsborough
County, Merrimack County, and
Rockingham County, New Hampshire.
The primary emission source in the
nonattainment area is now subject to
federally-enforceable emission control
standards, and air quality in the area
now meets the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. This
action is being taken under the Clean
Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before August 30, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
OAR–2019–0352 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
biton.leiran@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.,
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly
available docket materials are available
at https://www.regulations.gov or at the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA Region 1 Regional Office, Air and
Radiation Division, 5 Post Office
Square—Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37187
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Leiran Biton, Air Permits, Toxics, and
Indoor Programs Branch, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
Region 1, 5 Post Office Square—Suite
100, (Mail code 05–2), Boston, MA
02109–3912, tel. (617) 918–1267, email
biton.leiran@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background and Purpose
II. Redesignation Requirements
III. Determination of Attainment
IV. New Hampshire’s Approved State
Implementation Plan
V. Permanent and Enforceable Emission
Reductions
VI. Requirements for the Area Under Section
110 and Part D
VII. Maintenance Plan
VIII. Proposed Action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background and Purpose
On June 2, 2010 (75 FR 35520, June
22, 2010), EPA promulgated a new 1hour primary SO2 NAAQS of 75 parts
per billion (ppb), which is met at an
ambient air quality monitoring site
when the 3-year average of the annual
99th percentile of daily maximum 1hour concentrations does not exceed 75
ppb, as determined in accordance with
appendix T of 40 CFR part 50. On
August 5, 2013 (78 FR 47191), EPA
designated a first set of 29 areas of the
country as nonattainment for the 2010
SO2 NAAQS, including the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area within
the State of New Hampshire. These
‘‘round one’’ area designations were
effective October 4, 2013. In that action,
the Central New Hampshire area was
designated nonattainment for the SO2
NAAQS based on data collected at the
Pembroke, New Hampshire ambient air
quality monitoring station in calendar
years 2009 through 2011. The Central
New Hampshire nonattainment area is
comprised of 14 municipalities in
portions of three different counties in
New Hampshire. These cities and
towns, and the counties in which they
are located, are listed in Table 1. All
other areas in the State were designated
as attainment/unclassifiable for the 2010
SO2 NAAQS in the ‘‘round 3’’ area
designations on January 9, 2018. The
Central New Hampshire nonattainment
area contains the electric generating
source Merrimack Station, currently
owned and operated by GSP Merrimack
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
37188
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules
LLC and formerly by Public Service of
New Hampshire (PSNH) d/b/a
Eversource Energy, in Bow, New
Hampshire, to which the State
attributed about 90% of SO2 emissions
contributing to the nonattainment
designation.
TABLE 1—LIST OF COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES INCLUDED WITHIN THE CENTRAL NEW HAMPSHIRE NONATTAINMENT
AREA
County
Municipality
Hillsborough County (part) .................
Merrimack County (part) .....................
Goffstown Town.
Allenstown Town, Bow Town, Chichester Town, Dunbarton Town, Epsom Town, Hooksett Town, Loudon
Town, Pembroke Town, Pittsfield Town, City of Concord.
Candia Town, Deerfield Town, Northwood Town.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Rockingham County (part) .................
By April 4, 2015, New Hampshire was
required to submit a nonattainment plan
State Implementation Plan (SIP) that
meets the requirements of sections
172(c) and 191–192 of the CAA, and
that would provide for attainment of the
NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable,
but no later than October 4, 2018. On
March 18, 2016 (81 FR 14736), EPA
found for a number of areas, including
the Central New Hampshire area, that
the states in which those areas are
located had failed to submit the
required SO2 nonattainment plan by the
submittal deadline. In response to the
requirement for SO2 nonattainment plan
submittals, New Hampshire submitted a
nonattainment area plan and attainment
demonstration for the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area on
January 31, 2017.
New Hampshire’s submittal included
new SO2 emissions limits and
associated control technology efficiency
requirements for Merrimack Station. In
2011, Merrimack Station installed and
began operation of a flue gas
desulfurization (FGD) scrubber system
that is efficient in removing SO2 from
the exhaust gas stream. On September 1,
2016, the State established permit
conditions that include stringent
emissions limits and prohibit operation
of either of Merrimack Station’s two
coal-fired boilers when the FGD
scrubber system is not operating except
as necessary to prevent severe damage
to equipment or potential injury to
facility personnel.
On June 5, 2018, EPA found that the
emissions limits established by New
Hampshire for Merrimack Station and
submitted to EPA on January 31, 2017
provide for attainment of the NAAQS,
and EPA approved the limits and
associated conditions into the New
Hampshire SIP (83 FR 25922).
Emissions from Merrimack Station
have declined considerably in recent
years. In 2010, Merrimack Station
emitted 33,248 tons of SO2. Based on
data the State presented from the 2014
National Emissions Inventory (NEI), the
total point, area, and mobile source SO2
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Jul 30, 2019
Jkt 247001
emissions in the entire Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area in 2014
were 1,481 tons per year (tpy), with
1,044 tons (70.5%) emitted from
Merrimack Station. In 2016, SO2
emissions reported for Merrimack
Station were 228 tons. Because of the
significant, permanent, and enforceable
reduction in SO2 emissions affecting the
nonattainment area, the (then) proposed
approval of the State’s nonattainment
area plan and attainment demonstration,
and the fact that the Pembroke SO2
monitor’s three-year SO2 design value
(DV) 1 was below the SO2 NAAQS for
2012–2014 and 2014–2016, New
Hampshire submitted a redesignation
request in 2018.
On March 16, 2018, the New
Hampshire Department of
Environmental Services (NHDES)
submitted its request to EPA to
redesignate the Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area to attainment. The
title of the submittal is ‘‘1-Hour Sulfur
Dioxide (2010 Standard) Redesignation
Request and Maintenance Plan for the
Central New Hampshire Nonattainment
Area’’ (New Hampshire’s March 16,
2018 submittal). For the reasons set
forth in this document, EPA is
proposing to approve New Hampshire’s
request to redesignate the area to
attainment.
II. Redesignation Requirements
Under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), there
are five criteria which must be met
before a nonattainment area may be
redesignated to attainment.
1. EPA has determined that the
relevant NAAQS has been attained in
the area.
2. The applicable implementation
plan has been fully approved by EPA
under section 110(k).
3. EPA has determined that
improvement in air quality is due to
1 The DV is a statistic computed according to the
data handling procedures of the NAAQS (in 40 CFR
part 50 appendix T) that, by comparison to the level
of the NAAQS, indicates whether the area is
violating the NAAQS. For SO2, the DV is the threeyear average of the annual 99th percentile of onehour daily maximum concentrations.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from the SIP,
Federal regulations, and other
permanent and enforceable reductions.
4. EPA has fully approved a
maintenance plan, including a
contingency plan, for the area under
section 175A of the CAA.
5. The State has met all applicable
requirements for the area under section
110 and part D.
Sections III (Determination of
Attainment), IV (New Hampshire’s
Approved State Implementation Plan),
V (Permanent and Enforceable Emission
Reductions), VI (Requirements for the
Area Under Section 110 and Part D) and
VII (Maintenance Plan) of this notice
describe how New Hampshire meets
each of these criteria for the Central
New Hampshire nonattainment area.
III. Determination of Attainment
As stated in the April 23, 2014
‘‘Guidance for 1-Hour SO2
Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions,’’
(EPA’s April 23, 2014 Guidance) for
SO2, there are two components needed
to support an attainment determination:
(1) A review of representative air quality
monitoring data, and (2) a further
analysis, generally requiring air quality
modeling, to demonstrate that the entire
area is attaining the applicable standard,
based on current actual emissions or the
fully implemented control strategy. New
Hampshire has addressed both
components, as described in the two
following sections III.A and III.B.
A. Air Quality Monitoring Data
The first requirement for
redesignation is to demonstrate that the
standard has been attained in the area.
Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50.17,
the SO2 standard is met at an ambient
air quality monitoring site when the
three-year average of the annual 99th
percentile of one-hour daily maximum
concentrations is less than or equal to
75 ppb, as determined in accordance
with appendix T of 40 CFR part 50 at
all relevant monitoring sites in the
subject area. EPA has reviewed the
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
37189
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules
ambient air monitoring data for the
Central New Hampshire nonattainment
area. The Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area has two SO2
monitoring sites: One located in
Concord at Hazen Drive (Site ID #33–
013–1007) 2 and one in Pembroke (Site
ID #33–013–1006). The annual 99th
percentile daily maximum SO2
concentrations were higher at the
Pembroke monitor than the Concord
monitor for all years reviewed by EPA
(2012 through 2017). In New
Hampshire’s March 16, 2018 submittal,
the State demonstrated that the vast
majority of monitored exceedances at
the Pembroke monitor during the 2009–
2011 period occurred when wind
directions were from Merrimack Station
and toward the monitor. EPA’s review
of monitored air quality includes
ambient data collected in the 2012–2014
period through the 2014–2016 period, as
well as data collected in the 2015–2017
period, which were the most recent
quality-assured data available at the
time of EPA’s review. All data
considered are complete, qualityassured, certified, and recorded in
EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS)
database.
Table 2 shows the three-year DVs for
the periods between 2012 and 2017 for
the Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area. For 2012, the last
year during which emissions from
Merrimack Station bypassed the FGD
system (a practice that is no longer
permitted except as necessary to prevent
severe damage to equipment or potential
injury to facility personnel under the
State’s September 1, 2016 permit), the
99th percentile monitored daily
maximum value at the Pembroke
monitor was 26.9 ppb. For 2017, the
first full year during which Merrimack
Station was no longer permitted to
operate unless its FGD system was
operating, the 99th percentile daily
maximum value at the Pembroke
monitor was 16.4 ppb. Within the
Central New Hampshire nonattainment
area, the maximum monitored threeyear average DV for 2012–2014 was 23
ppb (31.7% of the NAAQS), and the
three-year average DV for 2015–2017
was 15 ppb (20.0% of the NAAQS).
Both values are low and show
attainment with the SO2 standard.
Therefore, the SO2 monitors in the
Central New Hampshire area clearly
show attainment. New Hampshire plans
to continue monitoring for SO2 at the
Pembroke location. Preliminary data for
2018 (January 1 through September 30)
indicate a 99th percentile monitored
daily maximum value of 11.9 ppb at the
Pembroke monitor, indicating that the
area is continuing to attain the SO2
standard.
TABLE 2—MONITORING DATA FOR THE CENTRAL NEW HAMPSHIRE NONATTAINMENT AREA FOR 2012 THROUGH 2017
Annual 99th percentile value
(ppb)
Design value
(ppb)
Site Name/ID No.
Concord/33–013–1007 .................................................................
Pembroke/33–013–1006 ..............................................................
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017 a
2012–
2014
2013–
2015
2014–
2016
2015–
2017 a
7.7
26.9
8.6
17.0
9.5
26.0
7.2
16.9
4.9
16.4
N/A b
12.1
9
23
8
20
7
20
N/A b
15
a Data
b The
from EPA’s ‘‘Air Quality Design Values’’ website at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values, accessed on July 18, 2019.
Concord monitor ceased collection of SO2 monitoring data at the end of 2016.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Air Quality Modeling Data
Regarding the second component of
the attainment determination, i.e., air
quality modeling, EPA stated in its
April 23, 2014 Guidance that a
previously submitted modeled
attainment demonstration would
suffice, along with evidence that the
control strategy in the SIP has been fully
implemented, to show attainment for a
nonattainment area. In New
Hampshire’s March 16, 2018 submittal,
the State provides details about the SO2
modeled attainment demonstration that
the State submitted to EPA on January
31, 2017 with its SO2 nonattainment
area plan. As previously stated, EPA
approved the State’s nonattainment area
plan and attainment demonstration on
June 5, 2018 (83 FR 25922). The control
strategy for the nonattainment area
consists of emission limits on
Merrimack Station’s SO2 emission units.
Specifically, the emission limits for
Merrimack Station are 7-boiler operating
day rolling averages that New
Hampshire established as being
comparably stringent, using a method
described in EPA’s April 23, 2014
Guidance, to a 1-hour emission limit for
which the attainment demonstration
was performed. Therefore, since the
emission limits have been fully
implemented at Merrimack Station and
are being complied with, as discussed in
section V of this notice, then New
Hampshire’s attainment demonstration
is a sufficient basis to show attainment
for the Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area.
In its approved attainment
demonstration, New Hampshire
conducted air dispersion modeling
using EPA’s AERMOD modeling system
in a manner consistent with the
requirements and recommendations
specified in appendix W to 40 CFR part
55, known as the Guideline on Air
Quality Models (the Guideline). This
modeling established the 1-hour
‘‘critical emission value’’ of 0.54 lb/
million British thermal units (mmBtu)
for emissions from Merrimack Station to
attain the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. The State
established for Merrimack Station a 7boiler operating day emissions limit of
0.39 lb/MMBtu, determined to be
comparably stringent to the critical
emissions value using a method
consistent with recommendations
contained in appendix C to EPA’s April
23, 2014 Guidance. Details of New
Hampshire’s attainment demonstration
are provided in EPA’s proposal (82 FR
45242, September 28, 2017) and final
action (83 FR 25922, June 5, 2018) for
the approval of New Hampshire’s
nonattainment area plan and attainment
demonstration.
In summary, the monitored data show
attainment in the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area for all
three-year periods between 2012 and
2017, inclusive. New Hampshire has
demonstrated, through an analysis of
hourly wind directions correlated with
the monitored exceedances at the
Pembroke monitor for the 2009–2011
period, that Merrimack Station was
responsible for the violation in the area.
New Hampshire established through its
2 The Concord monitor ceased collection of SO
2
monitoring data at the end of 2016 due to low
concentrations measured at that location.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Jul 30, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
37190
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules
attainment demonstration, air
dispersion modeling that Merrimack
Station will not cause a violation of the
NAAQS in the area in the future.
Therefore, EPA agrees that the Central
New Hampshire nonattainment area is
currently attaining the SO2 NAAQS.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. New Hampshire’s Approved State
Implementation Plan
As described in EPA’s April 23, 2014
Guidance, for EPA to redesignate a
nonattainment area to attainment, there
must be a fully approved SIP under
section 110(k) of the CAA for the area
with respect to the NAAQS, without any
current disapproval, finding of failure to
submit or failure to implement the SIP,
or partial, conditional, or limited
approval.
EPA has determined that New
Hampshire has a fully approved SIP
with respect to section 110(k). On July
8, 2016, EPA approved New
Hampshire’s infrastructure SIP for the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS (81 FR 44542),
except for an aspect of the SIP related
to notification of neighboring states,
which EPA conditionally approved, and
the interstate transport provisions,
which were not included in New
Hampshire’s SIP submittal. On May 25,
2017, EPA converted the conditional
approval to a full approval based on a
proposed amendment to the New
Hampshire SIP (82 FR 24057). On
December 17, 2018, EPA approved the
State’s interstate transport provisions
(83 FR 64470). As stated previously,
New Hampshire’s nonattainment area
plan for the area was approved on June
5, 2018 (83 FR 25922). There are no
elements of the State’s SIP that are
subject to disapproval, finding of failure
to submit, or partial, conditional, or
limited approval, with respect to the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Therefore, the
State has a fully approved SIP under
section 110(k) of the CAA and satisfies
all applicable requirements for the 2010
1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
V. Permanent and Enforceable Emission
Reductions
New Hampshire established stringent
emissions limits and associated
requirements for Merrimack Station on
September 1, 2016 in its permit, TP–
0189, for Merrimack Station. These
emission limits were achieved through
optimized operation of Merrimack
Station’s FGD system to more efficiently
control SO2 emissions. EPA
incorporated those permit conditions
from TP–0189 into the SIP in the
approval of New Hampshire’s
nonattainment area plan. SO2 emissions
from Merrimack Station decreased by
21,388 tons (greater than 95%) in 2012,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Jul 30, 2019
Jkt 247001
the first full year of FGD operation at the
facility, from the previous year. In 2016,
the facility emitted 228 tons of SO2,
about 1% of its emissions in 2011.
According to EPA’s review of more
recent annual emissions information
from the Air Markets Program Data
(AMPD) tool website for the facility,
Merrimack Station emitted 431.2 tons of
SO2 in 2018,3 which is about 2% of its
emissions in 2011.
In addition, EPA has reviewed
emissions data from Merrimack Station
to assess whether the State’s federallyenforceable permit conditions are
effective in controlling emissions from
the facility. Specifically, EPA reviewed
AMPD emissions data using EPA’s Field
Audit Checklist Tool (FACT) 4 for the
period between September 1, 2016,
when the State’s 7-day emissions limit
became effective, and March 31, 2019,
which is the most recent date for which
emissions data are currently available.
EPA’s review indicates that Merrimack
Station’s emissions have not exceeded
the SIP-approved SO2 emissions limit.
Furthermore, hourly emissions from
Merrimack Station have been generally
well below both the 1-hour critical
emissions limit, which the State
demonstrated to be comparably
stringent to the permitted 7-day limit.
Emissions from Merrimack Station were
only above the critical emissions value
for four individual hours since
September 1, 2016, specifically: Twice
in 2016, once in 2017, and once in 2018.
A spreadsheet of these data and EPA’s
analysis is provided in the public
docket. This operating pattern is
consistent with EPA’s expectation, as
stated in EPA’s approval of the State’s
nonattainment area plan, that ‘‘the
source is presumed occasionally to emit
more than the critical emission value
but on average, and presumably at most
times, to emit well below the critical
emission value’’ (83 FR 25922, June 5,
2018). In summary, EPA’s review of
emissions information for Merrimack
Station indicates that the facility has not
exceeded its 7-day SO2 emissions limit
contained in the TP–0189 permit, and
the facility has rarely exceeded the 1hour critical emissions value, as
anticipated by EPA. EPA therefore
concludes that the emissions limits
incorporated into the New Hampshire
SIP for Merrimack Station are being
complied with.
3 Annual emissions data from EPA’s AMPD tool,
available at https://ampd.epa.gov/ampd/.
4 Field Audit Checklist Tool (FACT) version
1.2.0.1, available for download at: www.epa.gov/
airmarkets/field-audit-checklist-tool-fact. FACT
provides users with metadata beyond the
information available using the AMPD website.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
VI. Requirements for the Area Under
Section 110 and Part D
New Hampshire has submitted
information demonstrating that it meets
the requirements for the area under
section 110 and part D of the CAA. In
demonstrating that it has met all
requirements for section 110 and part D
of the CAA for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS,
New Hampshire cited its Air Pollution
Control statutes at Chapter 125–C of the
New Hampshire Revised Statutes
Annotated (RSA), and its Rules
Governing the Control of Air Pollution
in the New Hampshire Code of
Administrative Rules at Env-A 100
through 4800, of which some (but not
all) have been approved into the State’s
SIP. As stated earlier in section IV, EPA
has approved New Hampshire’s entire
infrastructure SIP for SO2 in three
separate actions. This prior
infrastructure SIP approval confirms
that New Hampshire’s SIP meets the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2) to contain the basic
program elements, such as an active
enforcement program and permitting
program.
Section 191 of the CAA required New
Hampshire to submit a part D
nonattainment SIP for the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area by April
4, 2015. EPA issued a finding of failure
to submit the required SO2
nonattainment plan by the submittal
deadline for a number of areas,
including the Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area (81 FR 14736). New
Hampshire submitted a plan for the
Central New Hampshire nonattainment
area on January 31, 2017, and EPA
approved that plan on June 5, 2018 (83
FR 25922). Therefore, the State has met
its obligations to establish a plan for the
nonattainment area under section 191 of
the CAA.
Part D includes general requirements,
in subpart 1, and more specific
requirements applicable to SO2, in
subpart 5, for nonattainment areas. For
purposes of evaluating this
redesignation request, the applicable
section 172 SIP requirements for the
Central New Hampshire area are
contained in sections 172(c)(1)–(9). A
thorough discussion of the requirements
contained in section 172 can be found
in the General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498,
13564, April 16, 1992).
Section 172(c)(1) requires
nonattainment area SIPs to provide for
the implementation of all reasonably
available control measures (RACM) as
expeditiously as practicable and to
provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
EPA’s longstanding interpretation of the
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
37191
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules
nonattainment planning requirements of
section 172 is that once an area is
attaining the NAAQS, those
requirements are not applicable for
purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)
and therefore need not be approved into
the SIP before EPA can redesignate the
area. In the 1992 General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I, EPA set forth
its interpretation of applicable
requirements for purposes of evaluating
redesignation requests when an area is
attaining a standard (57 FR 13498,
13564, April 16, 1992). EPA noted that
the requirements for reasonable further
progress (RFP) and other measures
designed to provide for attainment do
not apply in evaluating redesignation
requests because those nonattainment
planning requirements ‘‘have no
meaning’’ for an area that has already
attained the standard. EPA’s
understanding of section 172 also forms
the basis of its Clean Data Policy, which
was articulated for SO2 in EPA’s April
23, 2014 Guidance and it suspends a
State’s obligation to submit most of the
attainment planning requirements that
would otherwise apply, including an
attainment demonstration and planning
SIPs to provide for RFP, RACM, and
contingency measures under section
172(c)(9). Courts have upheld EPA’s
interpretation of section 172(c)(1) for
‘‘reasonably available’’ control measures
and control technology as meaning only
those controls that advance attainment,
which precludes the need to require
additional measures where an area is
already attaining. NRDC v. EPA, 571
F.3d 1245, 1252 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra
Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162 (D.C.
Cir. 2002); Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d
735, 744 (5th Cir. 2002); Sierra Club v.
EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).5
Therefore, because the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area has
attained the SO2 standard, no additional
measures are needed to provide for
attainment, and section 172(c)(1)
requirements for an attainment
demonstration and RACM are not part
of the ‘‘applicable implementation
plan’’ required to have been approved
prior to redesignation per CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In any case, in the
context of implemented measures
(especially the installation of the FGD at
Merrimack Station, and establishment
and incorporation into the SIP of the
conditions of TP–0189), EPA believes
that New Hampshire has satisfied the
reasonably available control measures/
reasonably available control techniques
(RACM/RACT) requirement for this
area.
The other section 172 requirements
that are designed to help an area achieve
attainment are the section 172(c)(2)
requirement that nonattainment plans
contain provisions promoting
reasonable further progress, the
requirement to submit the section
172(c)(9) contingency measures, and the
section 172(c)(6) requirement for the SIP
to contain control measures necessary to
provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
These are also not required to be
approved as part of the ‘‘applicable
implementation plan’’ for purposes of
satisfying CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission
and approval of a comprehensive,
accurate, and current inventory of actual
emissions. In New Hampshire’s March
16, 2018 submittal, as part of its
maintenance plan for the area, the State
submitted an attainment inventory of
the SO2 emissions from sources in the
nonattainment area. New Hampshire
chose 2011 for its base year emissions
inventory, as comprehensive emissions
data was available and updated that
year. The State provided emissions
inventories for 2014, the most recent
year with quality assured actual
emissions for the area, and the 2018
interim year and project emissions for
the 2028 maintenance year.6 EPA
considers these inventories, which are
summarized in Table 3, to satisfy the
requirement of section 172(c)(3).
Merrimack Station, the only electric
generating unit (EGU) in the Central
New Hampshire nonattainment area,
remains the largest source of SO2 in the
area, and emissions from Merrimack
Station have declined substantially as
discussed previously. For 2011 and
2014, the emissions inventories were
based on the NEI for the respective
years.
Note that New Hampshire’s projected
inventory for the 2028 maintenance
year, accounting for Merrimack Station’s
continued operation under the
conditions established in TP–0189,
show overall emissions in the
nonattainment area about 19,046 tons
lower than those from 2011. This large
reduction is expected to be sufficient to
maintain the SO2 standard. EPA is
proposing to approve the 2014
emissions inventory, submitted by New
Hampshire along with the redesignation
request, as meeting the section 172(c)(3)
emissions inventory requirement.
TABLE 3—SO2 EMISSIONS INVENTORIES IN TONS PER YEAR FOR THE CENTRAL NEW HAMPSHIRE NONATTAINMENT AREA a
EGU point
sources
Year
2011 .........................................................
2014 .........................................................
2018 b .......................................................
2028 b .......................................................
Non-EGU
point
sources
22,393
1,044
c 1,927
3,443
115
63
90
127
Area
sources
On-road
mobile
sources
451
359
425
353
Non-road
mobile
sources
15
14
5
5
Total
emissions
1
1
1
1
22,975
1,481
c 2,473
3,929
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
a New Hampshire’s emissions inventory provided emissions for each of the three partial counties in the nonattainment area. This table provides
only the area-wide emissions totals for each inventory year.
b New Hampshire projected emissions for 2018 and 2028.
c According to EPA’s AMPD, actual emissions for Merrimack Station, the only EGU in the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area, were
431.2 tons in 2018.
5 Although the Court of Appeals for the Sixth
Circuit has issued a contrary opinion in the context
of redesignations for ozone and PM2.5, EPA believes
that these opinions, interpreting the applicability of
the ozone and PM2.5 RACM/RACT requirements for
redesignations for those pollutants, do not address
the applicability of the RACM/RACT requirement
for SO2. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 793 F.3d 656 (6th
Cir. 2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Jul 30, 2019
Jkt 247001
6 At least one interim year inventory is used to
demonstrate that emissions in the area are not
expected to exceed the attainment year inventory in
the interim between the base year and the last year
of the maintenance plan. The demonstration, by
means of an interim year inventory, that the area
will maintain the standard throughout the
maintenance period is derived from CAA section
175A, which states that maintenance in the area is
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to be provided ‘‘for at least ten years after the
redesignation,’’ and not just in the final year. Thus,
a maintenance plan includes at least one interim
year inventory to establish that, during the period
that maintenance is projected, emissions will
remain at or below the level of the attainment year
inventory.
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
37192
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Section 172(c)(4) requires the
identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and
modified stationary sources to be
allowed in an area, and section 172(c)(5)
requires source permits for the
construction and operation of new and
modified major stationary sources
anywhere in the nonattainment area.
EPA has determined that, since PSD
requirements will apply to new and
modified major stationary sources after
redesignation, areas being redesignated
need not comply with the requirement
that an NSR program be approved prior
to redesignation, provided that the area
demonstrates maintenance of the
NAAQS without part D NSR. A more
detailed rationale for this view is
described in a memorandum from Mary
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled ‘‘Part D New Source Review
Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.’’ New
Hampshire has demonstrated that the
Central New Hampshire nonattainment
area will be able to maintain the
NAAQS without part D NSR in effect,
and therefore New Hampshire does not
need to have a fully approved part D
NSR program prior to approval of the
redesignation request. After
redesignation, major new or modifying
stationary sources would be subject to
the State’s Env-A 619 Prevention of
Significant Deterioration rules and
would no longer be subject to the State’s
part D NSR rules. Furthermore, EPA
notes that New Hampshire does have a
fully approved part D NSR program
contained in its Env-A 618
Nonattainment New Source Review
rules. New Hampshire’s Env-A 618 and
619 rules were approved by EPA into
the State’s SIP on September 25, 2015
(80 FR 57722).
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to
meet the applicable provisions of
section 110(a)(2). As noted previously,
EPA has already approved a SIP for New
Hampshire that meets the requirements
of section 110(a)(2) applicable for
purposes of redesignation.
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires
States to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that federally
supported or funded projects conform to
the air quality planning goals in the
applicable SIP. The requirement to
determine conformity applies to
transportation plans, programs, and
projects that are developed, funded, or
approved under title 23 of the United
States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal
Transit Act (transportation conformity)
as well as to all other federally
supported or funded projects (general
conformity). State transportation
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Jul 30, 2019
Jkt 247001
conformity SIP revisions must be
consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation,
enforcement, and enforceability that
EPA promulgated pursuant to its
authority under the CAA. On December
9, 2011, New Hampshire submitted
documentation establishing
transportation conformity procedures in
its SIP. EPA approved these procedures
on November 29, 2013 (78 FR 71504).
Moreover, EPA interprets the
conformity SIP requirements as not
applying for purposes of evaluating a
redesignation request under section
107(d) because, like other requirements
listed above, state conformity rules are
still required after redesignation and
Federal conformity rules apply where
state rules have not been approved. See
Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir.
2001) (upholding this interpretation);
see also 60 FR 62748 (December 7,
1995) (redesignation of Tampa, Florida).
Based on the preceding discussion,
EPA is proposing to find that New
Hampshire has satisfied all applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation of the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area under
section 110 and part D of title I of the
CAA.
VII. Maintenance Plan
CAA section 175A sets forth the
elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. Under
section 175A, the plan must
demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least ten
years after the nonattainment area is
redesignated to attainment. Eight years
after the redesignation, the State must
submit a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that attainment will
continue to be maintained for the ten
years following the initial ten-year
period. To address the possibility of
future NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain
contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of
any future one-hour SO2 violations.
Specifically, the maintenance plan
should address five requirements: The
attainment emissions inventory,
maintenance demonstration,
monitoring, verification of continued
attainment, and a contingency plan.
New Hampshire’s March 16, 2018
redesignation request contains its
maintenance plan, which New
Hampshire has committed to review
eight years after redesignation. New
Hampshire submitted an attainment
emission inventory which addresses
current emissions and projections of
future emissions for point, area, and
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
mobile sources. Total SO2 emissions in
the nonattainment area were 22,975 tons
in the base year, 2011; 1,481 tons in the
attainment year, 2014; 2,473 tons in the
projected interim year, 2018; and 3,929
tons in the projected maintenance year,
2028. See Table 3. EPA notes that actual
emissions for the interim year 2018
were considerably lower than the State’s
projected emissions, indicating that the
State’s methods for projecting an
inventory may overestimate emissions
in the area, which lends additional
confidence in the continued future
attainment of the area. Furthermore, the
State indicated in its redesignation
request that the projected emissions
from all sources in the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area in 2028
are still lower than emissions permitted
under TP–0189 for Merrimack Station
alone, which have been modeled to
show attainment.
New Hampshire has committed to
continue to operate and maintain an
appropriate air quality monitoring
network to verify the area’s attainment
status, in accordance with the
requirements of 40 CFR part 58. These
data will be used to verify continued
attainment.
New Hampshire has the authority to
adopt, implement and enforce any
subsequent emissions control measures
deemed necessary to correct any future
SO2 violations. Regarding contingency
measures to implement in the case of a
future violation of the SO2 standard,
New Hampshire has committed to use
its enforcement authority to promptly
and aggressively address permit
deviations from sources in the Central
New Hampshire area, and in particular
from Merrimack Station.
EPA proposes to find that New
Hampshire’s maintenance plan
adequately addresses the five basic
components necessary to maintain the
SO2 standard in the New Hampshire
nonattainment area.
VIII. Proposed Action
In accordance with New Hampshire’s
March 16, 2018 request, EPA is
proposing to redesignate the Central
New Hampshire nonattainment area
from nonattainment to attainment for
the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS.
New Hampshire has demonstrated that
the area is attaining the SO2 standard,
and that the improvement in air quality
is due to the permanent and enforceable
permit conditions established for the
main SO2 source in the nonattainment
area. EPA is also proposing to approve
the maintenance plan that New
Hampshire submitted to ensure that the
area will continue to maintain the SO2
standard. EPA is soliciting public
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 147 / Wednesday, July 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules
comments on the issues discussed in
this notice or on other relevant matters.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action. Interested
parties may participate in the Federal
rulemaking procedure by submitting
written comments to this proposed rule
by following the instructions listed in
the ADDRESSES section of this Federal
Register.
jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
IX. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action
merely approves State law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by State law. For that
reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not expected to be an Executive
Order 13771 regulatory action because
this action is not significant under
Executive Order 12866;
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:41 Jul 30, 2019
Jkt 247001
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 25, 2019.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA
Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2019–16271 Filed 7–30–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0282; FRL–9997–62–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AM75
Reclassification of Major Sources as
Area Sources Under Section 112 of the
Clean Air Act
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of public hearing.
AGENCY:
On June 25, 2019, the
Administrator of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
signed the proposed rulemaking
‘‘Reclassification of Major Sources as
Area Sources Under Section 112 of the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37193
Clean Air Act.’’ The EPA also requested
public comment on the proposed action.
The EPA is announcing that it will hold
a public hearing to provide interested
parties the opportunity to present data,
views, or arguments concerning the
proposed action.
DATES: Public hearing: The EPA will
hold a public hearing on August 15,
2019, in Washington, DC. Please refer to
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
for additional information on the public
hearing.
ADDRESSES: The hearing will be held at
the EPA WJC East Building, 1201
Constitution Avenue NW, Room 1153,
Washington, DC 20004. The hearing will
convene at 9:00 a.m. (local time) and
will conclude at 5:00 p.m. If there are
no additional registered speakers, the
EPA will end the hearing 2 hours after
the last registered speaker has
concluded their comments. The EPA’s
website for this rulemaking, which
includes the proposal and information
about the hearing, can be found at:
https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sourcesair-pollution/reclassification-majorsources-area-sources-under-section-112clean. Written comments on the
proposed rulemaking may be submitted
to the EPA electronically, by mail,
facsimile, or through hand delivery/
courier. Please refer to the website for
this rulemaking for the addresses and
detailed instructions for submitting
written comments.
Because this hearing is being held at
a U.S. government facility, individuals
planning to attend the hearing should be
prepared to show valid picture
identification to the security staff to gain
access to the meeting room. Please note
that the REAL ID Act, passed by
Congress in 2005, established new
requirements for entering federal
facilities. For purposes of the REAL ID
Act, the EPA will accept governmentissued IDs, including driver’s licenses
from the District of Columbia and all
states and territories. Acceptable
alternative forms of identification
include: federal employee badges,
passports, enhanced driver’s licenses,
and military identification cards.
Additional information on the REAL ID
Act is available at: https://www.dhs.gov/
real-id.
Any objects brought into the building
need to fit through the security
screening system, such as a purse,
laptop bag, or small backpack.
Demonstrations will not be allowed on
federal property for security reasons.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
EPA will begin pre-registering speakers
for the hearing upon publication of this
document in the Federal Register. To
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 147 (Wednesday, July 31, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37187-37193]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16271]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R01-OAR-2019-0352; FRL-9997-35-Region 1]
Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; New Hampshire;
Redesignation of the Central New Hampshire Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment
Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the maintenance plan and redesignation request submitted by the
State of New Hampshire for the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area
for the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2) national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS). This nonattainment area consists of
portions of Hillsborough County, Merrimack County, and Rockingham
County, New Hampshire. The primary emission source in the nonattainment
area is now subject to federally-enforceable emission control
standards, and air quality in the area now meets the 2010
SO2 NAAQS. This action is being taken under the Clean Air
Act.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 30, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2019-0352 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly
available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 Regional
Office, Air and Radiation Division, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100,
Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leiran Biton, Air Permits, Toxics, and
Indoor Programs Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
Region 1, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code 05-2), Boston, MA
02109-3912, tel. (617) 918-1267, email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background and Purpose
II. Redesignation Requirements
III. Determination of Attainment
IV. New Hampshire's Approved State Implementation Plan
V. Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions
VI. Requirements for the Area Under Section 110 and Part D
VII. Maintenance Plan
VIII. Proposed Action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background and Purpose
On June 2, 2010 (75 FR 35520, June 22, 2010), EPA promulgated a new
1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS of 75 parts per billion (ppb),
which is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year
average of the annual 99th percentile of daily maximum 1-hour
concentrations does not exceed 75 ppb, as determined in accordance with
appendix T of 40 CFR part 50. On August 5, 2013 (78 FR 47191), EPA
designated a first set of 29 areas of the country as nonattainment for
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, including the Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area within the State of New Hampshire. These ``round
one'' area designations were effective October 4, 2013. In that action,
the Central New Hampshire area was designated nonattainment for the
SO2 NAAQS based on data collected at the Pembroke, New
Hampshire ambient air quality monitoring station in calendar years 2009
through 2011. The Central New Hampshire nonattainment area is comprised
of 14 municipalities in portions of three different counties in New
Hampshire. These cities and towns, and the counties in which they are
located, are listed in Table 1. All other areas in the State were
designated as attainment/unclassifiable for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS in the ``round 3'' area designations on January 9, 2018. The
Central New Hampshire nonattainment area contains the electric
generating source Merrimack Station, currently owned and operated by
GSP Merrimack
[[Page 37188]]
LLC and formerly by Public Service of New Hampshire (PSNH) d/b/a
Eversource Energy, in Bow, New Hampshire, to which the State attributed
about 90% of SO2 emissions contributing to the nonattainment
designation.
Table 1--List of Counties and Municipalities Included Within the Central New Hampshire Nonattainment Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County Municipality
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hillsborough County (part)................................ Goffstown Town.
Merrimack County (part)................................... Allenstown Town, Bow Town, Chichester Town,
Dunbarton Town, Epsom Town, Hooksett Town, Loudon
Town, Pembroke Town, Pittsfield Town, City of
Concord.
Rockingham County (part).................................. Candia Town, Deerfield Town, Northwood Town.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By April 4, 2015, New Hampshire was required to submit a
nonattainment plan State Implementation Plan (SIP) that meets the
requirements of sections 172(c) and 191-192 of the CAA, and that would
provide for attainment of the NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable,
but no later than October 4, 2018. On March 18, 2016 (81 FR 14736), EPA
found for a number of areas, including the Central New Hampshire area,
that the states in which those areas are located had failed to submit
the required SO2 nonattainment plan by the submittal
deadline. In response to the requirement for SO2
nonattainment plan submittals, New Hampshire submitted a nonattainment
area plan and attainment demonstration for the Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area on January 31, 2017.
New Hampshire's submittal included new SO2 emissions
limits and associated control technology efficiency requirements for
Merrimack Station. In 2011, Merrimack Station installed and began
operation of a flue gas desulfurization (FGD) scrubber system that is
efficient in removing SO2 from the exhaust gas stream. On
September 1, 2016, the State established permit conditions that include
stringent emissions limits and prohibit operation of either of
Merrimack Station's two coal-fired boilers when the FGD scrubber system
is not operating except as necessary to prevent severe damage to
equipment or potential injury to facility personnel.
On June 5, 2018, EPA found that the emissions limits established by
New Hampshire for Merrimack Station and submitted to EPA on January 31,
2017 provide for attainment of the NAAQS, and EPA approved the limits
and associated conditions into the New Hampshire SIP (83 FR 25922).
Emissions from Merrimack Station have declined considerably in
recent years. In 2010, Merrimack Station emitted 33,248 tons of
SO2. Based on data the State presented from the 2014
National Emissions Inventory (NEI), the total point, area, and mobile
source SO2 emissions in the entire Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area in 2014 were 1,481 tons per year (tpy), with 1,044
tons (70.5%) emitted from Merrimack Station. In 2016, SO2
emissions reported for Merrimack Station were 228 tons. Because of the
significant, permanent, and enforceable reduction in SO2
emissions affecting the nonattainment area, the (then) proposed
approval of the State's nonattainment area plan and attainment
demonstration, and the fact that the Pembroke SO2 monitor's
three-year SO2 design value (DV) \1\ was below the
SO2 NAAQS for 2012-2014 and 2014-2016, New Hampshire
submitted a redesignation request in 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The DV is a statistic computed according to the data
handling procedures of the NAAQS (in 40 CFR part 50 appendix T)
that, by comparison to the level of the NAAQS, indicates whether the
area is violating the NAAQS. For SO2, the DV is the
three-year average of the annual 99th percentile of one-hour daily
maximum concentrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 16, 2018, the New Hampshire Department of Environmental
Services (NHDES) submitted its request to EPA to redesignate the
Central New Hampshire nonattainment area to attainment. The title of
the submittal is ``1-Hour Sulfur Dioxide (2010 Standard) Redesignation
Request and Maintenance Plan for the Central New Hampshire
Nonattainment Area'' (New Hampshire's March 16, 2018 submittal). For
the reasons set forth in this document, EPA is proposing to approve New
Hampshire's request to redesignate the area to attainment.
II. Redesignation Requirements
Under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), there are five criteria which must
be met before a nonattainment area may be redesignated to attainment.
1. EPA has determined that the relevant NAAQS has been attained in
the area.
2. The applicable implementation plan has been fully approved by
EPA under section 110(k).
3. EPA has determined that improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from the
SIP, Federal regulations, and other permanent and enforceable
reductions.
4. EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan, including a
contingency plan, for the area under section 175A of the CAA.
5. The State has met all applicable requirements for the area under
section 110 and part D.
Sections III (Determination of Attainment), IV (New Hampshire's
Approved State Implementation Plan), V (Permanent and Enforceable
Emission Reductions), VI (Requirements for the Area Under Section 110
and Part D) and VII (Maintenance Plan) of this notice describe how New
Hampshire meets each of these criteria for the Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area.
III. Determination of Attainment
As stated in the April 23, 2014 ``Guidance for 1-Hour
SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions,'' (EPA's April 23,
2014 Guidance) for SO2, there are two components needed to
support an attainment determination: (1) A review of representative air
quality monitoring data, and (2) a further analysis, generally
requiring air quality modeling, to demonstrate that the entire area is
attaining the applicable standard, based on current actual emissions or
the fully implemented control strategy. New Hampshire has addressed
both components, as described in the two following sections III.A and
III.B.
A. Air Quality Monitoring Data
The first requirement for redesignation is to demonstrate that the
standard has been attained in the area. Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR
50.17, the SO2 standard is met at an ambient air quality
monitoring site when the three-year average of the annual 99th
percentile of one-hour daily maximum concentrations is less than or
equal to 75 ppb, as determined in accordance with appendix T of 40 CFR
part 50 at all relevant monitoring sites in the subject area. EPA has
reviewed the
[[Page 37189]]
ambient air monitoring data for the Central New Hampshire nonattainment
area. The Central New Hampshire nonattainment area has two
SO2 monitoring sites: One located in Concord at Hazen Drive
(Site ID #33-013-1007) \2\ and one in Pembroke (Site ID #33-013-1006).
The annual 99th percentile daily maximum SO2 concentrations
were higher at the Pembroke monitor than the Concord monitor for all
years reviewed by EPA (2012 through 2017). In New Hampshire's March 16,
2018 submittal, the State demonstrated that the vast majority of
monitored exceedances at the Pembroke monitor during the 2009-2011
period occurred when wind directions were from Merrimack Station and
toward the monitor. EPA's review of monitored air quality includes
ambient data collected in the 2012-2014 period through the 2014-2016
period, as well as data collected in the 2015-2017 period, which were
the most recent quality-assured data available at the time of EPA's
review. All data considered are complete, quality-assured, certified,
and recorded in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Concord monitor ceased collection of SO2
monitoring data at the end of 2016 due to low concentrations
measured at that location.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2 shows the three-year DVs for the periods between 2012 and
2017 for the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area. For 2012, the
last year during which emissions from Merrimack Station bypassed the
FGD system (a practice that is no longer permitted except as necessary
to prevent severe damage to equipment or potential injury to facility
personnel under the State's September 1, 2016 permit), the 99th
percentile monitored daily maximum value at the Pembroke monitor was
26.9 ppb. For 2017, the first full year during which Merrimack Station
was no longer permitted to operate unless its FGD system was operating,
the 99th percentile daily maximum value at the Pembroke monitor was
16.4 ppb. Within the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area, the
maximum monitored three-year average DV for 2012-2014 was 23 ppb (31.7%
of the NAAQS), and the three-year average DV for 2015-2017 was 15 ppb
(20.0% of the NAAQS). Both values are low and show attainment with the
SO2 standard. Therefore, the SO2 monitors in the
Central New Hampshire area clearly show attainment. New Hampshire plans
to continue monitoring for SO2 at the Pembroke location.
Preliminary data for 2018 (January 1 through September 30) indicate a
99th percentile monitored daily maximum value of 11.9 ppb at the
Pembroke monitor, indicating that the area is continuing to attain the
SO2 standard.
Table 2--Monitoring Data for the Central New Hampshire Nonattainment Area for 2012 Through 2017
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual 99th percentile value (ppb) Design value (ppb)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site Name/ID No. 2017 2015-2017
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 a 2012-2014 2013-2015 2014-2016 a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concord/33-013-1007............................................... 7.7 8.6 9.5 7.2 4.9 N/A 9 8 7 N/A \b\
\b\
Pembroke/33-013-1006.............................................. 26.9 17.0 26.0 16.9 16.4 12.1 23 20 20 15
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Data from EPA's ``Air Quality Design Values'' website at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values, accessed on July 18, 2019.
\b\ The Concord monitor ceased collection of SO2 monitoring data at the end of 2016.
B. Air Quality Modeling Data
Regarding the second component of the attainment determination,
i.e., air quality modeling, EPA stated in its April 23, 2014 Guidance
that a previously submitted modeled attainment demonstration would
suffice, along with evidence that the control strategy in the SIP has
been fully implemented, to show attainment for a nonattainment area. In
New Hampshire's March 16, 2018 submittal, the State provides details
about the SO2 modeled attainment demonstration that the
State submitted to EPA on January 31, 2017 with its SO2
nonattainment area plan. As previously stated, EPA approved the State's
nonattainment area plan and attainment demonstration on June 5, 2018
(83 FR 25922). The control strategy for the nonattainment area consists
of emission limits on Merrimack Station's SO2 emission
units. Specifically, the emission limits for Merrimack Station are 7-
boiler operating day rolling averages that New Hampshire established as
being comparably stringent, using a method described in EPA's April 23,
2014 Guidance, to a 1-hour emission limit for which the attainment
demonstration was performed. Therefore, since the emission limits have
been fully implemented at Merrimack Station and are being complied
with, as discussed in section V of this notice, then New Hampshire's
attainment demonstration is a sufficient basis to show attainment for
the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area.
In its approved attainment demonstration, New Hampshire conducted
air dispersion modeling using EPA's AERMOD modeling system in a manner
consistent with the requirements and recommendations specified in
appendix W to 40 CFR part 55, known as the Guideline on Air Quality
Models (the Guideline). This modeling established the 1-hour ``critical
emission value'' of 0.54 lb/million British thermal units (mmBtu) for
emissions from Merrimack Station to attain the 1-hour SO2
NAAQS. The State established for Merrimack Station a 7-boiler operating
day emissions limit of 0.39 lb/MMBtu, determined to be comparably
stringent to the critical emissions value using a method consistent
with recommendations contained in appendix C to EPA's April 23, 2014
Guidance. Details of New Hampshire's attainment demonstration are
provided in EPA's proposal (82 FR 45242, September 28, 2017) and final
action (83 FR 25922, June 5, 2018) for the approval of New Hampshire's
nonattainment area plan and attainment demonstration.
In summary, the monitored data show attainment in the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area for all three-year periods between 2012
and 2017, inclusive. New Hampshire has demonstrated, through an
analysis of hourly wind directions correlated with the monitored
exceedances at the Pembroke monitor for the 2009-2011 period, that
Merrimack Station was responsible for the violation in the area. New
Hampshire established through its
[[Page 37190]]
attainment demonstration, air dispersion modeling that Merrimack
Station will not cause a violation of the NAAQS in the area in the
future. Therefore, EPA agrees that the Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area is currently attaining the SO2 NAAQS.
IV. New Hampshire's Approved State Implementation Plan
As described in EPA's April 23, 2014 Guidance, for EPA to
redesignate a nonattainment area to attainment, there must be a fully
approved SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA for the area with respect
to the NAAQS, without any current disapproval, finding of failure to
submit or failure to implement the SIP, or partial, conditional, or
limited approval.
EPA has determined that New Hampshire has a fully approved SIP with
respect to section 110(k). On July 8, 2016, EPA approved New
Hampshire's infrastructure SIP for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
(81 FR 44542), except for an aspect of the SIP related to notification
of neighboring states, which EPA conditionally approved, and the
interstate transport provisions, which were not included in New
Hampshire's SIP submittal. On May 25, 2017, EPA converted the
conditional approval to a full approval based on a proposed amendment
to the New Hampshire SIP (82 FR 24057). On December 17, 2018, EPA
approved the State's interstate transport provisions (83 FR 64470). As
stated previously, New Hampshire's nonattainment area plan for the area
was approved on June 5, 2018 (83 FR 25922). There are no elements of
the State's SIP that are subject to disapproval, finding of failure to
submit, or partial, conditional, or limited approval, with respect to
the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Therefore, the State has a fully
approved SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA and satisfies all
applicable requirements for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
V. Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions
New Hampshire established stringent emissions limits and associated
requirements for Merrimack Station on September 1, 2016 in its permit,
TP-0189, for Merrimack Station. These emission limits were achieved
through optimized operation of Merrimack Station's FGD system to more
efficiently control SO2 emissions. EPA incorporated those
permit conditions from TP-0189 into the SIP in the approval of New
Hampshire's nonattainment area plan. SO2 emissions from
Merrimack Station decreased by 21,388 tons (greater than 95%) in 2012,
the first full year of FGD operation at the facility, from the previous
year. In 2016, the facility emitted 228 tons of SO2, about
1% of its emissions in 2011.
According to EPA's review of more recent annual emissions
information from the Air Markets Program Data (AMPD) tool website for
the facility, Merrimack Station emitted 431.2 tons of SO2 in
2018,\3\ which is about 2% of its emissions in 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Annual emissions data from EPA's AMPD tool, available at
https://ampd.epa.gov/ampd/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, EPA has reviewed emissions data from Merrimack Station
to assess whether the State's federally-enforceable permit conditions
are effective in controlling emissions from the facility. Specifically,
EPA reviewed AMPD emissions data using EPA's Field Audit Checklist Tool
(FACT) \4\ for the period between September 1, 2016, when the State's
7-day emissions limit became effective, and March 31, 2019, which is
the most recent date for which emissions data are currently available.
EPA's review indicates that Merrimack Station's emissions have not
exceeded the SIP-approved SO2 emissions limit. Furthermore,
hourly emissions from Merrimack Station have been generally well below
both the 1-hour critical emissions limit, which the State demonstrated
to be comparably stringent to the permitted 7-day limit. Emissions from
Merrimack Station were only above the critical emissions value for four
individual hours since September 1, 2016, specifically: Twice in 2016,
once in 2017, and once in 2018. A spreadsheet of these data and EPA's
analysis is provided in the public docket. This operating pattern is
consistent with EPA's expectation, as stated in EPA's approval of the
State's nonattainment area plan, that ``the source is presumed
occasionally to emit more than the critical emission value but on
average, and presumably at most times, to emit well below the critical
emission value'' (83 FR 25922, June 5, 2018). In summary, EPA's review
of emissions information for Merrimack Station indicates that the
facility has not exceeded its 7-day SO2 emissions limit
contained in the TP-0189 permit, and the facility has rarely exceeded
the 1-hour critical emissions value, as anticipated by EPA. EPA
therefore concludes that the emissions limits incorporated into the New
Hampshire SIP for Merrimack Station are being complied with.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Field Audit Checklist Tool (FACT) version 1.2.0.1, available
for download at: www.epa.gov/airmarkets/field-audit-checklist-tool-fact. FACT provides users with metadata beyond the information
available using the AMPD website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Requirements for the Area Under Section 110 and Part D
New Hampshire has submitted information demonstrating that it meets
the requirements for the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
In demonstrating that it has met all requirements for section 110 and
part D of the CAA for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, New Hampshire
cited its Air Pollution Control statutes at Chapter 125-C of the New
Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated (RSA), and its Rules Governing the
Control of Air Pollution in the New Hampshire Code of Administrative
Rules at Env-A 100 through 4800, of which some (but not all) have been
approved into the State's SIP. As stated earlier in section IV, EPA has
approved New Hampshire's entire infrastructure SIP for SO2
in three separate actions. This prior infrastructure SIP approval
confirms that New Hampshire's SIP meets the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) to contain the basic program elements, such as
an active enforcement program and permitting program.
Section 191 of the CAA required New Hampshire to submit a part D
nonattainment SIP for the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area by
April 4, 2015. EPA issued a finding of failure to submit the required
SO2 nonattainment plan by the submittal deadline for a
number of areas, including the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area
(81 FR 14736). New Hampshire submitted a plan for the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area on January 31, 2017, and EPA approved that
plan on June 5, 2018 (83 FR 25922). Therefore, the State has met its
obligations to establish a plan for the nonattainment area under
section 191 of the CAA.
Part D includes general requirements, in subpart 1, and more
specific requirements applicable to SO2, in subpart 5, for
nonattainment areas. For purposes of evaluating this redesignation
request, the applicable section 172 SIP requirements for the Central
New Hampshire area are contained in sections 172(c)(1)-(9). A thorough
discussion of the requirements contained in section 172 can be found in
the General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, 13564,
April 16, 1992).
Section 172(c)(1) requires nonattainment area SIPs to provide for
the implementation of all reasonably available control measures (RACM)
as expeditiously as practicable and to provide for attainment of the
NAAQS. EPA's longstanding interpretation of the
[[Page 37191]]
nonattainment planning requirements of section 172 is that once an area
is attaining the NAAQS, those requirements are not applicable for
purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and therefore need not be
approved into the SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. In the 1992
General Preamble for Implementation of Title I, EPA set forth its
interpretation of applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating
redesignation requests when an area is attaining a standard (57 FR
13498, 13564, April 16, 1992). EPA noted that the requirements for
reasonable further progress (RFP) and other measures designed to
provide for attainment do not apply in evaluating redesignation
requests because those nonattainment planning requirements ``have no
meaning'' for an area that has already attained the standard. EPA's
understanding of section 172 also forms the basis of its Clean Data
Policy, which was articulated for SO2 in EPA's April 23,
2014 Guidance and it suspends a State's obligation to submit most of
the attainment planning requirements that would otherwise apply,
including an attainment demonstration and planning SIPs to provide for
RFP, RACM, and contingency measures under section 172(c)(9). Courts
have upheld EPA's interpretation of section 172(c)(1) for ``reasonably
available'' control measures and control technology as meaning only
those controls that advance attainment, which precludes the need to
require additional measures where an area is already attaining. NRDC v.
EPA, 571 F.3d 1245, 1252 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d
155, 162 (D.C. Cir. 2002); Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 744 (5th
Cir. 2002); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).\5\
Therefore, because the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area has
attained the SO2 standard, no additional measures are needed
to provide for attainment, and section 172(c)(1) requirements for an
attainment demonstration and RACM are not part of the ``applicable
implementation plan'' required to have been approved prior to
redesignation per CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In any case, in the
context of implemented measures (especially the installation of the FGD
at Merrimack Station, and establishment and incorporation into the SIP
of the conditions of TP-0189), EPA believes that New Hampshire has
satisfied the reasonably available control measures/reasonably
available control techniques (RACM/RACT) requirement for this area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Although the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has
issued a contrary opinion in the context of redesignations for ozone
and PM2.5, EPA believes that these opinions, interpreting
the applicability of the ozone and PM2.5 RACM/RACT
requirements for redesignations for those pollutants, do not address
the applicability of the RACM/RACT requirement for SO2.
See Sierra Club v. EPA, 793 F.3d 656 (6th Cir. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The other section 172 requirements that are designed to help an
area achieve attainment are the section 172(c)(2) requirement that
nonattainment plans contain provisions promoting reasonable further
progress, the requirement to submit the section 172(c)(9) contingency
measures, and the section 172(c)(6) requirement for the SIP to contain
control measures necessary to provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
These are also not required to be approved as part of the ``applicable
implementation plan'' for purposes of satisfying CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions. In
New Hampshire's March 16, 2018 submittal, as part of its maintenance
plan for the area, the State submitted an attainment inventory of the
SO2 emissions from sources in the nonattainment area. New
Hampshire chose 2011 for its base year emissions inventory, as
comprehensive emissions data was available and updated that year. The
State provided emissions inventories for 2014, the most recent year
with quality assured actual emissions for the area, and the 2018
interim year and project emissions for the 2028 maintenance year.\6\
EPA considers these inventories, which are summarized in Table 3, to
satisfy the requirement of section 172(c)(3). Merrimack Station, the
only electric generating unit (EGU) in the Central New Hampshire
nonattainment area, remains the largest source of SO2 in the
area, and emissions from Merrimack Station have declined substantially
as discussed previously. For 2011 and 2014, the emissions inventories
were based on the NEI for the respective years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ At least one interim year inventory is used to demonstrate
that emissions in the area are not expected to exceed the attainment
year inventory in the interim between the base year and the last
year of the maintenance plan. The demonstration, by means of an
interim year inventory, that the area will maintain the standard
throughout the maintenance period is derived from CAA section 175A,
which states that maintenance in the area is to be provided ``for at
least ten years after the redesignation,'' and not just in the final
year. Thus, a maintenance plan includes at least one interim year
inventory to establish that, during the period that maintenance is
projected, emissions will remain at or below the level of the
attainment year inventory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note that New Hampshire's projected inventory for the 2028
maintenance year, accounting for Merrimack Station's continued
operation under the conditions established in TP-0189, show overall
emissions in the nonattainment area about 19,046 tons lower than those
from 2011. This large reduction is expected to be sufficient to
maintain the SO2 standard. EPA is proposing to approve the
2014 emissions inventory, submitted by New Hampshire along with the
redesignation request, as meeting the section 172(c)(3) emissions
inventory requirement.
Table 3--SO2 Emissions Inventories in Tons Per Year for the Central New Hampshire Nonattainment Area a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-road Non-road
Year EGU point Non-EGU point Area sources mobile mobile Total
sources sources sources sources emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011.................................................... 22,393 115 451 15 1 22,975
2014.................................................... 1,044 63 359 14 1 1,481
2018 \b\................................................ \c\ 1,927 90 425 5 1 \c\ 2,473
2028 \b\................................................ 3,443 127 353 5 1 3,929
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ New Hampshire's emissions inventory provided emissions for each of the three partial counties in the nonattainment area. This table provides only
the area-wide emissions totals for each inventory year.
\b\ New Hampshire projected emissions for 2018 and 2028.
\c\ According to EPA's AMPD, actual emissions for Merrimack Station, the only EGU in the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area, were 431.2 tons in
2018.
[[Page 37192]]
Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources to be
allowed in an area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for
the construction and operation of new and modified major stationary
sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has determined that,
since PSD requirements will apply to new and modified major stationary
sources after redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply
with the requirement that an NSR program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the
NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale for this view is
described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled ``Part D New
Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment.'' New Hampshire has demonstrated that the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area will be able to maintain the NAAQS without
part D NSR in effect, and therefore New Hampshire does not need to have
a fully approved part D NSR program prior to approval of the
redesignation request. After redesignation, major new or modifying
stationary sources would be subject to the State's Env-A 619 Prevention
of Significant Deterioration rules and would no longer be subject to
the State's part D NSR rules. Furthermore, EPA notes that New Hampshire
does have a fully approved part D NSR program contained in its Env-A
618 Nonattainment New Source Review rules. New Hampshire's Env-A 618
and 619 rules were approved by EPA into the State's SIP on September
25, 2015 (80 FR 57722).
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted previously, EPA has already
approved a SIP for New Hampshire that meets the requirements of section
110(a)(2) applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires States to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that federally supported or funded projects
conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The
requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans,
programs, and projects that are developed, funded, or approved under
title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act
(transportation conformity) as well as to all other federally supported
or funded projects (general conformity). State transportation
conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement, and enforceability
that EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA. On
December 9, 2011, New Hampshire submitted documentation establishing
transportation conformity procedures in its SIP. EPA approved these
procedures on November 29, 2013 (78 FR 71504). Moreover, EPA interprets
the conformity SIP requirements as not applying for purposes of
evaluating a redesignation request under section 107(d) because, like
other requirements listed above, state conformity rules are still
required after redesignation and Federal conformity rules apply where
state rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th
Cir. 2001) (upholding this interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748
(December 7, 1995) (redesignation of Tampa, Florida).
Based on the preceding discussion, EPA is proposing to find that
New Hampshire has satisfied all applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation of the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area under
section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA.
VII. Maintenance Plan
CAA section 175A sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. Under
section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the
applicable NAAQS for at least ten years after the nonattainment area is
redesignated to attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, the
State must submit a revised maintenance plan demonstrating that
attainment will continue to be maintained for the ten years following
the initial ten-year period. To address the possibility of future NAAQS
violations, the maintenance plan must contain contingency measures as
EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction of any future one-hour
SO2 violations. Specifically, the maintenance plan should
address five requirements: The attainment emissions inventory,
maintenance demonstration, monitoring, verification of continued
attainment, and a contingency plan.
New Hampshire's March 16, 2018 redesignation request contains its
maintenance plan, which New Hampshire has committed to review eight
years after redesignation. New Hampshire submitted an attainment
emission inventory which addresses current emissions and projections of
future emissions for point, area, and mobile sources. Total
SO2 emissions in the nonattainment area were 22,975 tons in
the base year, 2011; 1,481 tons in the attainment year, 2014; 2,473
tons in the projected interim year, 2018; and 3,929 tons in the
projected maintenance year, 2028. See Table 3. EPA notes that actual
emissions for the interim year 2018 were considerably lower than the
State's projected emissions, indicating that the State's methods for
projecting an inventory may overestimate emissions in the area, which
lends additional confidence in the continued future attainment of the
area. Furthermore, the State indicated in its redesignation request
that the projected emissions from all sources in the Central New
Hampshire nonattainment area in 2028 are still lower than emissions
permitted under TP-0189 for Merrimack Station alone, which have been
modeled to show attainment.
New Hampshire has committed to continue to operate and maintain an
appropriate air quality monitoring network to verify the area's
attainment status, in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part
58. These data will be used to verify continued attainment.
New Hampshire has the authority to adopt, implement and enforce any
subsequent emissions control measures deemed necessary to correct any
future SO2 violations. Regarding contingency measures to
implement in the case of a future violation of the SO2
standard, New Hampshire has committed to use its enforcement authority
to promptly and aggressively address permit deviations from sources in
the Central New Hampshire area, and in particular from Merrimack
Station.
EPA proposes to find that New Hampshire's maintenance plan
adequately addresses the five basic components necessary to maintain
the SO2 standard in the New Hampshire nonattainment area.
VIII. Proposed Action
In accordance with New Hampshire's March 16, 2018 request, EPA is
proposing to redesignate the Central New Hampshire nonattainment area
from nonattainment to attainment for the 2010 1-hour primary
SO2 NAAQS. New Hampshire has demonstrated that the area is
attaining the SO2 standard, and that the improvement in air
quality is due to the permanent and enforceable permit conditions
established for the main SO2 source in the nonattainment
area. EPA is also proposing to approve the maintenance plan that New
Hampshire submitted to ensure that the area will continue to maintain
the SO2 standard. EPA is soliciting public
[[Page 37193]]
comments on the issues discussed in this notice or on other relevant
matters. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure
by submitting written comments to this proposed rule by following the
instructions listed in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal Register.
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves State law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by State law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory
action because this action is not significant under Executive Order
12866;
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: July 25, 2019.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2019-16271 Filed 7-30-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
