Finding of Failure To Attain the Primary 2010 One-Hour Sulfur Dioxide Standard for the St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana Nonattainment Area, 69210-69215 [2021-26433]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
69210
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules
and approval on an annual basis.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to find that
Wisconsin has met the EMP
requirements for its portion of the
Chicago area for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
III. What action is EPA proposing?
EPA is proposing to approve revisions
to Wisconsin’s SIP pursuant to section
110 and part D of the CAA and EPA’s
regulations, because Wisconsin’s
December 1, 2020 nonattainment plan
satisfies the requirements for the VOC
and NOX RACT, the CFVP, and the
EMP, in the Wisconsin portion of the
Chicago serious nonattainment area for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Dec 06, 2021
Jkt 256001
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: December 1, 2021.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2021–26468 Filed 12–6–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2017–0558; FRL–9308–01–
R6]
Finding of Failure To Attain the
Primary 2010 One-Hour Sulfur Dioxide
Standard for the St. Bernard Parish,
Louisiana Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to determine
that the St. Bernard Parish sulfur
dioxide (SO2) nonattainment area (‘‘St.
Bernard area’’ or ‘‘area’’) failed to attain
the primary 2010 one-hour SO2 national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the
Act) by the applicable attainment date
of October 4, 2018. This proposed
determination is based upon review of
compliance records for the area’s
primary SO2 source, the Rain CII
Carbon, LLC (Rain) facility, in addition
to dispersion modeling based on the
allowable limits showing design values
close to the SO2 NAAQS. If the EPA
finalizes this determination as
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
proposed, the State of Louisiana will be
required to submit revisions to the
Louisiana State Implementation Plan
(SIP) that, among other elements,
provide for expeditious attainment of
the 2010 SO2 standard.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 6, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2017–0558, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed. The EPA may
publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov. While all
documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may not be
publicly available due to docket file size
restrictions or content (e.g., CBI).
Publicly available docket materials are
available electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Karolina Ruan Lei, EPA Region 6 Office,
SO2 and Regional Haze Section (R6–
ARSH), 214–665–7346, ruanlei.karolina@epa.gov. Out of an
abundance of caution for members of
the public and our staff, the EPA Region
6 office will be closed to the public to
reduce the risk of transmitting COVID–
19. We encourage the public to submit
comments via https://
www.regulations.gov, as there will be a
delay in processing mail and no courier
or hand deliveries will be accepted.
Please call or email the contact listed
above if you need alternative access to
material indexed but not provided in
the docket.
E:\FR\FM\07DEP1.SGM
07DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
or ‘‘our’’ means EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. The 2010 SO2 NAAQS
B. Designations and Attainment Dates for
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
C. Louisiana’s Nonattainment SIP Revision
II. Proposed Determination
A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory
Provisions
B. Monitoring Network Considerations
C. Data Considerations and Proposed
Determination
a. Monitor Data
b. Modeling Data
c. Record of Compliance
d. EPA’s Proposed Determination
III. Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
I. Background
A. The 2010 SO2 NAAQS
Under section 109 of the Act, the EPA
has established primary and secondary
NAAQS for certain pervasive air
pollutants (referred to as ‘‘criteria
pollutants’’) and conducts periodic
reviews of the NAAQS to determine
whether they should be revised or
whether new NAAQS should be
established. The primary NAAQS
represent ambient air quality standards
the attainment and maintenance of
which the EPA has determined,
including a margin of safety, are
requisite to protect the public health.
The secondary NAAQS represent
ambient air quality standards the
attainment and maintenance of which
the EPA has determined are requisite to
protect the public welfare from any
known or anticipated adverse effects
associated with the presence of such air
pollutant in the ambient air.
Under the CAA, the EPA must
establish NAAQS for criteria pollutants,
including SO2. SO2 is primarily released
to the atmosphere through the burning
of fossil fuels by power plants and other
industrial facilities. SO2 is also emitted
from industrial processes including
metal extraction from ore and heavy
equipment that burn fuel with a high
sulfur content. Short-term exposure to
SO2 can damage the human respiratory
system and increase breathing
difficulties. Small children and people
with respiratory conditions, such as
asthma, are more sensitive to the effects
of SO2. Sulfur oxides at high
concentrations in ambient air can also
react with compounds to form small
particulates that can penetrate deeply
into the lungs and cause health
problems.
The EPA first established primary SO2
standards in 1971 at 0.14 parts per
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Dec 06, 2021
Jkt 256001
million (ppm) over a 24-hour averaging
period and 0.3 ppm over an annual
averaging period.1 In June 2010, the
EPA revised the NAAQS for SO2 to
provide increased protection of public
health, providing for revocation of the
1971 primary annual and 24-hour SO2
standards for most areas of the country
following area designations under the
new NAAQS.2 The primary 2010 SO2
NAAQS is 75 parts per billion (ppb), or
0.075 ppm, over a one-hour averaging
period.3 A violation of the 2010 onehour SO2 NAAQS occurs when the
annual 99th percentile of ambient daily
maximum one-hour average SO2
concentrations, averaged over a 3-year
period, exceeds 75 ppb.4
B. Designations and Attainment Dates
for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
Following promulgation of any new
or revised NAAQS, the EPA is required
by CAA section 107(d) to designate
areas throughout the nation as attaining
or not attaining the NAAQS. On August
5, 2013, the EPA finalized its first round
of designations for the 2010 primary
SO2 NAAQS.5 In this 2013 action, the
EPA designated 29 areas in 16 states as
nonattainment for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS, including the St. Bernard area
in Louisiana. The EPA designated the
St. Bernard area nonattainment based on
certified monitoring data for years 2009
through 2011.6 The EPA’s initial round
of designations for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS including the St. Bernard area
became effective on October 4, 2013.
Pursuant to CAA section 192(a), the
maximum attainment date for the St.
Bernard area was October 4, 2018, five
years after the effective date of the final
action designating the area as
nonattainment for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS.
C. Louisiana’s Nonattainment SIP
Revision
Section 172(c) of the CAA lists the
required components of a
nonattainment plan submittal. In
addition to an attainment
demonstration, the nonattainment plan
addresses the requirements for meeting
reasonable further progress (RFP)
toward attainment of the NAAQS,
implementation of reasonably available
control measures and reasonably
available control technology (RACM/
RACT), base-year and projection-year
emission inventories, a new source
1 See
36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971).
40 CFR 50.4(e).
3 See 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010).
4 See 40 CFR 50.17.
5 See 78 FR 47191 (August 5, 2013).
6 See 78 FR 47191, codified at 40 CFR part 81,
subpart C.
2 See
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69211
review permit program, enforceable
emissions limitations and control
measures, and contingency measures.
The attainment demonstration includes
a modeling analysis showing that the
enforceable emissions limitations and
other control measures taken by the
state will provide for RFP and
expeditious attainment of the NAAQS
(section 172(c)(2), (4), (6), and (7)).
On November 9, 2017, the Louisiana
Department of Environmental Quality
(LDEQ) submitted a nonattainment area
SIP for the St. Bernard Parish area. On
February 8, 2018, LDEQ submitted a
letter to the EPA, accompanied by an
Administrative Order on Consent
(AOC), dated February 2, 2018, executed
between LDEQ and the Rain CII Carbon,
LLC (Rain) facility, that included new
emissions limits for the Rain facility’s
cold stack and hot stack/pyroscrubber,
as well as monitoring, testing and
recordkeeping requirements. LDEQ
submitted this as a source specific SIP
revision and supplement to the 2017
nonattainment area SIP. Rain is a coke
calcining operation that includes a
waste heat recovery boiler. During
normal operations, the exhaust from the
calcining operation is routed through
the recovery boiler and then through a
scrubber and finally to the atmosphere
through what is termed the ‘‘cold
stack.’’ During start up and times when
the recovery boiler is down, emissions
are routed to the atmosphere through
what is known as the ‘‘hot stack.’’ The
modeling covers three operation
scenarios: Cold stack only operation, hot
stack only operation, and a transitional
period with emissions through both
stacks. The transition period from hot
stack to cold stack occurs in a phased
approach, gradually routing more and
more exhaust to the cold stack from the
hot stack until all exhaust is routed to
the cold stack. The emission limits in
the AOC included all operation regimes
at the facility, with differing emission
limits depending on the stage of
operation defined by a minimum or
range of flowrates and stack
temperatures of the cold and hot stacks.
On April 19, 2018, we published a
proposed rulemaking action to approve
the 2010 SO2 Primary NAAQS
Nonattainment Area SIP revision for St.
Bernard Parish.7 The April 19, 2018
action proposed approval of the
following CAA SIP elements: The
attainment demonstration for the SO2
NAAQS; enforceable emissions limits
including the AOC dated February 2,
2018, for the Rain facility; RFP plan;
RACM and RACT demonstrations;
emission inventories; and contingency
7 See
E:\FR\FM\07DEP1.SGM
83 FR 17349 (April 19, 2018).
07DEP1
69212
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
measures. We also proposed to find that
the State had demonstrated that its
current nonattainment new source
review (NNSR) program covered the
2010 one-hour SO2 NAAQS; therefore,
no revision to the SIP was required for
the NNSR element.
After the close of the public comment
period to the April 19, 2018 proposal,
the LDEQ submitted additional
information to EPA on August 24,
2018.8 The additional information was
submitted to EPA partly in response to
a public comment that expressed
concern that Rain would need to modify
the February 2018 AOC entered between
Rain and LDEQ as Rain did not believe
that it could meet the limits set forth in
the AOC without an additional
extension to the compliance dates.9 In
response to the comment, and in order
to determine feasible emission limits for
operations during transitions from
exhaust flow through the hot stack to
the cold stack, LDEQ granted an
extension of the deadline of the
February 2018 AOC on April 27, 2018.10
On August 2, 2018, Rain and LDEQ
revised their existing AOC. On August
24, 2018, LDEQ supplemented their SIP
submittal with the revised AOC and
additional modeling analysis. On
October 9, 2018, LDEQ again
supplemented their SIP with an updated
modeling analysis. The revised AOC 11
and the October 9, 2018 modeling files
served as a supplement to the November
9, 2017 and February 8, 2018 SIP
submittals and incorporated certain
additional AOC revisions (dated August
2, 2018) and supporting modeling into
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS Nonattainment
Area SIP revision for St. Bernard Parish.
On February 8, 2019, EPA proposed to
approve LDEQ’s August 24, 2018 and
October 9, 2018 submittals as a
supplement to the prior SIP submittals
(84 FR 2801). Please refer to EPA’s April
19, 2018 proposed approval and
February 8, 2019 supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking.
In a May 29, 2019 final action, EPA
approved the nonattainment SIP for the
St. Bernard area (84 FR 24712). For
additional information concerning the
St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana
8 See letter from Secretary Chuck Carr Brown to
Anne Idsal, August 24, 2018, St. Bernard 2008
Sulfur Dioxide State Implementation Plan
Supplemental Information and Executed
Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) included
in the docket for this action.
9 See the April 24, 2018 letter (in the docket to
this action) from Senator Cassidy to EPA that
referred to Rain’s need to modify the February 2,
2018 AOC.
10 See April 27, 2018 Letter from Secretary Chuck
Carr Brown to Rain in the docket for this action.
11 AOC signed by LDEQ and Rain on August 2,
2018, and submitted to EPA on August 24, 2018.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Dec 06, 2021
Jkt 256001
nonattainment SIP revision see docket
ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2017–0558
available at https://
www.regulations.gov.
II. Proposed Determination
A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory
Provisions
Section 179(c)(1) of the Act requires
the EPA to determine whether a
nonattainment area has achieved an
applicable attainment date based on the
area’s air quality as of the attainment
date. A determination of whether an
area’s air quality meets applicable
standards is generally based upon the
most recent three years of complete,
quality-assured data gathered at
established state and local air
monitoring stations (SLAMS) in a
nonattainment area and entered into the
EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS)
database.12 Data from ambient air
monitors operated by state and local
agencies in compliance with the EPA
monitoring requirements must be
submitted to AQS.13 Monitoring
agencies annually certify that these data
are accurate to the best of their
knowledge.14 All SO2 data are reviewed
to determine the area’s air quality status
in accordance with 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix T.
Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR
50.17 and in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50 Appendix T, the 2010 one-hour
annual SO2 standard is met when the
design value is less than or equal to 75
ppb. Design values are calculated by
computing the three-year average of the
annual 99th percentile daily maximum
one-hour average concentrations.15 An
SO2 one-hour primary standard design
value is valid if it encompasses three
consecutive calendar years of complete
data. A year is considered complete
when all four quarters are complete, and
a quarter is complete when at least 75
percent of the sampling days are
complete. A sampling day is considered
complete if 75 percent of the hourly
concentration values are reported; this
includes data affected by exceptional
events that have been approved for
exclusion by the Administrator.16
We note that when determining the
attainment status of SO2 nonattainment
areas, including when making
12 AQS is the EPA’s repository of ambient air
quality data.
13 See 40 CFR 58.16.
14 See 40 CFR 58.15.
15 As defined in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T
section 1(c), daily maximum 1-hour values refer to
the maximum one-hour SO2 concentration values
measured from midnight to midnight that are used
in the NAAQS computations.
16 See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T sections 1(c),
3(b), 4(c), and 5(a).
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
determinations of attainment by the
attainment date, in addition to ambient
monitoring data, the EPA may also
consider air quality dispersion modeling
and/or a demonstration that the control
strategy in the SIP has been fully
implemented.17 With regard to the use
of monitoring data for such
determinations, the EPA’s SO2
Nonattainment Area Guidance
specifically notes that ‘‘[i]f the EPA
determines that the air quality monitors
located in the affected area are located
in the area of maximum concentration,
the EPA may be able to use the data
from these monitors to make the
determination of attainment without the
use of air quality modeling data.’’ If
there are no air quality monitors located
in the affected area, or there are air
quality monitors located in the area, but
analyses show that none of the monitors
are located in the area of maximum
concentration,18 then air quality
dispersion modeling will generally be
needed to estimate SO2 concentrations
in the area. In this case, as discussed in
our proposed actions on the St. Bernard
nonattainment plan and Technical
Support Documents (TSDs),19 the
monitors are not located in the area of
expected maximum concentration,
meaning we-must also consider the
available modeling data in determining
whether the area attained by the
attainment date. When relying on a
modeling demonstration based on
allowable emissions for purposes of
determining attainment by the
attainment date, the EPA looks to
whether the emission limit or limits
were adopted and whether the relevant
source or sources were complying with
those modeled limits prior to the
attainment date. That is, when
determining attainment by the
attainment date using air quality
modeling of allowable emissions, EPA
looks to whether the state has
demonstrated that the control strategy in
the SIP has been fully implemented
(compliance records demonstrating that
the control measures have been
implemented as required by the
approved SIP). This is necessary
because a modeling demonstration
based on allowable emissions is not
itself sufficient since, without the
supporting emissions information
17 EPA, April 23, 2014 Guidance for 1-Hour SO
2
Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions (‘‘SO2
Nonattainment Area Guidance’’), page 49.
18 See section VIII.A of the SO Nonattainment
2
Area Guidance
19 See EPA’s April 19, 2018 proposed approval
(83 FR 17349), February 8, 2019 supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking (84 FR 2801) and
EPA’s Technical Support Documents, available in
the docket for this action.
E:\FR\FM\07DEP1.SGM
07DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules
reflected in the control strategy, there
would be no way to confirm that the
actual emissions were below the
modeled limits within the period under
review.
B. Monitoring Network Considerations
Section 110(a)(2)(B)(i) of the CAA
requires states to establish and operate
air monitoring networks to compile data
on ambient air quality for all criteria
pollutants. The EPA’s monitoring
requirements are specified by regulation
in 40 CFR part 58. These requirements
are applicable to state, and where
delegated, local air monitoring agencies
that operate criteria pollutant monitors.
In section 4.5 of Appendix D to 40 CFR
part 58, the EPA specifies the minimum
requirements for SO2 monitoring sites to
be classified as state or local air
monitoring stations (SLAMS). SLAMS
produce data that are eligible for
comparison with the NAAQS, and
therefore, the monitor must be an
approved federal reference method
(FRM) or federal equivalent method
(FEM), per section 2 of Appendix C to
40 CFR part 58. In St. Bernard Parish,
LDEQ operates a SLAMS monitor at
Chalmette-Vista (EPA Site ID 22–087–
0007, 24 E Chalmette Circle). In
addition, LDEQ operates a special
purpose monitor (SPM) at Meraux (EPA
Site ID 22–087–0004, 4101 Mistrot
Drive).
C. Data Considerations and Proposed
Determination
a. Monitor Data
Under 40 CFR 58.15, monitoring
agencies must certify, on an annual
basis, data collected at all SLAMS by
FRM, FEM, and special purpose
monitors (SPMs) that meet EPA quality
assurance requirements. In doing so,
monitoring agencies must certify that
the previous year of ambient
concentration and quality assurance
data are completely submitted to AQS
and that the ambient concentration data
are accurate to the best of their
knowledge.
The one-hour SO2 design values at
Chalmette Vista and Meraux monitoring
sites within the St. Bernard area for the
2013–2020 period are shown below.
69213
therefore cannot be used, on its own, to
determine that the St. Bernard Parish
area attained by the attainment date.
b. Modeling Data
LDEQ and Rain developed the onehour SO2 emission limits contained in
the August 2, 2018 AOC to ensure
compliance with the SO2 NAAQS. The
emission limits in the AOC were
TABLE 1—2013–2020 ONE-HOUR DE- effective August 2, 2018. The LDEQ
SIGN VALUES FOR THE ST. BERNARD undertook an additional modeling
analysis which also incorporated the
AREA
amended stack parameters and utilized
Chalmette Meraux more recent allowable emission rates
vista
design
from other contributing sources, an
Years
design
value
value
expanded receptor grid, and covered all
(ppb)
(ppb)
operating scenarios. The additional
2013–2015 ............................
114
19 modeling used the most recent version
2014–2016 ............................
82
16 of AERMOD and followed EPA’s
2015–2017 ............................
73
13 guidance for SIP modeling for SO2.20
2016–2018 ............................
59
10
The analysis included modeling
2017–2019 ............................
44
7
2018–2020 ............................
42
8 allowable emissions and stack
parameters for different operational
stages at the Rain facility, including
The attainment date for the area was
stand-alone operations for the waste
October 4, 2018. In order for the EPA to
heat boiler and the pyroscrubber as well
determine that the area attained by the
as transition stages between the two
October 4, 2018 attainment date based
modes of operation; a summary of the
solely on air quality monitoring data,
results is given in Table 2. The
the design value based upon complete,
modeling demonstration approved in
quality-assured monitored air quality
the nonattainment SIP demonstrates
data from three consecutive years
(2015–2017) at each eligible monitoring that compliance with the emission
site must be equal to or less than 75 ppb limits and required stack parameters in
the AOC provide for attainment, with
for the one-hour standard, and air
predicted SO2 concentrations near (just
quality modeling would need to show
below) the NAAQS if the emission
that there was an air quality monitor
limits and stack parameters are met.21
located in the area of maximum
Additional, more detailed discussion of
concentration.
Although the one-hour SO2 design
the State’s modeling is contained in the
values at the Chalmette Vista
TSD for the EPA’s proposed Approval
monitoring site located within the St.
and Promulgation of Implementation
Bernard area show a downward trend of Plans; Louisiana Attainment
SO2 concentrations less than 75 ppb for
Demonstration for the St. Bernard Parish
the one-hour standard beginning with
2010 SO2 Primary National Ambient Air
the 2015–2017 design value, this
Quality Standard Nonattainment Area
monitor is not located in the area of
published on February 8, 2019 (84 FR
maximum predicted concentration, and 2801).
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF LDEQ SUPPLEMENTAL MODELING RESULTS FOR THE ST. BERNARD PARISH SIP USING THE
EMISSION LIMITS AND STACK PARAMETERS FROM THE AOC
Operational stage
Model design value
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Waste Heat Boiler Stack Alone ....................................................................................................................................
Pyroscrubber Stack Alone ............................................................................................................................................
Transition between Pyroscrubber Stack to the Waste Heat Boiler Stack (transitional stage with maximum design
value).
c. Record of Compliance
As noted, when relying on modeling
of allowable emissions to support a
determination of whether an area has
attained by its attainment date, the EPA
20 See Appendix A, page A–1 of the SO
2
Nonattainment Area Guidance.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Dec 06, 2021
Jkt 256001
must also look at whether the control
strategy in the SIP has been fully
implemented and whether the relevant
sources in an area are complying with
the emission limits and stack
parameters required in the SIP. As
21 See
PO 00000
discussed above, the modeling, based on
the August 2, 2018 AOC limits, shows
attainment of the NAAQS with
maximum modeled concentrations just
below the 75 ppb standard. Emissions
higher than modeled limits and/or
Table 2.
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
190.8 μg/m3 (72.9 ppb).
176.6 μg/m3 (67.4 ppb).
185.6 μg/m3 (70.9 ppb).
E:\FR\FM\07DEP1.SGM
07DEP1
69214
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
actual stack parameters (flowrate or
temperature) below the modeled stack
parameters can result in downwind
concentrations higher than those
modeled. We note that Rain’s
compliance records, Title V deviation
reports, and annual stack tests since
August 2, 2018 (the effective date of
AOC) demonstrate a pattern of difficulty
complying with the SIP emission limits
at all times and difficulty in estimating
emissions and flowrates from the
pyroscrubber to demonstrate
compliance.22 During the 9-week period
between when the AOC limits became
effective (August 2, 2018) and the
attainment date (October 4, 2018), Rain
reported that deviations occurred on 7
separate days for a total duration of 27.2
hours (25.2 hours due to calculated
pyroscrubber flowrates less than the
AOC requirements, and 2 hours when
cold stack emissions exceeded the AOC
emission limits).23 Rain has since
identified the need to revise the limits
and potentially adjust the methodology
used to estimate emissions and
flowrates in the pyroscrubber that are
contained in the AOC. In March of 2019,
Rain conducted the first annual stack
test as required by the August 2, 2018
AOC.24 The 2019 stack test report found
that ‘‘the AOC hot stack equation
underestimates hot stack emissions
during most of the transition from hot
stack to cold stack’’ and ‘‘[d]uring no
hour did the combined flue gas flow and
temperature meet the description of any
transition stage.’’ The report then states
‘‘the AOC limits and conditions do not
reflect actual emissions conditions and
it is difficult to identify the appropriate
transition stage,’’ before recommending
that the August 2018 AOC’s flue gas
flow rates, temperatures, and emissions
limits for transitions stages 1, 2, and 3
be replaced with new conditions.
Generally, one stack test may not be
determinative, but the EPA believes that
it is reasonable to conclude that the
problems identified in the 2019 stack
test were significant and, in conjunction
with the 2018 semiannual monitoring
report violations, indicative that the
facility not only failed to meet the AOC
requirements during the two days of the
stack test, but likely failed to meet the
22 See deviations listed in semiannual monitoring
reports for 2018. We also note as dicta that the
source continued to experience deviations in 2019
and 2020. The semiannual monitoring reports for
2018, 2019, and 2020 as well as the 2019 and 2020
stack test reports are available in the docket for this
action.
23 See deviations listed in semiannual monitoring
report for July 1–December 31, 2018.
24 Annual stack tests are a requirement of the
August 2, 2018 AOC. The 2019 stack test was the
first annual stack test performed pursuant to this
requirement.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Dec 06, 2021
Jkt 256001
2018 AOC’s transition stage operational
requirements during the period between
the effective date of the AOC and the
attainment date.
The EPA also notes that the
semiannual monitoring report for
January through June 2020, while not
the basis or rational for our decision
making, includes additional deviations
indicating that the facility continued to
have difficulty complying with the
limits in the SIP after the attainment
date had passed. The report further
states that: ‘‘Rain continues to analyze
this and similar deviations to identify a
corrective action. The permit
requirements do not match actual startup conditions. Rain is in negotiations
with EPA and LDEQ to revise the permit
requirements to reflect actual start-up
conditions.’’
From the available information, EPA
cannot determine with certainty that the
area attained the NAAQS as the
emissions and stack parameters at times
fall outside the limits and conditions
modeled in the approved attainment
demonstration. The noted violations of
the permit limits or underestimated
emissions may have resulted in
violations of the one-hour SO2 NAAQS
in areas other than the monitored
location. Furthermore, the data
demonstrates a clear need for
development of a new attainment SIP
with revised limits that better align with
the source’s operations and modeling to
demonstrate attainment.
d. EPA’s Proposed Determination
Based on our review of the monitor,
modeling and compliance data, EPA
proposes to find that the St. Bernard
area did not attain the 2010 one-hour
SO2 NAAQS by the October 4, 2018
attainment date. The modeling data
demonstrates that the emission limits
and stack parameters in the AOC
required of the Rain facility were
necessary for the St. Bernard area to
attain the standard. However, review of
Rain’s compliance record demonstrates
that emissions have exceeded those
limits, and stack temperatures and
flowrates have not met the necessary
parameters to demonstrate attainment in
the St. Bernard area. As described in the
previous section, Rain reported
deviations during the period between
the effective date of the limits and the
attainment date. Rain has also reported
underestimation of emissions from the
hot stack when comparing estimated
emissions to the measured emissions
during the 2019 stack test indicative
that Rain has failed to meet the AOC
limits since the effective date. We also
note, without relying upon, that Rain
continued to report deviations in
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
additional stack tests and deviation
reports from 2018, 2019, and 2020.
Under CAA section 179(d)(2), if the EPA
determines that an area did not attain
the NAAQS by the applicable deadline,
the responsible air agency has up to 12
months from the effective date of the
determination to submit a revised SIP
for the area demonstrating attainment
and containing any additional measures
that the EPA may reasonably prescribe
that can be feasibly implemented in the
area in light of technological
achievability, costs, and any non-air
quality and other air quality-related
health and environmental impacts as
required. According to CAA section
179(d)(3), this revised SIP is to achieve
attainment of the one-hour SO2 NAAQS
as expeditiously as practicable, but no
later than 5 years from the effective date
of the area’s failure to attain (i.e., 5 years
after the EPA publishes a final action in
the Federal Register determining that
the nonattainment area failed to attain
the SO2 NAAQS). In addition to
triggering requirements for a new SIP
submittal, a final determination that a
nonattainment area failed to attain the
NAAQS by the attainment date would
trigger the implementation of
contingency measures adopted under
172(c)(9).
III. Proposed Action
Under CAA section 179(d)(2), the EPA
proposes to determine that the St.
Bernard Parish SO2 nonattainment area
has failed to attain the 2010 one-hour
SO2 standard of 75 ppb by the
applicable attainment date of October 4,
2018. This determination is based upon
review of (1) the state’s air quality
modeling demonstration, which showed
the emission limits and stack
parameters required at Rain, the primary
source of SO2 emission in the area, that
were necessary to provide for the area’s
attainment and (2) Rain’s available
compliance records. The state’s
dispersion modeling, which was based
on the allowable limits in the AOC,
showed that with compliance with the
limits, modeled design values were
close to the SO2 NAAQS. Rain has
demonstrated a pattern of difficulty
meeting its federally enforceable
applicable SO2 emission limits and
stack parameters (memorialized in its
Title V permit and the AOC). Emissions
have exceeded those limits, and stack
temperatures and flowrates have not
met the necessary parameters to
demonstrate attainment in the St.
Bernard area, including the deviations
noted above during the period between
the effective date of the limits and the
attainment date and reported
underestimation of emissions from the
E:\FR\FM\07DEP1.SGM
07DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules
hot stack. If finalized as proposed, the
State of Louisiana would be required
under CAA section 179(d) to submit
revisions to the SIP for the St. Bernard
area. The required SIP revision for the
area must, among other elements,
demonstrate expeditious attainment of
the SO2 standard within the time period
prescribed by CAA section 179(d) and
such additional measures as the
Administrator may reasonably prescribe
that can be feasibly implemented in the
area in light of technological
achievability, costs, and any non-air
quality and other air quality-related
health and environmental impacts. If
finalized as proposed, the SIP revisions
required under CAA section 179(d)
would be due for submittal to the EPA
no later than one year after the
publication date of the final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and therefore was not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the PRA because it does
not contain any information collection
activities.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. This action will not
impose any requirements on small
entities. This proposed action, if
finalized, would require the state to
adopt and submit SIP revisions to
satisfy CAA requirements and would
not itself directly regulate any small
entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more, as described in UMRA (2 U.S.C.
1531–1538) and does not significantly
or uniquely affect small governments.
This action itself imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local, or
tribal governments, or the private sector.
This action proposes to determine that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Dec 06, 2021
Jkt 256001
the St. Bernard Parish SO2
nonattainment area failed to attain the
SO2 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment dates. If finalized, this
determination would trigger existing
statutory timeframes for the State to
submit SIP revisions. Such a
determination in and of itself does not
impose any federal intergovernmental
mandate.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13175. The proposed finding of
failure to attain the SO2 NAAQS does
not apply to tribal areas, and the
proposed rule would not impose a
burden on Indian reservation lands or
other areas where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction within the St. Bernard
Parish SO2 nonattainment area. Thus,
this proposed 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.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern
environmental health or safety risks that
the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This proposed action
is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because the effect of this proposed
action, if finalized, would be to trigger
additional planning requirements under
the CAA. This proposed action does not
establish an environmental standard
intended to mitigate health or safety
risks.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, because it is not
a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69215
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does
not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations, lowincome populations and/or indigenous
peoples, as specified in Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The effect of this proposed action, if
finalized, would be to trigger additional
planning requirements under the CAA.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Pollution, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 1, 2021.
David Gray,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2021–26433 Filed 12–6–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
45 CFR Part 1336
RIN 0970–AC88
Native American Programs
Administration for Native
Americans (ANA), Administration for
Children and Families (ACF), U.S.
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
This notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) proposes changes to
ANA regulations to allow grant
recipients to apply for an emergency
waiver of part or all of their proposed
non-Federal share (NFS) due to
emergency circumstances.
DATES: In order to be considered,
written comments on this proposed rule
must be received on or before February
7, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number ACF–
2021–004 and/or RIN number, by the
following method:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07DEP1.SGM
07DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 232 (Tuesday, December 7, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69210-69215]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26433]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0558; FRL-9308-01-R6]
Finding of Failure To Attain the Primary 2010 One-Hour Sulfur
Dioxide Standard for the St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana Nonattainment
Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
determine that the St. Bernard Parish sulfur dioxide (SO2)
nonattainment area (``St. Bernard area'' or ``area'') failed to attain
the primary 2010 one-hour SO2 national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) by the
applicable attainment date of October 4, 2018. This proposed
determination is based upon review of compliance records for the area's
primary SO2 source, the Rain CII Carbon, LLC (Rain)
facility, in addition to dispersion modeling based on the allowable
limits showing design values close to the SO2 NAAQS. If the
EPA finalizes this determination as proposed, the State of Louisiana
will be required to submit revisions to the Louisiana State
Implementation Plan (SIP) that, among other elements, provide for
expeditious attainment of the 2010 SO2 standard.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 6, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2017-0558, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed. The EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at https://www.regulations.gov. While all documents in
the docket are listed in the index, some information may not be
publicly available due to docket file size restrictions or content
(e.g., CBI). Publicly available docket materials are available
electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Karolina Ruan Lei, EPA Region 6
Office, SO2 and Regional Haze Section (R6-ARSH), 214-665-
7346, [email protected]. Out of an abundance of caution for
members of the public and our staff, the EPA Region 6 office will be
closed to the public to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. We
encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov, as there will be a delay in processing mail and no
courier or hand deliveries will be accepted. Please call or email the
contact listed above if you need alternative access to material indexed
but not provided in the docket.
[[Page 69211]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' means EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. The 2010 SO2 NAAQS
B. Designations and Attainment Dates for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS
C. Louisiana's Nonattainment SIP Revision
II. Proposed Determination
A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
B. Monitoring Network Considerations
C. Data Considerations and Proposed Determination
a. Monitor Data
b. Modeling Data
c. Record of Compliance
d. EPA's Proposed Determination
III. Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A. The 2010 SO2 NAAQS
Under section 109 of the Act, the EPA has established primary and
secondary NAAQS for certain pervasive air pollutants (referred to as
``criteria pollutants'') and conducts periodic reviews of the NAAQS to
determine whether they should be revised or whether new NAAQS should be
established. The primary NAAQS represent ambient air quality standards
the attainment and maintenance of which the EPA has determined,
including a margin of safety, are requisite to protect the public
health. The secondary NAAQS represent ambient air quality standards the
attainment and maintenance of which the EPA has determined are
requisite to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated
adverse effects associated with the presence of such air pollutant in
the ambient air.
Under the CAA, the EPA must establish NAAQS for criteria
pollutants, including SO2. SO2 is primarily
released to the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels by power
plants and other industrial facilities. SO2 is also emitted
from industrial processes including metal extraction from ore and heavy
equipment that burn fuel with a high sulfur content. Short-term
exposure to SO2 can damage the human respiratory system and
increase breathing difficulties. Small children and people with
respiratory conditions, such as asthma, are more sensitive to the
effects of SO2. Sulfur oxides at high concentrations in
ambient air can also react with compounds to form small particulates
that can penetrate deeply into the lungs and cause health problems.
The EPA first established primary SO2 standards in 1971
at 0.14 parts per million (ppm) over a 24-hour averaging period and 0.3
ppm over an annual averaging period.\1\ In June 2010, the EPA revised
the NAAQS for SO2 to provide increased protection of public
health, providing for revocation of the 1971 primary annual and 24-hour
SO2 standards for most areas of the country following area
designations under the new NAAQS.\2\ The primary 2010 SO2
NAAQS is 75 parts per billion (ppb), or 0.075 ppm, over a one-hour
averaging period.\3\ A violation of the 2010 one-hour SO2
NAAQS occurs when the annual 99th percentile of ambient daily maximum
one-hour average SO2 concentrations, averaged over a 3-year
period, exceeds 75 ppb.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971).
\2\ See 40 CFR 50.4(e).
\3\ See 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010).
\4\ See 40 CFR 50.17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Designations and Attainment Dates for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
Following promulgation of any new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required by CAA section 107(d) to designate areas throughout the nation
as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. On August 5, 2013, the EPA
finalized its first round of designations for the 2010 primary
SO2 NAAQS.\5\ In this 2013 action, the EPA designated 29
areas in 16 states as nonattainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS,
including the St. Bernard area in Louisiana. The EPA designated the St.
Bernard area nonattainment based on certified monitoring data for years
2009 through 2011.\6\ The EPA's initial round of designations for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS including the St. Bernard area became
effective on October 4, 2013. Pursuant to CAA section 192(a), the
maximum attainment date for the St. Bernard area was October 4, 2018,
five years after the effective date of the final action designating the
area as nonattainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 78 FR 47191 (August 5, 2013).
\6\ See 78 FR 47191, codified at 40 CFR part 81, subpart C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Louisiana's Nonattainment SIP Revision
Section 172(c) of the CAA lists the required components of a
nonattainment plan submittal. In addition to an attainment
demonstration, the nonattainment plan addresses the requirements for
meeting reasonable further progress (RFP) toward attainment of the
NAAQS, implementation of reasonably available control measures and
reasonably available control technology (RACM/RACT), base-year and
projection-year emission inventories, a new source review permit
program, enforceable emissions limitations and control measures, and
contingency measures. The attainment demonstration includes a modeling
analysis showing that the enforceable emissions limitations and other
control measures taken by the state will provide for RFP and
expeditious attainment of the NAAQS (section 172(c)(2), (4), (6), and
(7)).
On November 9, 2017, the Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality (LDEQ) submitted a nonattainment area SIP for the St. Bernard
Parish area. On February 8, 2018, LDEQ submitted a letter to the EPA,
accompanied by an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC), dated February
2, 2018, executed between LDEQ and the Rain CII Carbon, LLC (Rain)
facility, that included new emissions limits for the Rain facility's
cold stack and hot stack/pyroscrubber, as well as monitoring, testing
and recordkeeping requirements. LDEQ submitted this as a source
specific SIP revision and supplement to the 2017 nonattainment area
SIP. Rain is a coke calcining operation that includes a waste heat
recovery boiler. During normal operations, the exhaust from the
calcining operation is routed through the recovery boiler and then
through a scrubber and finally to the atmosphere through what is termed
the ``cold stack.'' During start up and times when the recovery boiler
is down, emissions are routed to the atmosphere through what is known
as the ``hot stack.'' The modeling covers three operation scenarios:
Cold stack only operation, hot stack only operation, and a transitional
period with emissions through both stacks. The transition period from
hot stack to cold stack occurs in a phased approach, gradually routing
more and more exhaust to the cold stack from the hot stack until all
exhaust is routed to the cold stack. The emission limits in the AOC
included all operation regimes at the facility, with differing emission
limits depending on the stage of operation defined by a minimum or
range of flowrates and stack temperatures of the cold and hot stacks.
On April 19, 2018, we published a proposed rulemaking action to approve
the 2010 SO2 Primary NAAQS Nonattainment Area SIP revision
for St. Bernard Parish.\7\ The April 19, 2018 action proposed approval
of the following CAA SIP elements: The attainment demonstration for the
SO2 NAAQS; enforceable emissions limits including the AOC
dated February 2, 2018, for the Rain facility; RFP plan; RACM and RACT
demonstrations; emission inventories; and contingency
[[Page 69212]]
measures. We also proposed to find that the State had demonstrated that
its current nonattainment new source review (NNSR) program covered the
2010 one-hour SO2 NAAQS; therefore, no revision to the SIP
was required for the NNSR element.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 83 FR 17349 (April 19, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After the close of the public comment period to the April 19, 2018
proposal, the LDEQ submitted additional information to EPA on August
24, 2018.\8\ The additional information was submitted to EPA partly in
response to a public comment that expressed concern that Rain would
need to modify the February 2018 AOC entered between Rain and LDEQ as
Rain did not believe that it could meet the limits set forth in the AOC
without an additional extension to the compliance dates.\9\ In response
to the comment, and in order to determine feasible emission limits for
operations during transitions from exhaust flow through the hot stack
to the cold stack, LDEQ granted an extension of the deadline of the
February 2018 AOC on April 27, 2018.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See letter from Secretary Chuck Carr Brown to Anne Idsal,
August 24, 2018, St. Bernard 2008 Sulfur Dioxide State
Implementation Plan Supplemental Information and Executed
Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) included in the docket for
this action.
\9\ See the April 24, 2018 letter (in the docket to this action)
from Senator Cassidy to EPA that referred to Rain's need to modify
the February 2, 2018 AOC.
\10\ See April 27, 2018 Letter from Secretary Chuck Carr Brown
to Rain in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 2, 2018, Rain and LDEQ revised their existing AOC. On
August 24, 2018, LDEQ supplemented their SIP submittal with the revised
AOC and additional modeling analysis. On October 9, 2018, LDEQ again
supplemented their SIP with an updated modeling analysis. The revised
AOC \11\ and the October 9, 2018 modeling files served as a supplement
to the November 9, 2017 and February 8, 2018 SIP submittals and
incorporated certain additional AOC revisions (dated August 2, 2018)
and supporting modeling into the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
Nonattainment Area SIP revision for St. Bernard Parish. On February 8,
2019, EPA proposed to approve LDEQ's August 24, 2018 and October 9,
2018 submittals as a supplement to the prior SIP submittals (84 FR
2801). Please refer to EPA's April 19, 2018 proposed approval and
February 8, 2019 supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ AOC signed by LDEQ and Rain on August 2, 2018, and
submitted to EPA on August 24, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a May 29, 2019 final action, EPA approved the nonattainment SIP
for the St. Bernard area (84 FR 24712). For additional information
concerning the St. Bernard Parish, Louisiana nonattainment SIP revision
see docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2017-0558 available at https://www.regulations.gov.
II. Proposed Determination
A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
Section 179(c)(1) of the Act requires the EPA to determine whether
a nonattainment area has achieved an applicable attainment date based
on the area's air quality as of the attainment date. A determination of
whether an area's air quality meets applicable standards is generally
based upon the most recent three years of complete, quality-assured
data gathered at established state and local air monitoring stations
(SLAMS) in a nonattainment area and entered into the EPA's Air Quality
System (AQS) database.\12\ Data from ambient air monitors operated by
state and local agencies in compliance with the EPA monitoring
requirements must be submitted to AQS.\13\ Monitoring agencies annually
certify that these data are accurate to the best of their
knowledge.\14\ All SO2 data are reviewed to determine the
area's air quality status in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix
T.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ AQS is the EPA's repository of ambient air quality data.
\13\ See 40 CFR 58.16.
\14\ See 40 CFR 58.15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR 50.17 and in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50 Appendix T, the 2010 one-hour annual SO2 standard is
met when the design value is less than or equal to 75 ppb. Design
values are calculated by computing the three-year average of the annual
99th percentile daily maximum one-hour average concentrations.\15\ An
SO2 one-hour primary standard design value is valid if it
encompasses three consecutive calendar years of complete data. A year
is considered complete when all four quarters are complete, and a
quarter is complete when at least 75 percent of the sampling days are
complete. A sampling day is considered complete if 75 percent of the
hourly concentration values are reported; this includes data affected
by exceptional events that have been approved for exclusion by the
Administrator.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ As defined in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T section 1(c),
daily maximum 1-hour values refer to the maximum one-hour
SO2 concentration values measured from midnight to
midnight that are used in the NAAQS computations.
\16\ See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T sections 1(c), 3(b), 4(c),
and 5(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We note that when determining the attainment status of
SO2 nonattainment areas, including when making
determinations of attainment by the attainment date, in addition to
ambient monitoring data, the EPA may also consider air quality
dispersion modeling and/or a demonstration that the control strategy in
the SIP has been fully implemented.\17\ With regard to the use of
monitoring data for such determinations, the EPA's SO2
Nonattainment Area Guidance specifically notes that ``[i]f the EPA
determines that the air quality monitors located in the affected area
are located in the area of maximum concentration, the EPA may be able
to use the data from these monitors to make the determination of
attainment without the use of air quality modeling data.'' If there are
no air quality monitors located in the affected area, or there are air
quality monitors located in the area, but analyses show that none of
the monitors are located in the area of maximum concentration,\18\ then
air quality dispersion modeling will generally be needed to estimate
SO2 concentrations in the area. In this case, as discussed
in our proposed actions on the St. Bernard nonattainment plan and
Technical Support Documents (TSDs),\19\ the monitors are not located in
the area of expected maximum concentration, meaning we-must also
consider the available modeling data in determining whether the area
attained by the attainment date. When relying on a modeling
demonstration based on allowable emissions for purposes of determining
attainment by the attainment date, the EPA looks to whether the
emission limit or limits were adopted and whether the relevant source
or sources were complying with those modeled limits prior to the
attainment date. That is, when determining attainment by the attainment
date using air quality modeling of allowable emissions, EPA looks to
whether the state has demonstrated that the control strategy in the SIP
has been fully implemented (compliance records demonstrating that the
control measures have been implemented as required by the approved
SIP). This is necessary because a modeling demonstration based on
allowable emissions is not itself sufficient since, without the
supporting emissions information
[[Page 69213]]
reflected in the control strategy, there would be no way to confirm
that the actual emissions were below the modeled limits within the
period under review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ EPA, April 23, 2014 Guidance for 1-Hour SO2
Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions (``SO2 Nonattainment
Area Guidance''), page 49.
\18\ See section VIII.A of the SO2 Nonattainment Area
Guidance
\19\ See EPA's April 19, 2018 proposed approval (83 FR 17349),
February 8, 2019 supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (84 FR
2801) and EPA's Technical Support Documents, available in the docket
for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Monitoring Network Considerations
Section 110(a)(2)(B)(i) of the CAA requires states to establish and
operate air monitoring networks to compile data on ambient air quality
for all criteria pollutants. The EPA's monitoring requirements are
specified by regulation in 40 CFR part 58. These requirements are
applicable to state, and where delegated, local air monitoring agencies
that operate criteria pollutant monitors. In section 4.5 of Appendix D
to 40 CFR part 58, the EPA specifies the minimum requirements for
SO2 monitoring sites to be classified as state or local air
monitoring stations (SLAMS). SLAMS produce data that are eligible for
comparison with the NAAQS, and therefore, the monitor must be an
approved federal reference method (FRM) or federal equivalent method
(FEM), per section 2 of Appendix C to 40 CFR part 58. In St. Bernard
Parish, LDEQ operates a SLAMS monitor at Chalmette-Vista (EPA Site ID
22-087-0007, 24 E Chalmette Circle). In addition, LDEQ operates a
special purpose monitor (SPM) at Meraux (EPA Site ID 22-087-0004, 4101
Mistrot Drive).
C. Data Considerations and Proposed Determination
a. Monitor Data
Under 40 CFR 58.15, monitoring agencies must certify, on an annual
basis, data collected at all SLAMS by FRM, FEM, and special purpose
monitors (SPMs) that meet EPA quality assurance requirements. In doing
so, monitoring agencies must certify that the previous year of ambient
concentration and quality assurance data are completely submitted to
AQS and that the ambient concentration data are accurate to the best of
their knowledge.
The one-hour SO2 design values at Chalmette Vista and
Meraux monitoring sites within the St. Bernard area for the 2013-2020
period are shown below.
Table 1--2013-2020 One-Hour Design Values for the St. Bernard Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chalmette
vista Meraux
Years design design
value value
(ppb) (ppb)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2013-2015.......................................... 114 19
2014-2016.......................................... 82 16
2015-2017.......................................... 73 13
2016-2018.......................................... 59 10
2017-2019.......................................... 44 7
2018-2020.......................................... 42 8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The attainment date for the area was October 4, 2018. In order for
the EPA to determine that the area attained by the October 4, 2018
attainment date based solely on air quality monitoring data, the design
value based upon complete, quality-assured monitored air quality data
from three consecutive years (2015-2017) at each eligible monitoring
site must be equal to or less than 75 ppb for the one-hour standard,
and air quality modeling would need to show that there was an air
quality monitor located in the area of maximum concentration.
Although the one-hour SO2 design values at the Chalmette
Vista monitoring site located within the St. Bernard area show a
downward trend of SO2 concentrations less than 75 ppb for
the one-hour standard beginning with the 2015-2017 design value, this
monitor is not located in the area of maximum predicted concentration,
and therefore cannot be used, on its own, to determine that the St.
Bernard Parish area attained by the attainment date.
b. Modeling Data
LDEQ and Rain developed the one-hour SO2 emission limits
contained in the August 2, 2018 AOC to ensure compliance with the
SO2 NAAQS. The emission limits in the AOC were effective
August 2, 2018. The LDEQ undertook an additional modeling analysis
which also incorporated the amended stack parameters and utilized more
recent allowable emission rates from other contributing sources, an
expanded receptor grid, and covered all operating scenarios. The
additional modeling used the most recent version of AERMOD and followed
EPA's guidance for SIP modeling for SO2.\20\ The analysis
included modeling allowable emissions and stack parameters for
different operational stages at the Rain facility, including stand-
alone operations for the waste heat boiler and the pyroscrubber as well
as transition stages between the two modes of operation; a summary of
the results is given in Table 2. The modeling demonstration approved in
the nonattainment SIP demonstrates that compliance with the emission
limits and required stack parameters in the AOC provide for attainment,
with predicted SO2 concentrations near (just below) the
NAAQS if the emission limits and stack parameters are met.\21\
Additional, more detailed discussion of the State's modeling is
contained in the TSD for the EPA's proposed Approval and Promulgation
of Implementation Plans; Louisiana Attainment Demonstration for the St.
Bernard Parish 2010 SO2 Primary National Ambient Air Quality
Standard Nonattainment Area published on February 8, 2019 (84 FR 2801).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Appendix A, page A-1 of the SO2
Nonattainment Area Guidance.
\21\ See Table 2.
Table 2--Summary of LDEQ Supplemental Modeling Results for the St. Bernard Parish SIP Using the Emission Limits
and Stack Parameters From the AOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operational stage Model design value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Waste Heat Boiler Stack Alone............................. 190.8 [micro]g/m\3\ (72.9 ppb).
Pyroscrubber Stack Alone.................................. 176.6 [micro]g/m\3\ (67.4 ppb).
Transition between Pyroscrubber Stack to the Waste Heat 185.6 [micro]g/m\3\ (70.9 ppb).
Boiler Stack (transitional stage with maximum design
value).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Record of Compliance
As noted, when relying on modeling of allowable emissions to
support a determination of whether an area has attained by its
attainment date, the EPA must also look at whether the control strategy
in the SIP has been fully implemented and whether the relevant sources
in an area are complying with the emission limits and stack parameters
required in the SIP. As discussed above, the modeling, based on the
August 2, 2018 AOC limits, shows attainment of the NAAQS with maximum
modeled concentrations just below the 75 ppb standard. Emissions higher
than modeled limits and/or
[[Page 69214]]
actual stack parameters (flowrate or temperature) below the modeled
stack parameters can result in downwind concentrations higher than
those modeled. We note that Rain's compliance records, Title V
deviation reports, and annual stack tests since August 2, 2018 (the
effective date of AOC) demonstrate a pattern of difficulty complying
with the SIP emission limits at all times and difficulty in estimating
emissions and flowrates from the pyroscrubber to demonstrate
compliance.\22\ During the 9-week period between when the AOC limits
became effective (August 2, 2018) and the attainment date (October 4,
2018), Rain reported that deviations occurred on 7 separate days for a
total duration of 27.2 hours (25.2 hours due to calculated pyroscrubber
flowrates less than the AOC requirements, and 2 hours when cold stack
emissions exceeded the AOC emission limits).\23\ Rain has since
identified the need to revise the limits and potentially adjust the
methodology used to estimate emissions and flowrates in the
pyroscrubber that are contained in the AOC. In March of 2019, Rain
conducted the first annual stack test as required by the August 2, 2018
AOC.\24\ The 2019 stack test report found that ``the AOC hot stack
equation underestimates hot stack emissions during most of the
transition from hot stack to cold stack'' and ``[d]uring no hour did
the combined flue gas flow and temperature meet the description of any
transition stage.'' The report then states ``the AOC limits and
conditions do not reflect actual emissions conditions and it is
difficult to identify the appropriate transition stage,'' before
recommending that the August 2018 AOC's flue gas flow rates,
temperatures, and emissions limits for transitions stages 1, 2, and 3
be replaced with new conditions. Generally, one stack test may not be
determinative, but the EPA believes that it is reasonable to conclude
that the problems identified in the 2019 stack test were significant
and, in conjunction with the 2018 semiannual monitoring report
violations, indicative that the facility not only failed to meet the
AOC requirements during the two days of the stack test, but likely
failed to meet the 2018 AOC's transition stage operational requirements
during the period between the effective date of the AOC and the
attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See deviations listed in semiannual monitoring reports for
2018. We also note as dicta that the source continued to experience
deviations in 2019 and 2020. The semiannual monitoring reports for
2018, 2019, and 2020 as well as the 2019 and 2020 stack test reports
are available in the docket for this action.
\23\ See deviations listed in semiannual monitoring report for
July 1-December 31, 2018.
\24\ Annual stack tests are a requirement of the August 2, 2018
AOC. The 2019 stack test was the first annual stack test performed
pursuant to this requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA also notes that the semiannual monitoring report for
January through June 2020, while not the basis or rational for our
decision making, includes additional deviations indicating that the
facility continued to have difficulty complying with the limits in the
SIP after the attainment date had passed. The report further states
that: ``Rain continues to analyze this and similar deviations to
identify a corrective action. The permit requirements do not match
actual start-up conditions. Rain is in negotiations with EPA and LDEQ
to revise the permit requirements to reflect actual start-up
conditions.''
From the available information, EPA cannot determine with certainty
that the area attained the NAAQS as the emissions and stack parameters
at times fall outside the limits and conditions modeled in the approved
attainment demonstration. The noted violations of the permit limits or
underestimated emissions may have resulted in violations of the one-
hour SO2 NAAQS in areas other than the monitored location.
Furthermore, the data demonstrates a clear need for development of a
new attainment SIP with revised limits that better align with the
source's operations and modeling to demonstrate attainment.
d. EPA's Proposed Determination
Based on our review of the monitor, modeling and compliance data,
EPA proposes to find that the St. Bernard area did not attain the 2010
one-hour SO2 NAAQS by the October 4, 2018 attainment date.
The modeling data demonstrates that the emission limits and stack
parameters in the AOC required of the Rain facility were necessary for
the St. Bernard area to attain the standard. However, review of Rain's
compliance record demonstrates that emissions have exceeded those
limits, and stack temperatures and flowrates have not met the necessary
parameters to demonstrate attainment in the St. Bernard area. As
described in the previous section, Rain reported deviations during the
period between the effective date of the limits and the attainment
date. Rain has also reported underestimation of emissions from the hot
stack when comparing estimated emissions to the measured emissions
during the 2019 stack test indicative that Rain has failed to meet the
AOC limits since the effective date. We also note, without relying
upon, that Rain continued to report deviations in additional stack
tests and deviation reports from 2018, 2019, and 2020. Under CAA
section 179(d)(2), if the EPA determines that an area did not attain
the NAAQS by the applicable deadline, the responsible air agency has up
to 12 months from the effective date of the determination to submit a
revised SIP for the area demonstrating attainment and containing any
additional measures that the EPA may reasonably prescribe that can be
feasibly implemented in the area in light of technological
achievability, costs, and any non-air quality and other air quality-
related health and environmental impacts as required. According to CAA
section 179(d)(3), this revised SIP is to achieve attainment of the
one-hour SO2 NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but no
later than 5 years from the effective date of the area's failure to
attain (i.e., 5 years after the EPA publishes a final action in the
Federal Register determining that the nonattainment area failed to
attain the SO2 NAAQS). In addition to triggering
requirements for a new SIP submittal, a final determination that a
nonattainment area failed to attain the NAAQS by the attainment date
would trigger the implementation of contingency measures adopted under
172(c)(9).
III. Proposed Action
Under CAA section 179(d)(2), the EPA proposes to determine that the
St. Bernard Parish SO2 nonattainment area has failed to
attain the 2010 one-hour SO2 standard of 75 ppb by the
applicable attainment date of October 4, 2018. This determination is
based upon review of (1) the state's air quality modeling
demonstration, which showed the emission limits and stack parameters
required at Rain, the primary source of SO2 emission in the
area, that were necessary to provide for the area's attainment and (2)
Rain's available compliance records. The state's dispersion modeling,
which was based on the allowable limits in the AOC, showed that with
compliance with the limits, modeled design values were close to the
SO2 NAAQS. Rain has demonstrated a pattern of difficulty
meeting its federally enforceable applicable SO2 emission
limits and stack parameters (memorialized in its Title V permit and the
AOC). Emissions have exceeded those limits, and stack temperatures and
flowrates have not met the necessary parameters to demonstrate
attainment in the St. Bernard area, including the deviations noted
above during the period between the effective date of the limits and
the attainment date and reported underestimation of emissions from the
[[Page 69215]]
hot stack. If finalized as proposed, the State of Louisiana would be
required under CAA section 179(d) to submit revisions to the SIP for
the St. Bernard area. The required SIP revision for the area must,
among other elements, demonstrate expeditious attainment of the
SO2 standard within the time period prescribed by CAA
section 179(d) and such additional measures as the Administrator may
reasonably prescribe that can be feasibly implemented in the area in
light of technological achievability, costs, and any non-air quality
and other air quality-related health and environmental impacts. If
finalized as proposed, the SIP revisions required under CAA section
179(d) would be due for submittal to the EPA no later than one year
after the publication date of the final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and therefore
was not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the PRA because it does not contain any information
collection activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This
proposed action, if finalized, would require the state to adopt and
submit SIP revisions to satisfy CAA requirements and would not itself
directly regulate any small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 million
or more, as described in UMRA (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action itself
imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments,
or the private sector. This action proposes to determine that the St.
Bernard Parish SO2 nonattainment area failed to attain the
SO2 NAAQS by the applicable attainment dates. If finalized,
this determination would trigger existing statutory timeframes for the
State to submit SIP revisions. Such a determination in and of itself
does not impose any federal intergovernmental mandate.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. The proposed finding of failure to attain the
SO2 NAAQS does not apply to tribal areas, and the proposed
rule would not impose a burden on Indian reservation lands or other
areas where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe
has jurisdiction within the St. Bernard Parish SO2
nonattainment area. Thus, this proposed 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.
G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This proposed action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because the effect of this proposed
action, if finalized, would be to trigger additional planning
requirements under the CAA. This proposed action does not establish an
environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because
it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The
effect of this proposed action, if finalized, would be to trigger
additional planning requirements under the CAA.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Pollution, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 1, 2021.
David Gray,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2021-26433 Filed 12-6-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
