Air Plan Approval; Maryland; Clean Data Determination and Approval of Select Attainment Plan Elements for the Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County, Maryland Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area, 51006-51016 [2022-17341]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
51006
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 87, No. 160
Friday, August 19, 2022
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 983
[Doc. No. AMS–SC–22–0040]
Pistachios Grown in California,
Arizona, and New Mexico; Continuance
Referendum
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION: Referendum order.
AGENCY:
This document directs that a
referendum be conducted among
eligible pistachio producers to
determine whether they favor
continuance of the marketing order
regulating the handling of pistachios
grown in California, Arizona, and New
Mexico.
DATES: The referendum will be
conducted from October 31 through
November 18, 2022. To vote in this
referendum, producers must have
produced pistachios within the
designated production area during the
period September 1, 2021, through
August 31, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the marketing
order may be obtained from the office of
the referendum agents at 2202 Monterey
Street, Suite 102B, Fresno, California
93721–3129; Telephone: (559) 538–
1670; or the Office of the Docket Clerk,
Market Development Division, Specialty
Crops Program, AMS, USDA, 1400
Independence Avenue SW, STOP 0237,
Washington, DC 20250–0237;
Telephone: (202) 720–2491; or on the
internet https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Peter R. Sommers or Gary D. Olson,
Western Region Branch, Market
Development Division, Specialty Crops
Program, AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey
Street, Suite 102B, Fresno, California
93721–3129; Telephone: (559) 538–
1670, or Email: PeterR.Sommers@
usda.gov or GaryD.Olson@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to Marketing Agreement and Order No.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
983, as amended (7 CFR part 983),
hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Order,’’
and the applicable provisions of the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act
of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674),
hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act,’’ it is
hereby directed that a referendum be
conducted to ascertain whether
continuance of the Order is favored by
the producers. The referendum shall be
conducted from October 31 to
November 18, 2022, among eligible
pistachio producers in the production
area. Only pistachio producers, who
were engaged in the production of
pistachios during the period of
September 1, 2021, through August 31,
2022, may participate in the
continuance referendum.
USDA has determined that
continuance referenda are an effective
means for determining whether
producers favor continuation of
marketing order programs. The Order
will be deemed as favored by the
producers if at least two-thirds of
producers voting in the referendum, or
producers of at least two-thirds of the
volume represented in the referendum,
approve its continuance. In evaluating
the merits of continuance versus
termination, USDA will not exclusively
consider the results of the continuance
referendum. USDA will also consider all
other relevant information regarding the
operation of the Order and the relative
benefits and disadvantages to producers,
handlers, and consumers in order to
determine whether continued operation
of the Order would tend to effectuate
the declared policy of the Act.
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35), the ballots used in the
referendum have been approved by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and have been assigned OMB
No. 0581–0215 Pistachios Grown in
California, Arizona, and New Mexico. It
has been estimated that it will take an
average of 20 minutes for each of the
approximately 1,624 producers of
California, Arizona, and New Mexico
pistachios to cast a ballot. Participation
is voluntary. Ballots postmarked after
November 18, 2022, will not be
included in the vote tabulation.
Peter R. Sommers and Gary D. Olson
of the Western Region Branch, Market
Development Division, Specialty Crops
Program, AMS, USDA, are hereby
designated as the referendum agents of
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct
this referendum. The procedure
applicable to the referendum shall be
the ‘‘Procedure for the Conduct of
Referenda in Connection with
Marketing Orders for Fruits, Vegetables,
and Nuts Pursuant to the Agricultural
Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as
Amended’’ (7 CFR part 900.400–
900.407).
Ballots will be mailed to all producers
of record and may also be obtained from
the referendum agents or their
appointees.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 983
Marketing agreements, Nuts,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
Erin Morris,
Associate Administrator, Agricultural
Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2022–17825 Filed 8–18–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2020–0325; FRL–10118–
01–R3]
Air Plan Approval; Maryland; Clean
Data Determination and Approval of
Select Attainment Plan Elements for
the Anne Arundel County and
Baltimore County, Maryland Sulfur
Dioxide Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to determine
that the Anne Arundel County and
Baltimore County, Maryland sulfur
dioxide (SO2) nonattainment area has
attained the 2010 primary SO2 national
ambient air quality standard (2010 SO2
NAAQS). In designated nonattainment
areas where air quality data demonstrate
that the NAAQS have been attained,
EPA interprets certain requirements of
the Clean Air Act (CAA) as no longer
applicable for so long as air quality
continues to meet the standard. Under
this Clean Data Policy, EPA may issue
a determination of attainment, known as
a clean data determination (CDD), that
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 160 / Friday, August 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules
a nonattainment area is attaining the
relevant NAAQS. If finalized, this
proposed CDD would suspend the
obligation to submit certain attainment
planning requirements for the
nonattainment area for as long as the
area continues to attain the 2010 SO2
NAAQS.
EPA is also simultaneously proposing
to approve certain elements of the
attainment plan contained in
Maryland’s state implementation plan
(SIP) revision for the Anne Arundel
County and Baltimore County SO2
nonattainment area (referred to hereafter
as the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
Area, or simply the Area), submitted to
EPA on January 31, 2020. The
requirement to submit the elements that
EPA is proposing to approve would not
be suspended under this proposed CDD,
as set forth in EPA’s Clean Data Policy,
because EPA considers them to be
independent of attaining the NAAQS
under the CAA. Finally, EPA is
approving as SIP strengthening
measures certain emission limit
requirements on large SO2 emission
sources that were submitted as part of
Maryland’s attainment plan for the
nonattainment area. This determination
of attainment and approval of certain
elements and emissions limitations into
the SIP does not redesignate the Area to
attainment or constitute a full approval
of the submitted attainment plan or of
a maintenance plan. This action is being
taken under the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before September 19,
2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03–
OAR–2020–0325 at
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
gordon.mike@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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Rehn, Planning & Implementation
Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, Four Penn Center,
1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The
telephone number is (215) 814–2176.
Mr. Rehn can also be reached via
electronic mail at rehn.brian@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we refer
to EPA.
I. Background
On June 22, 2010, EPA published in
the Federal Register a strengthened,
primary 1-hour SO2 NAAQS,
establishing a new standard at a level of
75 parts per billion (ppb), based on the
3-year average of the annual 99th
percentile of daily maximum 1-hour
average concentrations of SO2.1
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, EPA is required to
designate all areas of the country area as
either ‘‘attainment,’’ ‘‘nonattainment,’’
or ‘‘unclassifiable.’’ CAA section
107(d)(1). On July 12, 2016, EPA
published a final rule designating the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area
as nonattainment for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS, based on air quality modeling
and ambient air monitoring data. 81 FR
45039.
The major SO2-emitting facilities in
this Area at that time were three
electrical generating units (EGUs)—
Herbert A. Wagner (Wagner), with two
coal-fired units, one #6 fuel oil-fired
unit and one dual fuel (natural gas and
fuel oil) unit; the Brandon Shores
Generating Station (Brandon Shores),
with two coal-fired units; and the
Charles P. Crane Generating Station
(Crane), with its two coal-fired units.
The other major SO2 source in the Area
is the Wheelabrator Baltimore waste-toenergy incinerator. The nonattainment
area is comprised of portions of Anne
Arundel and Baltimore Counties that are
within 26.8 kilometers of Wagner’s Unit
3 stack, which is located at 39.17765
1 On June 2, 2010, EPA signed the final rule titled,
‘‘Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard
for Sulfur Dioxide,’’ 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010),
codified at 40 CFR part 50.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
51007
North latitude, 76.52752 West
longitude.2
The CAA directs states containing an
area designated nonattainment for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS to develop and
submit a nonattainment area (NAA) SIP
to EPA within 18 months of the effective
date of an area’s designation as
nonattainment. The NAA SIP (also
referred to as an attainment plan) must
meet the requirements of subparts l and
5 of part D, of Title 1 of the CAA, and
provide for attainment of the NAAQS by
the applicable statutory attainment
date.3 To be approved by the EPA under
section 192(a), these NAA SIPs must
provide for attainment of the NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later
than five years from the effective date of
designation. The Maryland Department
of Environment (MDE) was required to
prepare and submit to EPA a NAA SIP
by March 12, 2018 to bring the Area into
attainment by the attainment date of
September 12, 2021. However,
Maryland failed to submit a complete
attainment plan for the Area by the
March 12, 2018 deadline. On September
20, 2019, EPA issued a finding of failure
to submit (FFS) regarding the required
attainment plan SIP.4
The September 20, 2019 FFS resulted
in the initiation of an 18-month clock
toward imposition of sanctions upon the
state under CAA section 179, unless by
that date the state has submitted to EPA
an SO2 SIP and EPA has determined it
to be complete and notified the state it
has corrected the deficiency that gave
rise to the FFS.5 The FFS action also
started a two-year clock by which EPA
is required under CAA section 110(c) to
promulgate a Federal Implementation
Plan (FIP) for the area, unless the state
submits, and EPA approves, a SIP for
the area before that date. Maryland
submitted an attainment plan SIP for the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area
on January 31, 2020. On March 30,
2020, EPA determined Maryland’s
attainment plan SIP complete under the
requirements for completeness under
CAA section 110(k), terminating the
sanctions clock started by the FFS
action. If finalized, this CDD would
have the effect of suspending EPA’s
obligation to promulgate a FIP for the
outstanding attainment plan elements
that are not being acted on in this
document, for so long as the CDD
remains in place. The requirement for
2 See the area’s complete boundary description at
40 CFR 81.321. Note that the nonattainment area
excludes any portion of Baltimore City that falls
within the 26.8-kilometer radius of Herbert A.
Wagner Generating Station’s Unit 3 stack.
3 See sections 172 and 191–192 of the CAA.
4 84 FR 49462 (September 20, 2019).
5 See 40 CFR 52.31(d)(5).
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
51008
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 160 / Friday, August 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules
outstanding attainment plan elements
and the FIP clock will terminate if EPA
redesignates the area to attainment.
Notwithstanding Maryland’s
submission of a complete attainment
plan, EPA proposes to determine, based
on evaluation of updated emissions data
for the major SO2 sources in the Area
and on more recently available air
quality monitoring and supporting air
quality modeling data, that the Area is
attaining the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and
qualifies for a CDD under EPA’s Clean
Data Policy.
II. EPA Clean Data Policy and Clean
Data Determinations
Following enactment of the CAA
Amendments of 1990, EPA discussed its
interpretation of the requirements for
implementing the NAAQS in the
‘‘General Preamble for the
Implementation of title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990’’ (General
Preamble).6 In 1995, based on the
interpretation of CAA sections 171, 172,
and 182 in the General Preamble, EPA
set forth what has become known as its
‘‘Clean Data Policy’’ for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS.7 Under the Clean Data
Policy, for a nonattainment area that can
demonstrate attainment of the standard
before implementing CAA
nonattainment measures, EPA interprets
the requirements of the CAA that are
specifically designed to help an area
achieve attainment, including
attainment demonstrations,
implementation of reasonably available
control measures, including reasonably
available control technology (RACM/
RACT), reasonable further progress
(RFP) demonstrations, emissions
limitations and control measures as
necessary to provide for attainment, and
contingency measures, to be suspended
for so long as air quality continues to
meet the standard.8 EPA’s ‘‘2014
Guidance for 1-hour SO2 Area SIP
Submissions’’ (2014 SO2 Nonattainment
Area Guidance) provides guidance and
6 57
FR 13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992).
statutory interpretation of the Clean Data
Policy is further described in the ‘‘Final Rule to
Implement the 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard—Phase 2 (referred to as the Phase
2 Final Rule)’’, (70 FR 71612, November 29, 2005).
The Tenth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuit U.S. District
Courts have upheld EPA rulemakings applying the
Clean Data Policy. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 F. 3d
1551 (10th Cir. 1996); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.
3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); Our Children’s Earth
Foundation v. EPA, No. 04–73032 (9th Cir., June 28,
2005) memorandum opinion.
8 See Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
entitled, ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment
Demonstration, and Related Requirements for
Ozone Nonattainment areas Meeting the Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ dated
May 10, 1995.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
7 EPA’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
EPA’s rationale for the application of
the existing Clean Data Policy to the
2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS.9
EPA may issue a CDD under our
Clean Data Policy when a
nonattainment area is attaining the 2010
SO2 NAAQS based on the most recent
available data. EPA will determine
whether the area has attained the 2010
SO2 NAAQS based on available
information, including air quality
monitoring data and air quality
dispersion modeling information for the
affected area. If the determination of
attainment is issued, then certain
attainment plan requirements for the
area are suspended for so long as the
area continues to attain the NAAQS.
However, the suspension of the
obligation to submit an attainment plan
is only appropriate where the area
remains in attainment of the NAAQS.
EPA is proposing to require Maryland to
submit annual statements to EPA (due
by July 1 of each year after the final
CDD), to address whether the Area has
continued to attain the 2010 SO2
NAAQS. EPA expects that these
statements would include at least
available air quality monitoring data, an
assessment of changes in SO2 emissions
from existing or new sources, and
discussion of whether these changes
warrant updated modeling. If EPA does
not receive credible information
indicating that the area continues to
attain the SO2 NAAQS, EPA will
propose to rescind the Anne ArundelBaltimore County Area’s CDD, the
finalization of which would reinstate all
outstanding attainment planning
requirements that were suspended by
the CDD. Therefore, if the area violates
the NAAQS in the future and EPA
rescinds the CDD, there would no longer
be a basis for suspending EPA’s FIP
obligation, and EPA would have an
immediate obligation to promulgate a
FIP addressing the outstanding SIP
requirements for the Anne ArundelBaltimore County Area for the SO2
NAAQS that were the subject of the
September 20, 2019 FFS.
A determination of attainment under
the Clean Data Policy does not serve to
alter the Area’s nonattainment
designation. CDDs are not
redesignations to attainment. For EPA to
redesignate an area to attainment the
state must submit, and EPA must
approve, a redesignation request for the
Area that meets the requirements of
CAA section 107(d)(3).
9 Memorandum from Steve Page, Director of the
EPA’s Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
to the EPA Air Division Directors entitled,
‘‘Guidance for 1-hr SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP
Submissions,’’ dated April 23, 2014.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
III. EPA’s Analysis Supporting a Clean
Data Determination for the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area
EPA may make a CDD for an SO2
nonattainment area if the most recent
three years of air quality monitoring
data from a monitor sited in the area of
peak ambient SO2 concentrations show
attainment of the NAAQS and any other
relevant information, such as dispersion
modeling, show the area is meeting the
NAAQS. Initial designations for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS were based on EPA’s
technical assessment of, and
conclusions regarding the weight of
evidence for, each area, including but
not limited to available air quality
monitoring data (for the three most
recent calendar years) and/or air quality
modeling. In the case of the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area, the
monitor recording SO2 concentrations
for the most recent 3-year period is not
located in the area of peak ambient SO2
concentrations. Because the monitor is
not located in the area of peak expected
SO2 concentrations, both monitoring
and modeling would need to show that
the 3-year average of the annual 99th
percentile of daily maximum 1-hour
average concentrations (which yields
the ‘‘design value’’) would not violate
the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS level of 75
parts per billion (ppb).
For a CDD where monitors are not
located in the area of peak expected SO2
concentrations, air quality dispersion
modeling based upon the most recent
three years of actual emissions or based
on permitted allowable emissions
should show attainment of the 2010 SO2
NAAQS. In the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
County Area, the nearest certified
ambient monitors to the primary SO2
sources are over 15 kilometers (km)
from Brandon Shores and Wagner and
approximately 9 km from Crane, and
neither monitor is close to the expected
area of SO2 peak concentrations
resulting from these sources. Similar to
the original designation modeling, a
more current characterization of
emissions using a regulatory dispersion
model provides the necessary
estimation of source concentrations near
the primary SO2 sources identified in
the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
Area.
A. EPA’s Analysis of Recent SO2
Monitoring for the Anne ArundelBaltimore County Area
EPA’s 2014 SO2 Nonattainment Area
Guidance states that ambient monitoring
data in support of a CDD should
comport with EPA’s ‘‘SO2 NAAQS
Designations Source-Oriented
Monitoring Technical Assistance
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
51009
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 160 / Friday, August 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules
Document’’ (SO2 Monitoring TAD).10
The SO2 Monitoring TAD was provided
by EPA to assist states in siting monitors
to characterize ambient air quality
impacted by significant SO2 sources,
with the goal of identifying peak SO2
concentrations attributable to those
sources. For a CDD, EPA must
determine whether the Area has
attained the NAAQS based upon a
showing that the three most recent years
of ambient monitoring data show
attainment, along with ‘‘additional
information’’ as necessary to determine
the area is in attainment. The State and
Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS)
network (and any other industrial or
special purpose monitors used for this
purpose) must meet applicable criteria
in 40 CFR part 58, appendices A, C, and
E and report their data to the Air
Quality Subsystem (AQS).
There are two SO2 monitors in the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area.
The Essex Monitor, a SLAMS monitor,
has not had any 1-hour SO2 design
values exceeding the 1-hour SO2
NAAQS over the last decade.11 The
Essex Monitor therefore does not show
a violation of the NAAQS, with a design
concentration higher than 75 ppb not
recorded since the period 2007 through
2009. Since then, this monitor has a
complete record showing no design
values exceeding the NAAQS. Though
the Essex Monitor does not show a
violation of the NAAQS, it is not sited
in the area of peak modeled values for
the Area. Table 1 in this document
shows the 99th percentile daily
maximum 1-hour SO2 concentrations
from 2014 through 2021 at this monitor,
along with the calculated design values
for each 3-year period and the number
of hourly SO2 concentrations above 75
ppb.
TABLE 1—2014–2021 ESSEX MONITOR SO2 VALUES FOR THE ANNE ARUNDEL-BALTIMORE COUNTY AREA
99th Percentile
daily 1-hour
maximum
value
(ppb)
Year
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
.................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................
Design value
(ppb)
26.4
17.7
12.9
8.5
12.3
10.5
4.7
5.4
22
22
19
13
11
10
9
7
Number of
hourly SO2
values above
75 ppb
(by year)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Valid
monitor days
(by year)
360
357
355
323
318
351
352
354
The Essex Monitor design value has
been below the 2010 1-hr SO2 NAAQS
since 2012, which was the first year of
the 3-year model simulation period used
to designate the area, and the Essex
Monitor has also had no hourly SO2
values exceeding the 75 ppb 2010
1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Over the last three
years of available data, 2019 through
2021, the 99th percentile hourly values
at the Essex Monitor have fallen to the
5–12 ppb range, with design values of
approximately 10 ppb. This shows
significant improvement in air quality
since 2012 within this portion of the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area.
The other monitor in the area is the
special purpose Riviera Beach Monitor
located in northern Anne Arundel
County near the Fort Smallwood
Complex. This monitor has a current
design value well below the 2010 SO2
NAAQS, but the monitor’s design value
data is incomplete.12 Though only in
operation since January 2018, the
Riviera Beach Special Purpose Monitor
has experienced significant periods of
invalid or missing measurements during
that time and was discontinued in mid2022.13 The Riviera Beach Monitor data
is incomplete for 2018, 2019, and 2020,
and therefore its data is invalid for the
purpose of a CDD.14 The Essex
Monitor’s 2019–2021 1-hr SO2 design
value is 7 ppb and Riviera Beach’s
2018–2020 1-hr SO2 design value is 24
ppb, though the Riviera Beach design
value is flagged as incomplete.15
Because the Riviera Beach Monitor has
now been discontinued, a more recent
design value is not available.
The technical support document
(TSD) prepared by EPA for this action
contains an analysis of historical 1-hour
monitored SO2 concentrations at the
Essex Monitor for the period 2009–2021
and the Riviera Beach Monitor for the
period between 2018–2021. The Essex
Monitor is shown to have marked
reductions in peak 1-hour SO2
concentrations over time. The Riviera
Beach Monitor, which has data over a
much smaller time period and
significant gaps in data collection,
nevertheless had a peak hourly
monitored 1-hour value of 63.9 ppb in
2018, and no peak values over 50 ppb
since that time.
One potential explanation for recent
decreases in the monitored hourly SO2
concentrations in the Anne Arundel–
Baltimore County Area is that the
operations of the coal-fired EGUs in the
Area are very different now than at the
time of EPA’s nonattainment
designation. Under a consent order
between Raven Power and MDE, one of
the area’s primary SO2 emission sources
(Wagner Unit #2) was permanently
10 ‘‘SO NAAQS Designations Source-Oriented
2
Monitoring Technical Assistance Document,’’ EPA
Office of Air and Radiation Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards Air Quality Assessment
Division (February 2016, DRAFT).
11 The Essex Monitor is a State and Local Air
Monitoring Station (or SLAMS). The design
concentration for the Essex Monitor for the threeyear period (2018–2020) is 9 ppb and the 2019–
2021 design concentration is 7 ppb, far under the
2010 SO2 NAAQS.
12 A special purpose monitor is defined in 40 CFR
58.20 and is limited to 24 months of operation. This
monitor has exceeded the operations limits under
the special purpose definition because it operated
past January 18, 2020. The 2018–20 design
concentration for the Riviera Beach Monitor is 24
ppb, well below the 75 ppb 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
13 See Maryland Department of the Environment
Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan
for Calendar Year 2022 (https://
mde.maryland.gov/programs/Air/AirQuality
Monitoring/Pages/Network.aspx).
14 From MDE’s 2022 Ambient Air Monitoring
Network Plan (page 15) concerning this monitor:
‘‘[I]n 2016, the EPA designated portions of Anne
Arundel County and Baltimore County as nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. This
designation was based on modeled, not monitored,
SO2 concentrations. In order to better evaluate
actual ambient SO2 concentrations, a source
oriented SO2 monitor was established at Riviera
Beach Elementary School as a Special Purpose
Monitor on January 12, 2018.’’
15 See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T, section 3(b)
for monitoring data completeness criteria for design
value determination for the SO2 NAAQS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
51010
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 160 / Friday, August 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules
required to cease burning coal and
switched to natural gas as of July 1,
2020.16 In addition, under that same
consent order, the remaining coal-fired
sources at Brandon Shores and Wagner
have operated much less frequently than
when EPA designated the Area as
nonattainment in 2016. This may
explain why there have been no recent
exceedances of the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS at the Riviera Beach Monitor.
B. Overview of EPA Modeling Analysis
for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
Area
EPA’s SO2 Modeling TAD outlines
modeling approaches for SO2 NAAQS
attainment status designations to assist
state, local, and tribal air agencies in the
characterization of ambient air quality
in areas with significant SO2 emission
sources.17 EPA’s SO2 Modeling TAD
outlines recommended modeling
approaches and provides
recommendations on several aspects of
dispersion modeling in this context,
including the use of temporally varying
actual emissions, source
characterization, meteorological data,
model selection, and background
concentrations. Consistent with the
approach set forth in the SO2 Modeling
TAD, EPA conducted a dispersion
modeling analysis for the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County
nonattainment area to show the impact
on air quality of all large SO2 emissions
sources. For this Area, the primary
sources of SO2 emissions include three
coal-fired EGUs located in the
nonattainment area—Brandon Shores,
C.P. Crane, and H.A. Wagner electric
generating facilities. Brandon Shores
and Wagner are located adjacent to one
another in northern Anne Arundel
County, residing within the Fort
Smallwood Complex. The Crane facility
is located approximately 22 kilometers
northeast of Brandon Shores and
Wagner in Baltimore County. The only
other significant source of SO2
emissions in the Area is the
Wheelabrator-Baltimore facility, which
is a waste-to-energy facility that
combusts up to 2,250 tons per day of
post-recycled waste to generate
electricity and steam. WheelabratorBaltimore is located in the City of
Baltimore, approximately 13 kilometers
northwest of the Brandon Shores and
Wagner facilities. EPA modeled
Wheelabrator using its allowable
permitted emission limit for SO2 rather
than actual emissions. The allowable
permitted emission limit was much
higher than actual emissions, based on
annual reported emissions.
EPA’s modeled actual emissions from
these sources for the Area for the period
between 2019–2021 (with the exception
of Wheelabrator-Baltimore, for which
we relied on allowable permitted
emissions). Our review shows that
recent actual, annual SO2 emissions are
much lower compared to the emissions
for the time periods used for the initial
nonattainment designation (i.e., 2012–
2014 and 2013–2015 actual emissions).
As a result of the closure of Crane’s coal
units by June 2018, there were no
emissions from those units to include in
this analysis. The conversion of Wagner
Unit 2 from coal to natural gas in 2020,
and the installation of a dry sorbent
injection emission control for SO2 on
Wagner Unit 3 in 2018, also contributed
to significant emission reductions in the
Area over the last five years. Both coal
units at Brandon Shores have flue gas
desulfurization (FGD) SO2 emissions
controls. The remaining Fort Smallwood
Complex coal units have also reduced
their total annual operating hours,
directly contributing to reductions in
annual SO2 emissions over the last five
years, under enforceable consent orders
between the source owners and the
MDE, establishing reduced emission
limits and allowable hours of operation.
The decline in actual SO2 emissions
from these sources between the time of
designation of the Area as
nonattainment (based on the period
2012–2014) and the most recent 3-year
period on which EPA is evaluating the
Area for a clean data determination
(2019–2021) can be found in Table 2 in
this document. Emissions from the EGU
sources presented in Table 2 in this
document are as reported to EPA’s
CAMD (Clean Air Markets Division),
while those for the non-EGU
Wheelabrator were provided to EPA by
MDE.
TABLE 2—ANNUAL EMISSIONS FROM MAJOR STATIONARY SO2 SOURCES IN THE ANNE ARUNDEL-BALTIMORE
NONATTAINMENT AREA FOR 2012–2021
[Tons of SO2 per Year]
Brandon Shores
H.A. Wagner
C.P. Crane
Year
Unit 1
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
.....................................................
.....................................................
.....................................................
.....................................................
.....................................................
.....................................................
.....................................................
.....................................................
.....................................................
.....................................................
Unit 2
1,547
1,389
1,670
1,311
1,450
1,098
1,747
547
420
759
1,301
1,482
1,475
1,643
1,270
1,418
1,785
954
267
720
Unit 1
0.2
0.2
72.6
65.0
26.5
2.5
6.1
15.3
0
5.7
Unit 2
2,513
1,555
1,940
1,188
163
117
230
88.8
0
0
Unit 3
4,964
8,557
7,277
8,754
7,575
1,245
2,733
1,124
605
645
Unit 4
41.1
72.7
323
185
74.8
60.8
197
39.9
13.5
17.4
Unit 1
1,214
719
574
382
412
379
392
0
0
0
Unit 2
962
2,143
1,316
946
638
449
475
0
0
0
WheelabratorBaltimore
194
321
310
(*)
259
308
346
329
(*)
(*)
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
* Wheelabrator-Baltimore state-reported emissions for 2015 were not available. Annual emissions for Wheelabrator for 2020 and 2021 were not
yet available at the time of EPA’s clean data determination analysis.
Based on the source-specific annual
SO2 emissions in Table 2 in this
document, emissions from Brandon
Shores have been reduced by about 70
percent between the designation and
CDD modeling periods, while emissions
from Wagner have been reduced by
about 90 percent during that same
period. Emissions from Crane have been
entirely eliminated in the time between
the designation and more recent CDD
modeling periods, while actual
16 See Consent Order between Raven Power Fort
Smallwood LLC and the Maryland Department of
the Environment regarding emissions at the Fort
Smallwood electric generating complex, entered
December 4, 2019, (Appendix B–1 of Maryland’s
January 31, 2020 SIP revision).
17 ‘‘SO NAAQS Designations Modeling
2
Technical Assistance Document,’’ U.S. EPA Office
of Air and Radiation Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards Air Quality Assessment Division
(August 2016, DRAFT).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 160 / Friday, August 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules
emissions from Wheelabrator during
that same period have remained
relatively unchanged. For further
information on actual hourly emission
rate historic data, refer to Appendix B
of EPA’s TSD for hourly emissions
values for the large EGUs in the Area.
EPA’s modeling analysis modeled the
emissions impacts from the Wagner,
Brandon Shores, and Wheelabrator
facilities described above in the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area. EPA
used actual 2019–2021 hourly SO2
emissions from EGUs in the Area, as
measured by continuous emissions
monitor (CEM) data and used permitted
allowable emissions for the non-EGU
source, Wheelabrator-Baltimore. EPA’s
analysis uses the American
Meteorological Society/Environmental
Protection Agency Regulatory Model
(AERMOD), with pre-processing input
data from EPA’s Regulatory Model
Terrain Pre-processor (AERMAP) and
EPA’s AERMOD Meteorological
Preprocessor (AERMET) models.
AERMOD is a steady-state plume model
that incorporates air dispersion based
on planetary boundary layer (PBL)
turbulence structure and scaling
concepts, including treatment of both
surface and elevated sources, and both
simple and complex terrain. AERMAP is
a stand-alone terrain pre-processor,
which is used to both characterize
terrain and generate receptor grids for
use in AERMOD. AERMET is a standalone program which provides
AERMOD with the information it needs
to characterize the state of the surface
and mixed layer, and the vertical
structure of the PBL. EPA’s modeling
comports with EPA’s SO2 Modeling
TAD, with additional guidance
provided by EPA’s AERMOD
Implementation Guide along with
appropriate sections of Appendix W and
AERMOD, AERMAP, and AERMET user
guides.
EPA developed its receptor grid
modeling protocol on a modeling
protocol developed by MDE for use in
their attainment planning modeling. For
purposes of a CDD, EPA refined
Maryland’s original receptor grid.
Maryland’s original model receptor grid
placed nested Cartesian grids centered
on the Fort Smallwood Complex
(Brandon Shores and Wagner) and
Crane and spaced: every 25 meters along
the ambient boundary; every 100 meters
out to a distance of 15 km; and every
500 meters between 15 and 25 km.
EPA’s final model receptor grid
included all of the Maryland SIP
modeling protocol-based receptors
within 10 km of the Crane and Fort
Smallwood EGUs and within 5 km of
the Wheelabrator-Baltimore facility.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
However, EPA limited the model
receptor grid to areas nearby to the
primary coal-fired EGUs based on
modeling done in support of our
original designation action for the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore 2010 SO2 NAAQS
nonattainment area. That designation
modeling showed peak model SO2
concentrations were confined to within
a few kilometers of the coal-fired EGUs
at the Fort Smallwood complex. The
final CDD model grid (after filtering and
pre-processing for use in AERMAP) is
composed of 56,883 model receptors.
Supplemental model receptor grids
were based on those of MDE’s modeling
protocol, covering the areas within the
boundaries of the Crane and the Fort
Smallwood facilities. EPA’s selected
modeling domain for the CDD analysis
captures the maximum modeled
concentration from the primary
emission sources in the nonattainment
area, per the Appendix W modeling
guidance. For further information on the
receptor grid utilized for EPA’s
modeling analysis, refer to the
AERMAP/Model Receptor Development
section of EPA’s TSD prepared in
support of this action.
Meteorological data utilized in the
modeling analysis was developed using
EPA’s AERMET (version 22112)
preprocessor. AERMET processes three
types of data: (1) hourly surface
observations that are typically, but not
exclusively, collected at airports by the
National Weather Service (NWS) and/or
the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA); (2) twice-daily upper air
soundings collected by the NWS; and
(3) data collected from an on-site or sitespecific measurement program or
prognostic meteorological data. Surface
meteorological measurements for the
Area were taken from the BaltimoreWashington International Airport (BWI)
Automated Surface Observing Systems
(ASOS) Monitor. Upper air soundings
were taken from the Sterling, Virginia
site near Dulles Airport in Virginia just
west of Washington, DC. These are the
closest available sites to the primary
SO2 sources in the Anne ArundelBaltimore County Area. EPA’s analysis
indicates the meteorological collection
sites and the modeled SO2 emissions
sources have similar elevations and
topographical settings.
In accordance with EPA’s SO2
Modeling TAD, EPA’s modeling
analysis uses surface meteorological
data from BWI and upper-air
measurements from Dulles Airport for
the 2019–2021 period. Local input
information for the Area was used to
analyze surface conditions using EPA’s
AERSURFACE tool for AERMET
meteorological pre-processor model for
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
51011
input to AERMOD. AERSURFACE is a
tool that processes land cover data to
determine the surface characteristics for
use in AERMET for processing for use
in AERMOD.
AERMOD currently cannot simulate
dispersion under calm or missing wind
conditions. To reduce the number of
calms and missing winds in the surface
data, EPA used the AERMINUTE tool to
more accurately translate 1-minute
ASOS wind data to generate hourly
average wind data for input to AERMET.
Section 8.3 of EPA’s Guideline on Air
Quality Models provides additional
discussion on background monitoring
concentrations for air quality analyses.
Additional guidance points regarding
the determination of background
concentrations for the 1-hr SO2 NAAQS
are outlined in EPA’s March 1, 2011, 1hour NO2 clarification memo.18 It
includes a procedure to use temporally
varying background concentrations.
Background concentrations are essential
in constructing the design
concentration, or total air quality
concentration, as part of any NAAQS
analysis. EPA utilized a seasonal by
hour of day background concentration
derived from 2019–2021 monitoring
data collected at the Essex, MD SO2
Monitor (Site # 24–005–3001), as
described in EPA’s March 1, 2011, 1hour NO2 clarification memo. The Essex
Monitor is located in Baltimore County,
within the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
County Area, approximately 16 km
north of the Fort Smallwood Complex
and 10 km west of Crane. EPA believes
the Essex Monitor, since it is actually in
the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
Area, provides a representative
background concentration for its CDD
modeling analysis. Given the monitor’s
most recent 1-hr SO2 design value (7
ppb), the impacts of these sources are
probably small and would provide a
conservative estimate of background
concentrations for EPA’s CDD modeling
analysis. The Essex Monitor is likely
also impacted by the major SO2
emission sources in the Area.
EPA modeled hourly emissions over a
3-year period between 2019 through
2021. Choice of this time period
excluded emissions from both coal-fired
units at Crane, which ceased burning
coal in June 2018. Selection of these
years simplified the process of obtaining
source emissions data and stack
information since only Brandon Shores,
Wagner and Wheelabrator-Baltimore
18 See EPA’s ‘‘Additional Clarification Regarding
Application of Appendix W Modeling Guidance for
the 1-hour N02 National Ambient Air Quality
Standard’’ memo from Tyler Fox to Regional Air
Division Directors, dated March 1, 2011.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
51012
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 160 / Friday, August 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules
operated over the timeframe of EPA’s
CDD analysis.
To capture the CDD model impacts,
the physical stack parameters and
hourly, actual SO2 emission rates must
be properly constructed. The CDD
modeling analysis utilized stack (and
building) information and is described
in detail in the Building Downwash and
Stack Good Engineering Practice (GEP)
section of the TSD prepared by EPA in
support of this action.
1. Results of EPA’s Air Quality
Modeling Analysis
EPA’s CDD modeling utilized
meteorological data, actual and
allowable hourly SO2 emissions, and
corresponding hourly stack velocities
and stack temperatures to simulate SO2
concentrations over portions of the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area.
This modeling analysis shows that the
Area is not violating the 1-hour SO2
NAAQS based on actual and allowable
SO2 emissions from sources within or
near the area. No air quality monitor
within the Area (which was designated
in Round 2 of EPA’s designations under
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS) is currently
violating the 1-hr SO2 NAAQS, although
we recognize that the current SLAMS
monitor in Essex, MD is not located at
the point of peak modeled values used
by EPA for area designation.
EPA’s modeling analysis (based on
2019–2021 SO2 emissions) showed a
peak design value (i.e., the 3-year
average of the 99th percentile daily
maximum 1-hour concentrations, or the
99th percentile concentrations) of 53.1
ppb. Table 3 in this document
summarizes the peak model receptor
design value and the 99th percentile
model concentrations that contributed
to that receptor’s modeled design
concentration.
TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF 2019–2021 PEAK MODELED RECEPTOR 1-HOUR SO2 DESIGN VALUES AND 99TH PERCENTILE
VALUES FOR THE ANNE ARUNDEL-BALTIMORE COUNTY, MD AREA
Year 1
Design value
(ppb)
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
53.1 .............................................................
Date
Hour of
day
I 10–02–2019 I
14
This modeled value is approximately
71 percent of the level of the 75 ppb
2010 SO2 NAAQS. The peak model
design value occurred about one km east
of the Fort Smallwood Complex, near
the southern shoreline of the Patapsco
River east of the Fort Smallwood
Complex. We note that the 99th
percentile values declined over the 3year modeled period. This trend is
similar to the trends observed at the
Riviera Beach Monitor, which is the
closest SO2 monitor to the location of
the peak model receptor.
Our analysis shows the remaining
coal-fired units within the Fort
Smallwood Complex (i.e., Brandon
Shores Units 1 and 2 and Wagner Unit
3) are the primary contributors to the
peak model design value, combining to
contributing over 94 percent of the peak
receptor’s modeled 1-hour SO2 design
concentration. However, FGD emission
controls have been installed on the coalfired units at Brandon Shores and dry
sorbent injection was installed on
Wagner Unit 3 in 2018. Wagner Unit 2
remains operational but since 2021 is
fired with natural gas and is no longer
a significant source of SO2 emissions.
Wagner Units 1 and 4 are now fired
with natural gas or oil and are less
significant SO2 emitters compared to the
remaining coal-fired units. Though the
2019 design value is higher than those
in 2020 and 2021, the additional
emissions controls on EGUs in the Area
and tighter emissions limits and annual
operating hours limitations imposed by
the consent decree likely contribute to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
Year 2
SO2 99th
percentile
(ppb)
I
69.3
I 7–27–2020
I
12
C. Conclusion of EPA’s Modeling and
Monitoring Analysis
EPA conducted a modeling analysis
using three years of actual and
allowable SO2 source emissions coupled
with representative meteorological data
for use in modeling. Hourly SO2
emissions from the sources that were
included in Maryland’s SIP were
constructed along with corresponding
stack velocities and temperatures. This
primary emissions source information
was processed for inclusion in EPA’s
AERMOD air-dispersion model to
estimate 1-hour SO2 design values
within the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
County, MD nonattainment area.
Final peak model concentrations from
EPA’s modeling analysis were 53.1 ppb,
occuring over the Patapsco River east of
the Fort Smallwood Complex. Large SO2
emission sources, including coal fired
units at Brandon Shores and Wagner,
are the largest contributors to the peak
modeled SO2 design concentration in
our modeling analysis. EPA also gauged
impacts from other nearby sources to
the primary sources. Modeled design
concentrations in these nearby areas
were much lower that the peak modeled
design concentrations found in the main
modeling domain.
Ambient air monitoring of the area
does not show any violations of the
NAAQS based on the most recently
available data for the period between
2019–2021, though the area of modeled
peak concentration is at a location other
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SO2 99th
percentile
(ppb)
Hour of
day
Date
lower design values in more recent
years.
PO 00000
Year 3
I
52.3
Date
I 1–20–2021
I
Hour of
day
SO2 99th
percentile
(ppb)
09
37.9
than the monitor locations. Recent trend
data has shown both declining
emissions and declining monitor 99th
percentile and peak 1-hour monitor
values. Based on this available
monitoring data and the accompanying
modeling analysis, we have
demonstrated that the Anne ArundelBaltimore County Area is attaining the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, based on
actual meteorology and emissions
during the 2019–2021 time period. As a
result, we have shown that the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS meets EPA criteria for
the area to qualify for a CDD.
D. EPA Review of Select Anne ArundelBaltimore County Area Attainment Plan
Elements From Maryland’s January 31,
2020 SO2 SIP Revision Request
In the event EPA issues a final CDD,
certain nonattainment planning
requirements under CAA section 172(c)
are still required for the Area.
Specifically, these elements include an
emissions inventory (EI), required by
CAA section 172(c)(3), and a
nonattainment new source review
(NNSR) program required by CAA
section 172(c)(5). Maryland submitted
these required attainment plan elements
to EPA as part of its attainment plan SIP
revision dated January 31, 2020.
1. Maryland’s Base Year Emissions
Inventory for the Anne ArundelBaltimore County Area
EPA’s 2014 SO2 Nonattainment
Guidance describes the statutory
elements comprising an SO2 attainment
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 160 / Friday, August 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules
plan. These requirements include
submission of a comprehensive,
accurate and current base year
emissions inventory of all sources of
SO2 within the nonattainment area, per
CAA section 172(c)(3).19 EPA’s 2014
SO2 Nonattainment Guidance requires
that the base year emissions inventory
should be consistent with the Air
Emissions Reporting Requirements
(AERR) at Subpart A to 40 CFR part
51.20 This base year inventory can be
represented by a year that contributed to
the three-year design value used for the
original nonattainment designation and
should include all sources of SO2 in the
nonattainment area and any sources
located outside the nonattainment area
which may affect attainment in the area.
Maryland selected 2014 for the base
year emission inventory for the Area,
which is appropriate because the
nonattainment designation of the Area
was based on data from 2013–2015.
Actual emissions from all the sources of
SO2 in the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
51013
County Area were reviewed and
compiled for the base year emissions
inventory requirement. Maryland’s 2014
base year SO2 emission inventory meets
the requirements of CAA section
172(c)(3) and comports with EPA’s 2014
SO2 SIP Guidance.21 Maryland’s 2014
base year SO2 emissions inventory for
the Area, by emission source category,
is contained in Table 4 in this
document.
TABLE 4—2014 SO2 EMISSION BASE YEAR INVENTORY FOR THE ANNE ARUNDEL-BALTIMORE COUNTY AREA
SO2 annual
emissions
(tons per year)
Emissions source category
Stationary Point (and Quasi-point) Sources ..................................................................................................................................
Area Sources .................................................................................................................................................................................
Onroad Mobile Sources .................................................................................................................................................................
Nonroad Mobile Sources ...............................................................................................................................................................
14,797.46
960.59
96.55
238.71
Total ........................................................................................................................................................................................
16,093.31
In the 2014 base year, point source
emissions accounted for 91 percent of
all SO2 emissions in the Area. The
primary SO2 point sources were the
Brandon Shores, Wagner, and Crane
EGUs, and to a lesser extent the
Wheelabrator Baltimore waste-to-energy
incinerator. Table 5 in this document
shows the 2014 SO2 emissions of point
source facilities in the Area that
reported annual emissions of greater
than six tons. As noted previously,
emissions for all of these sources have
declined dramatically since 2014, with
additional limits enacted for Wagner
and Brandon Shores through more
recent 40 CFR part 70 permits, as well
as more stringent emission limits and
operational restrictions placed upon
those facilities through consent orders
between MDE and the facility owners,
as described in more detail in sections
B and C, in this document.22 Further,
the Crane facility ceased operation in
2018, Wagner’s coal-fired Unit 2 ceased
coal combustion in June 2020, and the
remaining Wagner coal-fired unit (Unit
3) is to cease coal combustion by
January 1, 2026.23
TABLE 5—POINT SOURCE CONTRIBUTION TO THE 2014 SO2 BASE YEAR EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR THE ANNE ARUNDELBALTIMORE COUNTY NONATTAINMENT AREA
2014 SO2 annual
emissions
(tons per year)
Facility
Brandon Shores .............................................................................................................................................................................
Wagner ..........................................................................................................................................................................................
C.P. Crane .....................................................................................................................................................................................
All Other Point Sources Combined ...............................................................................................................................................
3,145.09
9,610.26
1,887.16
33.26
Total Point Source Emissions ................................................................................................................................................
14,675.76
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
EPA has evaluated Maryland’s 2014 base year emissions inventory for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area and has determined that it
was developed in a manner consistent with CAA section 172(c)(3) and with applicable EPA guidance.
19 See ‘‘Guidance for 1-Hour SO Nonattainment
2
Area SIP Submissions’’ (April 23, 2014).
20 The AERR at Subpart A to 40 CFR part 51 cover
overarching Federal reporting requirements for the
states to submit emissions inventories for criteria
pollutants to EPA’s Emissions Inventory System.
EPA uses these submittals, along with other data
sources, to build the National Emissions Inventory.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
21 See pp. 46–47 of EPA’s ‘‘Guidance for 1-Hour
SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions,’’ dated
April 23, 2014.
22 MDE issued a title V permit for Raven Power’s
Brandon Shores and Wagner generating stations
(which MDE considers a single source for title V
and NSR purposes). The Title V permit is available
at MDE’s website, at: https://mde.maryland.gov/
programs/permits/AirManagementPermits/Test/
Raven%20Power%20Ft.%20
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Smallwood,%20LLC.pdf. EPA does not intend to
add the Title V permit to the SIP but is referencing
it here for purposes of showing declining emissions.
23 See Consent Order between Raven Power Fort
Smallwood LLC and the Maryland Department of
the Environment relating to operations at the
Herbert A. Wagner electric generating station, as it
relates to regional haze formation, entered June 24,
2021. The consent order is available for review in
the docket for this action.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
51014
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 160 / Friday, August 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2. Maryland’s New Source Review
Program
Section 172(c)(5) of the CAA
establishes an attainment plan element
requirement that the state have in place
a permitting program for the
construction and operation of new or
modified major stationary sources in a
nonattainment area, in accordance with
section 173 of the CAA.24 Maryland has
a fully implemented nonattainment new
source review (NNSR) program under
the Code of Maryland Regulations
(COMAR), COMAR 26.11.17
‘‘Nonattainment Provisions for Major
New Sources and Major Modifications,’’
addressing the criteria pollutants. EPA
has approved this chapter into the
Maryland SIP (77 FR 45949, August 2,
2012; as updated by 80 FR 39969, July
13, 2015).
Maryland’s NNSR program meets the
SO2 applicable requirements of CAA
section 173 as COMAR 26.11.17 applies
to any new or modified major stationary
source in an area that has been
designated ‘‘nonattainment’’ under CAA
section 107(d)(1)(A)(i).25 The SIPapproved NNSR program covers the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County SO2
Area and includes SO2 as a ‘‘regulated
NSR pollutant.’’ 26
Maryland’s NNSR program rule, as
codified at COMAR 26.11.17, defines
‘‘major stationary source’’ as ‘‘any
stationary source of air pollution which
emits or has the potential to emit 100
tons or more of any regulated NSR
pollutant,’’ which by definition includes
SO2.27 A ‘‘significant’’ net increase in
SO2 emissions is defined as 40 tons per
year. ‘‘Best Available Control
Technology’’ is defined as an emissions
limitation ‘‘based on the maximum
degree of [emissions] reduction for each
24 The CAA NSR program is composed of three
separate programs: Prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD), NNSR, and Minor NSR. PSD is
established in part C of title I of the CAA and
applies in undesignated areas and in areas that meet
the NAAQS—designated ‘‘attainment areas’’—as
well as areas where there is insufficient information
to determine if the area meets the NAAQS—
designated ‘‘unclassifiable areas.’’ The NNSR
program is established in part D of title I of the CAA
and applies in areas that are not in attainment of
the NAAQS—designated ‘‘nonattainment areas.’’
The Minor NSR program addresses construction or
modification activities that do not qualify as
‘‘major’’ and applies regardless of the designation
of the area in which a source is located. Together,
these programs are referred to as the NSR programs.
Section 173 of the CAA lays out the NNSR program
for preconstruction review of new major sources or
major modifications to existing sources, as required
by CAA section 172(c)(5). The programmatic
elements for NNSR include, among other things,
compliance with the lowest achievable emissions
rate and the requirement to obtain emissions offsets.
25 See COMAR 26.11.17.02A(3).
26 See COMAR 26.11.17.01B(24).
27 See COMAR 26.11.17.01B(17).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
regulated NSR pollutant which would
be emitted from any proposed major
stationary source or major
modification.’’ All permits and
approvals required by Maryland’s NNSR
permitting program, under COMAR
26.11, must be obtained before
construction or modification of a subject
emissions source.28
EPA has reviewed Maryland’s NNSR
program and determined that its SIPapproved NNSR program under COMAR
26.11 meets the requirements for NSR
under CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 173
and 40 CFR 51.165 for SO2 sources
undergoing construction or major
modification in the Anne ArundelBaltimore County Area without need for
modification of the SIP-approved NNSR
program. Therefore, EPA concludes that
the Maryland SIP meets the NNSR
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(5)
applicable to attainment plan
requirements for the Area.
3. Maryland Limits on Stationary SO2
Sources
Although EPA is not taking action
upon Maryland’s attainment
demonstration submitted as part of the
January 31, 2020 attainment plan, EPA
has reviewed Maryland’s submitted
emission limits and emissions control
requirements for large SO2 sources in
the Area. EPA proposes to add to the
Maryland SIP as a SIP strengthening
measure a consent order between MDE
and Raven Power Fort Smallwood LLC
and a consent order between MDE and
C.P. Crane LLC that require enforceable
SO2 limits and operational limitations at
the Fort Smallwood Complex and at the
Crane facility.29
These consent orders establish SO2
emission limits for these facilities
(beginning in January 2019 and
additional limits beginning in 2021), as
summarized herein. Effective October
2019, Crane Units 1 and 2 are limited
to combined SO2 emissions of 2,900
pounds per hour (lbs/hr SO2). Beginning
January 2021, Brandon Shores Units 1
and 2 and Wagner Unit 3 combined
(whether operating individually or in
tandem) are limited to 3,860 lb/hr SO2,
on a 30-day rolling average basis.
Beginning January 2021, Brandon
Shores Units 1 and 2 (operating either
individually or in tandem) shall not
exceed a cumulative total of 435 hours
per calendar year when the applicable
28 See
COMAR 26.11.17.03A.
Appendix B of Maryland’s January 30,
2020 attainment plan SIP revision request to EPA.
Specifically, Appendix B1—Consent Order—
Brandon Shores and Wagner Generating Stations,
dated December 4, 2019; and Appendix B–2:
Consent Order—C.P. Crane Generating Station,
dated October 9, 2019.
29 See
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
units are operating at a combined SO2
emissions rate greater than 2,851
pounds per hour. Beginning January
2021, Brandon Shores Units 1 and 2
cannot exceed 9,980 lbs/hr SO2, on a 3hour rolling average basis. Beginning
January 2021, Brandon Shores Units 1
and 2 combined are limited to three
hours per calendar year with combined
emissions greater than 5,150 lbs/hr SO2
(on a 1-hour average basis) when
Wagner Unit 3 is not operating; and are
limited to 435 hours per calendar year
of combined emissions greater than
2,851 lbs/hr SO2 when Wagner Unit 3 is
also operating.
Wagner Unit 3 alone cannot emit
more than 3,289 lbs/hr SO2 (on a 1-hour
averaging basis); is limited to emitting
1,904 lbs/hr SO2 (on a 30-day rolling
average); and is limited to 336 hours per
calendar year of emissions greater than
2,299 lbs/hr SO2 (on a 1-hour averaging
basis).
Beginning January 2021, Wagner Unit
1 alone shall not emit more than 480
lbs/hour SO2 (on a 1-hour averaging
basis); and is limited to operating 438
hours per calendar year burning fuel oil.
Beginning January 2021, at all times
when operating, Wagner Unit 3 shall not
exceed 1,904 lbs/hr SO2 (as measured
on a 30-day rolling average); and Unit 3
shall not exceed a maximum rate of
3,289 lbs/hr SO2 at all times when
operating (on a 1-hour average basis).
Beginning January 2021, at all times
when operating, Wagner Unit 3 shall not
exceed a cumulative total operation of
336 hours per calendar year when the
Unit’s SO2 emissions rate is greater than
2,299 lbs/hr SO2 (on a one-hour average
basis). Beginning January 2021, Wagner
Unit 4 alone cannot emit more than
1,350 lbs/hr SO2 (on a 1-hour average
basis); and is limited to operating 438
hours per calendar year using fuel oil—
though both Units 1 and 4 can operate
additional hours each year using natural
gas. By July 2020, Wagner Unit 2 was
required to cease operation or to convert
from burning coal to burning natural
gas. Annual Emissions reported to
EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division
(CAMD) database and to MDE for the
Crane facility dropped to zero for 2019–
2021.
By incorporating these consent
decrees between MDE and Raven Power
into the Maryland SIP, EPA is
strengthening the SIP and making these
additional permitted limits and
operating conditions federally
enforceable.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to issue a CDD for
the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
Area. Finalizing this CDD would
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 160 / Friday, August 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules
suspend the requirements for Maryland
to submit an attainment demonstration
and certain other associated
nonattainment planning requirements
for so long as the Anne ArundelBaltimore County nonattainment area
continues to attain the 2010 SO2
NAAQS and would suspend EPA’s
obligation to promulgate a FIP
associated with the FFS issued on
September 20, 2019. This proposed
action is consistent with EPA’s longheld interpretation of CAA
requirements.
Finalizing this action would not
constitute a redesignation of the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County
nonattainment area to attainment of the
2010 SO2 NAAQS under section
107(d)(3) of the CAA. The Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area will
remain designated nonattainment for
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS until such time as
EPA determines that the area meets the
CAA requirements for redesignation to
attainment and takes action to
redesignate the area.
EPA is simultaneously proposing to
approve select elements of the SO2
attainment plan SIP revision for the
Area submitted by Maryland to EPA on
January 31, 2020. EPA is approving
select elements of the attainment plan
that would not be suspended under a
final CDD—a base year emission
inventory and a showing that the area is
covered by an EPA-approved NNSR
program. EPA has determined that
Maryland’s 2014 base year emissions
inventory for the Anne ArundelBaltimore County Area comports with
relevant EPA emissions inventory
guidance, and therefore pursuant to
section 172(c)(3), EPA proposes to
approve Maryland’s 2014 base year
emissions inventory for the Area. EPA
has also determined that Maryland’s
NNSR program meets applicable
requirements for NSR under CAA
section 173 for SO2 sources undergoing
construction or major modification in
the Area. EPA therefore proposes to
approve Maryland’s NNSR element of
its attainment plan as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(5).
If EPA’s approval of these elements is
finalized, EPA’s obligation to
promulgate a FIP as to those elements
will be terminated.
Finally, EPA is approving as SIP
strengthening measures certain SO2
emission limit requirements on large
SO2 emission sources that were
submitted as part of Maryland’s
attainment plan for the nonattainment
area.
EPA proposes to incorporate by
reference several consent orders
between MDE and Raven Power with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
the January 30, 2020 attainment plan as
SIP strengthening measures to provide
federally enforceable limits on the major
SO2 emissions sources in the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area, which
are contained in Appendix B of
Maryland’s January 30, 2020 SO2
attainment plan SIP revision to EPA.30
EPA proposes to approve this portion of
the Maryland’s January 2020 submitted
plan as a SIP strengthening measure and
these consent orders are available for
review in the docket for this action.
However, EPA is not proposing to
approve in this action the CAA section
172(c)(1) attainment modeling
demonstration submitted as part of the
January 30, 2020 plan revision, nor is
EPA proposing to approve the state’s
submitted CAA section 172(c)(1)
RACM/RACT, CAA section 172(c)(2)
RFP, CAA section 172(c)(6) emission
limits necessary to provide for
attainment, or CAA section 172(c)(9)
contingency measures elements. As
noted, EPA’s obligation to promulgate a
FIP as to these elements would be
suspended by a CDD, for as long as the
CDD remains in place.
EPA is soliciting public comments on
the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
(as described in Section IV of this
preamble) two consent orders between
MDE and Raven Power governing SO2
emissions limitations and operating
limitations at the Fort Smallwood
Complex facilities and the Crane
facility, as contained in Appendix B of
Maryland’s January 30, 2020 SO2
attainment plan SIP revision to EPA.
EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these materials generally
available through www.regulations.gov
and at the EPA Region III Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action proposes to make a CDD
for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
Area for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS based on
30 See Appendix B of the January 30, 2020
attainment plan SIP Revision. Specifically,
Appendix B1—Consent Order—Brandon Shores
and Wagner Generating Stations, dated December 4,
2019; and Appendix B–2: Consent Order—C.P.
Crane Generating Station, dated October 9, 2019.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
51015
air quality data which would result in
the suspension of the requirement to
submit certain Federal requirements and
does not impose any additional
regulatory requirements on sources
beyond those required by state law or
existing Federal law. Moreover, 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). In this case, EPA is
proposing approval of two elements of
a larger SIP revision (the 2020 SO2
attainment plan) and is also proposing
approval of two SIP-strengthening
consent orders between MDE and the
owner of two major SO2 emitting
sources that tighten SO2 emission limits
and impose specific operating
conditions and hours. In reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly,
this action pertaining to the approval of
two elements of the SIP submission
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For these
reasons, 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);
• 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 subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001)
because it is not a significant regulatory
action as defined by Executive Order
12866;
• 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
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
51016
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 160 / Friday, August 19, 2022 / Proposed Rules
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, this proposed CDD and
accompanying approval of selected
elements of Maryland’s January 30, 2020
SO2 attainment plan do not have tribal
implications, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), because the SIP is not approved
to apply in Indian country located in the
State, and EPA notes that it will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Adam Ortiz,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2022–17341 Filed 8–18–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R02–OAR–2020–0432; FRL–10121–
01–R2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; New
Jersey; Regional Haze State
Implementation Plan for the Second
Implementation Period
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
the regional haze state implementation
plan (SIP) revision submitted by New
Jersey on March 26, 2020, as satisfying
applicable requirements under the
Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s
Regional Haze Rule for the program’s
second implementation period. New
Jersey’s SIP submission addresses the
requirement that states must
periodically revise their long-term
strategies for making reasonable
progress towards the national goal of
preventing any future, and remedying
any existing, anthropogenic impairment
of visibility, including regional haze, in
mandatory Class I Federal areas. The
SIP submission also addresses other
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Aug 18, 2022
Jkt 256001
applicable requirements for the second
implementation period of the regional
haze program. The EPA is taking this
action pursuant to sections 110 and
169A of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before September 19,
2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R02–
OAR–2020–0432 at https://
www.regulations.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, the EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
confidential business information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Omar Hammad, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 2, 290
Broadway, New York, New York 10007–
1866, at (212) 637–3347, or by email at
Hammad.Omar@epa.gov.
Table of Contents
I. What action is the EPA proposing?
II. Background and Requirements for
Regional Haze Plans
A. Regional Haze Background
B. Roles of Agencies in Addressing
Regional Haze
III. Requirements for Regional Haze Plans for
the Second Implementation Period
A. Identification of Class I Areas
B. Calculations of Baseline, Current, and
Natural Visibility Conditions; Progress to
Date; and the Uniform Rate of Progress
C. Long-Term Strategy for Regional Haze
D. Reasonable Progress Goals
E. Monitoring Strategy and Other State
Implementation Plan Requirements
F. Requirements for Periodic Reports
Describing Progress Towards the
Reasonable Progress Goals
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
G. Requirements for State and Federal
Land Manager Coordination
IV. The EPA’s Evaluation of New Jersey’s
Regional Haze Submission for the
Second Implementation Period
A. Background on New Jersey’s First
Implementation Period SIP Submission
B. New Jersey’s Second Implementation
Period SIP Submission and the EPA’s
Evaluation
C. Identification of Class I Areas
D. Calculations of Baseline, Current, and
Natural Visibility Conditions; Progress to
Date; and the Uniform Rate of Progress
E. Long-Term Strategy for Regional Haze
a. New Jersey’s Response to the Six
MANE–VU Asks
b. The EPA’s Evaluation of New Jersey’s
Response to the Six MANE–VU Asks and
Compliance with § 51.308(f)(2)(i)
c. Additional Long-Term Strategy
Requirements
F. Reasonable Progress Goals
G. Monitoring Strategy and Other
Implementation Plan Requirements
H. Requirements for Periodic Reports
Describing Progress Towards the
Reasonable Progress Goals
I. Requirements for State and Federal Land
Manager Coordination
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What action is the EPA proposing?
On March 26, 2020, supplemented on
September 8, 2020, and April 1, 2021,
the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP)
submitted a revision to its SIP to
address regional haze for the second
implementation period. NJDEP made
this SIP submission to satisfy the
requirements of the CAA’s regional haze
program pursuant to CAA sections 169A
and 169B and 40 CFR 51.308. The EPA
is proposing to find that the New Jersey
regional haze SIP submission for the
second implementation period meets
the applicable statutory and regulatory
requirements and thus proposes to
approve New Jersey’s submission into
its SIP.
II. Background and Requirements for
Regional Haze Plans
A. Regional Haze Background
In the 1977 CAA Amendments,
Congress created a program for
protecting visibility in the nation’s
mandatory Class I Federal areas, which
include certain national parks and
wilderness areas.1 CAA 169A. The CAA
establishes as a national goal the
1 Areas statutorily designated as mandatory Class
I Federal areas consist of national parks exceeding
6,000 acres, wilderness areas and national memorial
parks exceeding 5,000 acres, and all international
parks that were in existence on August 7, 1977.
CAA 162(a). There are 156 mandatory Class I areas.
The list of areas to which the requirements of the
visibility protection program apply is in 40 CFR
part 81, subpart D.
E:\FR\FM\19AUP1.SGM
19AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 160 (Friday, August 19, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 51006-51016]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17341]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2020-0325; FRL-10118-01-R3]
Air Plan Approval; Maryland; Clean Data Determination and
Approval of Select Attainment Plan Elements for the Anne Arundel County
and Baltimore County, Maryland Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
determine that the Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County, Maryland
sulfur dioxide (SO2) nonattainment area has attained the
2010 primary SO2 national ambient air quality standard (2010
SO2 NAAQS). In designated nonattainment areas where air
quality data demonstrate that the NAAQS have been attained, EPA
interprets certain requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as no longer
applicable for so long as air quality continues to meet the standard.
Under this Clean Data Policy, EPA may issue a determination of
attainment, known as a clean data determination (CDD), that
[[Page 51007]]
a nonattainment area is attaining the relevant NAAQS. If finalized,
this proposed CDD would suspend the obligation to submit certain
attainment planning requirements for the nonattainment area for as long
as the area continues to attain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
EPA is also simultaneously proposing to approve certain elements of
the attainment plan contained in Maryland's state implementation plan
(SIP) revision for the Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County
SO2 nonattainment area (referred to hereafter as the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area, or simply the Area), submitted to EPA on
January 31, 2020. The requirement to submit the elements that EPA is
proposing to approve would not be suspended under this proposed CDD, as
set forth in EPA's Clean Data Policy, because EPA considers them to be
independent of attaining the NAAQS under the CAA. Finally, EPA is
approving as SIP strengthening measures certain emission limit
requirements on large SO2 emission sources that were
submitted as part of Maryland's attainment plan for the nonattainment
area. This determination of attainment and approval of certain elements
and emissions limitations into the SIP does not redesignate the Area to
attainment or constitute a full approval of the submitted attainment
plan or of a maintenance plan. This action is being taken under the
CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 19,
2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2020-0325 at 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 www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Rehn, Planning & Implementation
Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, Four Penn Center, 1600 John F. Kennedy Boulevard,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is (215) 814-
2176. Mr. Rehn can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we refer to EPA.
I. Background
On June 22, 2010, EPA published in the Federal Register a
strengthened, primary 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, establishing a new
standard at a level of 75 parts per billion (ppb), based on the 3-year
average of the annual 99th percentile of daily maximum 1-hour average
concentrations of SO2.\1\ Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, EPA is required to designate all areas of the country
area as either ``attainment,'' ``nonattainment,'' or
``unclassifiable.'' CAA section 107(d)(1). On July 12, 2016, EPA
published a final rule designating the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
Area as nonattainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, based on air
quality modeling and ambient air monitoring data. 81 FR 45039.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On June 2, 2010, EPA signed the final rule titled, ``Primary
National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide,'' 75 FR
35520 (June 22, 2010), codified at 40 CFR part 50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The major SO2-emitting facilities in this Area at that
time were three electrical generating units (EGUs)--Herbert A. Wagner
(Wagner), with two coal-fired units, one #6 fuel oil-fired unit and one
dual fuel (natural gas and fuel oil) unit; the Brandon Shores
Generating Station (Brandon Shores), with two coal-fired units; and the
Charles P. Crane Generating Station (Crane), with its two coal-fired
units. The other major SO2 source in the Area is the
Wheelabrator Baltimore waste-to-energy incinerator. The nonattainment
area is comprised of portions of Anne Arundel and Baltimore Counties
that are within 26.8 kilometers of Wagner's Unit 3 stack, which is
located at 39.17765 North latitude, 76.52752 West longitude.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See the area's complete boundary description at 40 CFR
81.321. Note that the nonattainment area excludes any portion of
Baltimore City that falls within the 26.8-kilometer radius of
Herbert A. Wagner Generating Station's Unit 3 stack.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CAA directs states containing an area designated nonattainment
for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS to develop and submit a nonattainment
area (NAA) SIP to EPA within 18 months of the effective date of an
area's designation as nonattainment. The NAA SIP (also referred to as
an attainment plan) must meet the requirements of subparts l and 5 of
part D, of Title 1 of the CAA, and provide for attainment of the NAAQS
by the applicable statutory attainment date.\3\ To be approved by the
EPA under section 192(a), these NAA SIPs must provide for attainment of
the NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than five years
from the effective date of designation. The Maryland Department of
Environment (MDE) was required to prepare and submit to EPA a NAA SIP
by March 12, 2018 to bring the Area into attainment by the attainment
date of September 12, 2021. However, Maryland failed to submit a
complete attainment plan for the Area by the March 12, 2018 deadline.
On September 20, 2019, EPA issued a finding of failure to submit (FFS)
regarding the required attainment plan SIP.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See sections 172 and 191-192 of the CAA.
\4\ 84 FR 49462 (September 20, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The September 20, 2019 FFS resulted in the initiation of an 18-
month clock toward imposition of sanctions upon the state under CAA
section 179, unless by that date the state has submitted to EPA an
SO2 SIP and EPA has determined it to be complete and
notified the state it has corrected the deficiency that gave rise to
the FFS.\5\ The FFS action also started a two-year clock by which EPA
is required under CAA section 110(c) to promulgate a Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) for the area, unless the state submits, and
EPA approves, a SIP for the area before that date. Maryland submitted
an attainment plan SIP for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area on
January 31, 2020. On March 30, 2020, EPA determined Maryland's
attainment plan SIP complete under the requirements for completeness
under CAA section 110(k), terminating the sanctions clock started by
the FFS action. If finalized, this CDD would have the effect of
suspending EPA's obligation to promulgate a FIP for the outstanding
attainment plan elements that are not being acted on in this document,
for so long as the CDD remains in place. The requirement for
[[Page 51008]]
outstanding attainment plan elements and the FIP clock will terminate
if EPA redesignates the area to attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 40 CFR 52.31(d)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notwithstanding Maryland's submission of a complete attainment
plan, EPA proposes to determine, based on evaluation of updated
emissions data for the major SO2 sources in the Area and on
more recently available air quality monitoring and supporting air
quality modeling data, that the Area is attaining the 2010
SO2 NAAQS and qualifies for a CDD under EPA's Clean Data
Policy.
II. EPA Clean Data Policy and Clean Data Determinations
Following enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990, EPA discussed
its interpretation of the requirements for implementing the NAAQS in
the ``General Preamble for the Implementation of title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990'' (General Preamble).\6\ In 1995, based on the
interpretation of CAA sections 171, 172, and 182 in the General
Preamble, EPA set forth what has become known as its ``Clean Data
Policy'' for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.\7\ Under the Clean Data Policy,
for a nonattainment area that can demonstrate attainment of the
standard before implementing CAA nonattainment measures, EPA interprets
the requirements of the CAA that are specifically designed to help an
area achieve attainment, including attainment demonstrations,
implementation of reasonably available control measures, including
reasonably available control technology (RACM/RACT), reasonable further
progress (RFP) demonstrations, emissions limitations and control
measures as necessary to provide for attainment, and contingency
measures, to be suspended for so long as air quality continues to meet
the standard.\8\ EPA's ``2014 Guidance for 1-hour SO2 Area
SIP Submissions'' (2014 SO2 Nonattainment Area Guidance)
provides guidance and EPA's rationale for the application of the
existing Clean Data Policy to the 2010 1-hour primary SO2
NAAQS.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992).
\7\ EPA's statutory interpretation of the Clean Data Policy is
further described in the ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard--Phase 2 (referred to as the
Phase 2 Final Rule)'', (70 FR 71612, November 29, 2005). The Tenth,
Seventh, and Ninth Circuit U.S. District Courts have upheld EPA
rulemakings applying the Clean Data Policy. See Sierra Club v. EPA,
99 F. 3d 1551 (10th Cir. 1996); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537
(7th Cir. 2004); Our Children's Earth Foundation v. EPA, No. 04-
73032 (9th Cir., June 28, 2005) memorandum opinion.
\8\ See Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, entitled, ``Reasonable Further
Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for
Ozone Nonattainment areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard,'' dated May 10, 1995.
\9\ Memorandum from Steve Page, Director of the EPA's Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, to the EPA Air Division
Directors entitled, ``Guidance for 1-hr SO2 Nonattainment
Area SIP Submissions,'' dated April 23, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA may issue a CDD under our Clean Data Policy when a
nonattainment area is attaining the 2010 SO2 NAAQS based on
the most recent available data. EPA will determine whether the area has
attained the 2010 SO2 NAAQS based on available information,
including air quality monitoring data and air quality dispersion
modeling information for the affected area. If the determination of
attainment is issued, then certain attainment plan requirements for the
area are suspended for so long as the area continues to attain the
NAAQS.
However, the suspension of the obligation to submit an attainment
plan is only appropriate where the area remains in attainment of the
NAAQS. EPA is proposing to require Maryland to submit annual statements
to EPA (due by July 1 of each year after the final CDD), to address
whether the Area has continued to attain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
EPA expects that these statements would include at least available air
quality monitoring data, an assessment of changes in SO2
emissions from existing or new sources, and discussion of whether these
changes warrant updated modeling. If EPA does not receive credible
information indicating that the area continues to attain the
SO2 NAAQS, EPA will propose to rescind the Anne Arundel-
Baltimore County Area's CDD, the finalization of which would reinstate
all outstanding attainment planning requirements that were suspended by
the CDD. Therefore, if the area violates the NAAQS in the future and
EPA rescinds the CDD, there would no longer be a basis for suspending
EPA's FIP obligation, and EPA would have an immediate obligation to
promulgate a FIP addressing the outstanding SIP requirements for the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area for the SO2 NAAQS that
were the subject of the September 20, 2019 FFS.
A determination of attainment under the Clean Data Policy does not
serve to alter the Area's nonattainment designation. CDDs are not
redesignations to attainment. For EPA to redesignate an area to
attainment the state must submit, and EPA must approve, a redesignation
request for the Area that meets the requirements of CAA section
107(d)(3).
III. EPA's Analysis Supporting a Clean Data Determination for the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area
EPA may make a CDD for an SO2 nonattainment area if the
most recent three years of air quality monitoring data from a monitor
sited in the area of peak ambient SO2 concentrations show
attainment of the NAAQS and any other relevant information, such as
dispersion modeling, show the area is meeting the NAAQS. Initial
designations for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS were based on EPA's
technical assessment of, and conclusions regarding the weight of
evidence for, each area, including but not limited to available air
quality monitoring data (for the three most recent calendar years) and/
or air quality modeling. In the case of the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
County Area, the monitor recording SO2 concentrations for
the most recent 3-year period is not located in the area of peak
ambient SO2 concentrations. Because the monitor is not
located in the area of peak expected SO2 concentrations,
both monitoring and modeling would need to show that the 3-year average
of the annual 99th percentile of daily maximum 1-hour average
concentrations (which yields the ``design value'') would not violate
the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS level of 75 parts per billion
(ppb).
For a CDD where monitors are not located in the area of peak
expected SO2 concentrations, air quality dispersion modeling
based upon the most recent three years of actual emissions or based on
permitted allowable emissions should show attainment of the 2010
SO2 NAAQS. In the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area, the
nearest certified ambient monitors to the primary SO2
sources are over 15 kilometers (km) from Brandon Shores and Wagner and
approximately 9 km from Crane, and neither monitor is close to the
expected area of SO2 peak concentrations resulting from
these sources. Similar to the original designation modeling, a more
current characterization of emissions using a regulatory dispersion
model provides the necessary estimation of source concentrations near
the primary SO2 sources identified in the Anne Arundel-
Baltimore County Area.
A. EPA's Analysis of Recent SO2 Monitoring for the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area
EPA's 2014 SO2 Nonattainment Area Guidance states that
ambient monitoring data in support of a CDD should comport with EPA's
``SO2 NAAQS Designations Source-Oriented Monitoring
Technical Assistance
[[Page 51009]]
Document'' (SO2 Monitoring TAD).\10\ The SO2
Monitoring TAD was provided by EPA to assist states in siting monitors
to characterize ambient air quality impacted by significant
SO2 sources, with the goal of identifying peak
SO2 concentrations attributable to those sources. For a CDD,
EPA must determine whether the Area has attained the NAAQS based upon a
showing that the three most recent years of ambient monitoring data
show attainment, along with ``additional information'' as necessary to
determine the area is in attainment. The State and Local Air Monitoring
Stations (SLAMS) network (and any other industrial or special purpose
monitors used for this purpose) must meet applicable criteria in 40 CFR
part 58, appendices A, C, and E and report their data to the Air
Quality Subsystem (AQS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ ``SO2 NAAQS Designations Source-Oriented
Monitoring Technical Assistance Document,'' EPA
Office of Air and Radiation Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards Air Quality Assessment Division (February 2016, DRAFT).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are two SO2 monitors in the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
County Area. The Essex Monitor, a SLAMS monitor, has not had any 1-hour
SO2 design values exceeding the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
over the last decade.\11\ The Essex Monitor therefore does not show a
violation of the NAAQS, with a design concentration higher than 75 ppb
not recorded since the period 2007 through 2009. Since then, this
monitor has a complete record showing no design values exceeding the
NAAQS. Though the Essex Monitor does not show a violation of the NAAQS,
it is not sited in the area of peak modeled values for the Area. Table
1 in this document shows the 99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour
SO2 concentrations from 2014 through 2021 at this monitor,
along with the calculated design values for each 3-year period and the
number of hourly SO2 concentrations above 75 ppb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The Essex Monitor is a State and Local Air Monitoring
Station (or SLAMS). The design concentration for the Essex Monitor
for the three-year period (2018-2020) is 9 ppb and the 2019-2021
design concentration is 7 ppb, far under the 2010 SO2
NAAQS.
Table 1--2014-2021 Essex Monitor SO2 Values for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99th Number of
Percentile hourly SO2
Year daily 1-hour Design value values above Valid monitor
maximum value (ppb) 75 ppb (by days (by year)
(ppb) year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014............................................ 26.4 22 0 360
2015............................................ 17.7 22 0 357
2016............................................ 12.9 19 0 355
2017............................................ 8.5 13 0 323
2018............................................ 12.3 11 0 318
2019............................................ 10.5 10 0 351
2020............................................ 4.7 9 0 352
2021............................................ 5.4 7 0 354
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Essex Monitor design value has been below the 2010 1-hr
SO2 NAAQS since 2012, which was the first year of the 3-year
model simulation period used to designate the area, and the Essex
Monitor has also had no hourly SO2 values exceeding the 75
ppb 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Over the last three years of
available data, 2019 through 2021, the 99th percentile hourly values at
the Essex Monitor have fallen to the 5-12 ppb range, with design values
of approximately 10 ppb. This shows significant improvement in air
quality since 2012 within this portion of the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
County Area.
The other monitor in the area is the special purpose Riviera Beach
Monitor located in northern Anne Arundel County near the Fort Smallwood
Complex. This monitor has a current design value well below the 2010
SO2 NAAQS, but the monitor's design value data is
incomplete.\12\ Though only in operation since January 2018, the
Riviera Beach Special Purpose Monitor has experienced significant
periods of invalid or missing measurements during that time and was
discontinued in mid-2022.\13\ The Riviera Beach Monitor data is
incomplete for 2018, 2019, and 2020, and therefore its data is invalid
for the purpose of a CDD.\14\ The Essex Monitor's 2019-2021 1-hr
SO2 design value is 7 ppb and Riviera Beach's 2018-2020 1-hr
SO2 design value is 24 ppb, though the Riviera Beach design
value is flagged as incomplete.\15\ Because the Riviera Beach Monitor
has now been discontinued, a more recent design value is not available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ A special purpose monitor is defined in 40 CFR 58.20 and is
limited to 24 months of operation. This monitor has exceeded the
operations limits under the special purpose definition because it
operated past January 18, 2020. The 2018-20 design concentration for
the Riviera Beach Monitor is 24 ppb, well below the 75 ppb 2010
SO2 NAAQS.
\13\ See Maryland Department of the Environment Ambient Air
Monitoring Network Plan
for Calendar Year 2022 (https://mde.maryland.gov/programs/Air/AirQualityMonitoring/Pages/Network.aspx).
\14\ From MDE's 2022 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan (page
15) concerning this monitor: ``[I]n 2016, the EPA designated
portions of Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County as non-
attainment for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. This
designation was based on modeled, not monitored, SO2
concentrations. In order to better evaluate actual ambient
SO2 concentrations, a source oriented SO2
monitor was established at Riviera Beach Elementary School as a
Special Purpose Monitor on January 12, 2018.''
\15\ See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix T, section 3(b) for monitoring
data completeness criteria for design value determination for the
SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The technical support document (TSD) prepared by EPA for this
action contains an analysis of historical 1-hour monitored
SO2 concentrations at the Essex Monitor for the period 2009-
2021 and the Riviera Beach Monitor for the period between 2018-2021.
The Essex Monitor is shown to have marked reductions in peak 1-hour
SO2 concentrations over time. The Riviera Beach Monitor,
which has data over a much smaller time period and significant gaps in
data collection, nevertheless had a peak hourly monitored 1-hour value
of 63.9 ppb in 2018, and no peak values over 50 ppb since that time.
One potential explanation for recent decreases in the monitored
hourly SO2 concentrations in the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
County Area is that the operations of the coal-fired EGUs in the Area
are very different now than at the time of EPA's nonattainment
designation. Under a consent order between Raven Power and MDE, one of
the area's primary SO2 emission sources (Wagner Unit #2) was
permanently
[[Page 51010]]
required to cease burning coal and switched to natural gas as of July
1, 2020.\16\ In addition, under that same consent order, the remaining
coal-fired sources at Brandon Shores and Wagner have operated much less
frequently than when EPA designated the Area as nonattainment in 2016.
This may explain why there have been no recent exceedances of the 2010
1-hour SO2 NAAQS at the Riviera Beach Monitor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Consent Order between Raven Power Fort Smallwood LLC
and the Maryland Department of the Environment regarding emissions
at the Fort Smallwood electric generating complex, entered December
4, 2019, (Appendix B-1 of Maryland's January 31, 2020 SIP revision).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Overview of EPA Modeling Analysis for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
County Area
EPA's SO2 Modeling TAD outlines modeling approaches for
SO2 NAAQS attainment status designations to assist state,
local, and tribal air agencies in the characterization of ambient air
quality in areas with significant SO2 emission sources.\17\
EPA's SO2 Modeling TAD outlines recommended modeling
approaches and provides recommendations on several aspects of
dispersion modeling in this context, including the use of temporally
varying actual emissions, source characterization, meteorological data,
model selection, and background concentrations. Consistent with the
approach set forth in the SO2 Modeling TAD, EPA conducted a
dispersion modeling analysis for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
nonattainment area to show the impact on air quality of all large
SO2 emissions sources. For this Area, the primary sources of
SO2 emissions include three coal-fired EGUs located in the
nonattainment area--Brandon Shores, C.P. Crane, and H.A. Wagner
electric generating facilities. Brandon Shores and Wagner are located
adjacent to one another in northern Anne Arundel County, residing
within the Fort Smallwood Complex. The Crane facility is located
approximately 22 kilometers northeast of Brandon Shores and Wagner in
Baltimore County. The only other significant source of SO2
emissions in the Area is the Wheelabrator-Baltimore facility, which is
a waste-to-energy facility that combusts up to 2,250 tons per day of
post-recycled waste to generate electricity and steam. Wheelabrator-
Baltimore is located in the City of Baltimore, approximately 13
kilometers northwest of the Brandon Shores and Wagner facilities. EPA
modeled Wheelabrator using its allowable permitted emission limit for
SO2 rather than actual emissions. The allowable permitted
emission limit was much higher than actual emissions, based on annual
reported emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ ``SO2 NAAQS Designations Modeling Technical
Assistance Document,'' U.S. EPA Office of Air and Radiation Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards Air Quality Assessment
Division (August 2016, DRAFT).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA's modeled actual emissions from these sources for the Area for
the period between 2019-2021 (with the exception of Wheelabrator-
Baltimore, for which we relied on allowable permitted emissions). Our
review shows that recent actual, annual SO2 emissions are
much lower compared to the emissions for the time periods used for the
initial nonattainment designation (i.e., 2012-2014 and 2013-2015 actual
emissions). As a result of the closure of Crane's coal units by June
2018, there were no emissions from those units to include in this
analysis. The conversion of Wagner Unit 2 from coal to natural gas in
2020, and the installation of a dry sorbent injection emission control
for SO2 on Wagner Unit 3 in 2018, also contributed to
significant emission reductions in the Area over the last five years.
Both coal units at Brandon Shores have flue gas desulfurization (FGD)
SO2 emissions controls. The remaining Fort Smallwood Complex
coal units have also reduced their total annual operating hours,
directly contributing to reductions in annual SO2 emissions
over the last five years, under enforceable consent orders between the
source owners and the MDE, establishing reduced emission limits and
allowable hours of operation. The decline in actual SO2
emissions from these sources between the time of designation of the
Area as nonattainment (based on the period 2012-2014) and the most
recent 3-year period on which EPA is evaluating the Area for a clean
data determination (2019-2021) can be found in Table 2 in this
document. Emissions from the EGU sources presented in Table 2 in this
document are as reported to EPA's CAMD (Clean Air Markets Division),
while those for the non-EGU Wheelabrator were provided to EPA by MDE.
Table 2--Annual Emissions From Major Stationary SO2 Sources in the Anne Arundel-Baltimore Nonattainment Area for 2012-2021
[Tons of SO2 per Year]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brandon Shores H.A. Wagner C.P. Crane
Year -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wheelabrator-
Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 1 Unit 2 Baltimore
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012.................................................... 1,547 1,301 0.2 2,513 4,964 41.1 1,214 962 194
2013.................................................... 1,389 1,482 0.2 1,555 8,557 72.7 719 2,143 321
2014.................................................... 1,670 1,475 72.6 1,940 7,277 323 574 1,316 310
2015.................................................... 1,311 1,643 65.0 1,188 8,754 185 382 946 (*)
2016.................................................... 1,450 1,270 26.5 163 7,575 74.8 412 638 259
2017.................................................... 1,098 1,418 2.5 117 1,245 60.8 379 449 308
2018.................................................... 1,747 1,785 6.1 230 2,733 197 392 475 346
2019.................................................... 547 954 15.3 88.8 1,124 39.9 0 0 329
2020.................................................... 420 267 0 0 605 13.5 0 0 (*)
2021.................................................... 759 720 5.7 0 645 17.4 0 0 (*)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\*\ Wheelabrator-Baltimore state-reported emissions for 2015 were not available. Annual emissions for Wheelabrator for 2020 and 2021 were not yet
available at the time of EPA's clean data determination analysis.
Based on the source-specific annual SO2 emissions in
Table 2 in this document, emissions from Brandon Shores have been
reduced by about 70 percent between the designation and CDD modeling
periods, while emissions from Wagner have been reduced by about 90
percent during that same period. Emissions from Crane have been
entirely eliminated in the time between the designation and more recent
CDD modeling periods, while actual
[[Page 51011]]
emissions from Wheelabrator during that same period have remained
relatively unchanged. For further information on actual hourly emission
rate historic data, refer to Appendix B of EPA's TSD for hourly
emissions values for the large EGUs in the Area.
EPA's modeling analysis modeled the emissions impacts from the
Wagner, Brandon Shores, and Wheelabrator facilities described above in
the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area. EPA used actual 2019-2021
hourly SO2 emissions from EGUs in the Area, as measured by
continuous emissions monitor (CEM) data and used permitted allowable
emissions for the non-EGU source, Wheelabrator-Baltimore. EPA's
analysis uses the American Meteorological Society/Environmental
Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD), with pre-processing input
data from EPA's Regulatory Model Terrain Pre-processor (AERMAP) and
EPA's AERMOD Meteorological Preprocessor (AERMET) models. AERMOD is a
steady-state plume model that incorporates air dispersion based on
planetary boundary layer (PBL) turbulence structure and scaling
concepts, including treatment of both surface and elevated sources, and
both simple and complex terrain. AERMAP is a stand-alone terrain pre-
processor, which is used to both characterize terrain and generate
receptor grids for use in AERMOD. AERMET is a stand-alone program which
provides AERMOD with the information it needs to characterize the state
of the surface and mixed layer, and the vertical structure of the PBL.
EPA's modeling comports with EPA's SO2 Modeling TAD, with
additional guidance provided by EPA's AERMOD Implementation Guide along
with appropriate sections of Appendix W and AERMOD, AERMAP, and AERMET
user guides.
EPA developed its receptor grid modeling protocol on a modeling
protocol developed by MDE for use in their attainment planning
modeling. For purposes of a CDD, EPA refined Maryland's original
receptor grid. Maryland's original model receptor grid placed nested
Cartesian grids centered on the Fort Smallwood Complex (Brandon Shores
and Wagner) and Crane and spaced: every 25 meters along the ambient
boundary; every 100 meters out to a distance of 15 km; and every 500
meters between 15 and 25 km. EPA's final model receptor grid included
all of the Maryland SIP modeling protocol-based receptors within 10 km
of the Crane and Fort Smallwood EGUs and within 5 km of the
Wheelabrator-Baltimore facility. However, EPA limited the model
receptor grid to areas nearby to the primary coal-fired EGUs based on
modeling done in support of our original designation action for the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore 2010 SO2 NAAQS nonattainment area.
That designation modeling showed peak model SO2
concentrations were confined to within a few kilometers of the coal-
fired EGUs at the Fort Smallwood complex. The final CDD model grid
(after filtering and pre-processing for use in AERMAP) is composed of
56,883 model receptors. Supplemental model receptor grids were based on
those of MDE's modeling protocol, covering the areas within the
boundaries of the Crane and the Fort Smallwood facilities. EPA's
selected modeling domain for the CDD analysis captures the maximum
modeled concentration from the primary emission sources in the
nonattainment area, per the Appendix W modeling guidance. For further
information on the receptor grid utilized for EPA's modeling analysis,
refer to the AERMAP/Model Receptor Development section of EPA's TSD
prepared in support of this action.
Meteorological data utilized in the modeling analysis was developed
using EPA's AERMET (version 22112) preprocessor. AERMET processes three
types of data: (1) hourly surface observations that are typically, but
not exclusively, collected at airports by the National Weather Service
(NWS) and/or the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); (2) twice-daily
upper air soundings collected by the NWS; and (3) data collected from
an on-site or site-specific measurement program or prognostic
meteorological data. Surface meteorological measurements for the Area
were taken from the Baltimore-Washington International Airport (BWI)
Automated Surface Observing Systems (ASOS) Monitor. Upper air soundings
were taken from the Sterling, Virginia site near Dulles Airport in
Virginia just west of Washington, DC. These are the closest available
sites to the primary SO2 sources in the Anne Arundel-
Baltimore County Area. EPA's analysis indicates the meteorological
collection sites and the modeled SO2 emissions sources have
similar elevations and topographical settings.
In accordance with EPA's SO2 Modeling TAD, EPA's
modeling analysis uses surface meteorological data from BWI and upper-
air measurements from Dulles Airport for the 2019-2021 period. Local
input information for the Area was used to analyze surface conditions
using EPA's AERSURFACE tool for AERMET meteorological pre-processor
model for input to AERMOD. AERSURFACE is a tool that processes land
cover data to determine the surface characteristics for use in AERMET
for processing for use in AERMOD.
AERMOD currently cannot simulate dispersion under calm or missing
wind conditions. To reduce the number of calms and missing winds in the
surface data, EPA used the AERMINUTE tool to more accurately translate
1-minute ASOS wind data to generate hourly average wind data for input
to AERMET.
Section 8.3 of EPA's Guideline on Air Quality Models provides
additional discussion on background monitoring concentrations for air
quality analyses. Additional guidance points regarding the
determination of background concentrations for the 1-hr SO2
NAAQS are outlined in EPA's March 1, 2011, 1-hour NO2
clarification memo.\18\ It includes a procedure to use temporally
varying background concentrations. Background concentrations are
essential in constructing the design concentration, or total air
quality concentration, as part of any NAAQS analysis. EPA utilized a
seasonal by hour of day background concentration derived from 2019-2021
monitoring data collected at the Essex, MD SO2 Monitor (Site
# 24-005-3001), as described in EPA's March 1, 2011, 1-hour
NO2 clarification memo. The Essex Monitor is located in
Baltimore County, within the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area,
approximately 16 km north of the Fort Smallwood Complex and 10 km west
of Crane. EPA believes the Essex Monitor, since it is actually in the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area, provides a representative
background concentration for its CDD modeling analysis. Given the
monitor's most recent 1-hr SO2 design value (7 ppb), the
impacts of these sources are probably small and would provide a
conservative estimate of background concentrations for EPA's CDD
modeling analysis. The Essex Monitor is likely also impacted by the
major SO2 emission sources in the Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See EPA's ``Additional Clarification Regarding Application
of Appendix W Modeling Guidance for the 1-hour N02 National Ambient
Air Quality Standard'' memo from Tyler Fox to Regional Air Division
Directors, dated March 1, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA modeled hourly emissions over a 3-year period between 2019
through 2021. Choice of this time period excluded emissions from both
coal-fired units at Crane, which ceased burning coal in June 2018.
Selection of these years simplified the process of obtaining source
emissions data and stack information since only Brandon Shores, Wagner
and Wheelabrator-Baltimore
[[Page 51012]]
operated over the timeframe of EPA's CDD analysis.
To capture the CDD model impacts, the physical stack parameters and
hourly, actual SO2 emission rates must be properly
constructed. The CDD modeling analysis utilized stack (and building)
information and is described in detail in the Building Downwash and
Stack Good Engineering Practice (GEP) section of the TSD prepared by
EPA in support of this action.
1. Results of EPA's Air Quality Modeling Analysis
EPA's CDD modeling utilized meteorological data, actual and
allowable hourly SO2 emissions, and corresponding hourly
stack velocities and stack temperatures to simulate SO2
concentrations over portions of the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area.
This modeling analysis shows that the Area is not violating the 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS based on actual and allowable SO2
emissions from sources within or near the area. No air quality monitor
within the Area (which was designated in Round 2 of EPA's designations
under the 2010 SO2 NAAQS) is currently violating the 1-hr
SO2 NAAQS, although we recognize that the current SLAMS
monitor in Essex, MD is not located at the point of peak modeled values
used by EPA for area designation.
EPA's modeling analysis (based on 2019-2021 SO2
emissions) showed a peak design value (i.e., the 3-year average of the
99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour concentrations, or the 99th
percentile concentrations) of 53.1 ppb. Table 3 in this document
summarizes the peak model receptor design value and the 99th percentile
model concentrations that contributed to that receptor's modeled design
concentration.
Table 3--Summary of 2019-2021 Peak Modeled Receptor 1-Hour SO2 Design Values and 99th Percentile Values for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County, MD Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design value (ppb) SO2 99th SO2 99th SO2 99th
Date Hour of percentile Date Hour of percentile Date Hour of percentile
day (ppb) day (ppb) day (ppb)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
53.1............................... 10-02-2019 14 69.3 7-27-2020 12 52.3 1-20-2021 09 37.9
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This modeled value is approximately 71 percent of the level of the
75 ppb 2010 SO2 NAAQS. The peak model design value occurred
about one km east of the Fort Smallwood Complex, near the southern
shoreline of the Patapsco River east of the Fort Smallwood Complex. We
note that the 99th percentile values declined over the 3-year modeled
period. This trend is similar to the trends observed at the Riviera
Beach Monitor, which is the closest SO2 monitor to the
location of the peak model receptor.
Our analysis shows the remaining coal-fired units within the Fort
Smallwood Complex (i.e., Brandon Shores Units 1 and 2 and Wagner Unit
3) are the primary contributors to the peak model design value,
combining to contributing over 94 percent of the peak receptor's
modeled 1-hour SO2 design concentration. However, FGD
emission controls have been installed on the coal-fired units at
Brandon Shores and dry sorbent injection was installed on Wagner Unit 3
in 2018. Wagner Unit 2 remains operational but since 2021 is fired with
natural gas and is no longer a significant source of SO2
emissions. Wagner Units 1 and 4 are now fired with natural gas or oil
and are less significant SO2 emitters compared to the
remaining coal-fired units. Though the 2019 design value is higher than
those in 2020 and 2021, the additional emissions controls on EGUs in
the Area and tighter emissions limits and annual operating hours
limitations imposed by the consent decree likely contribute to lower
design values in more recent years.
C. Conclusion of EPA's Modeling and Monitoring Analysis
EPA conducted a modeling analysis using three years of actual and
allowable SO2 source emissions coupled with representative
meteorological data for use in modeling. Hourly SO2
emissions from the sources that were included in Maryland's SIP were
constructed along with corresponding stack velocities and temperatures.
This primary emissions source information was processed for inclusion
in EPA's AERMOD air-dispersion model to estimate 1-hour SO2
design values within the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County, MD
nonattainment area.
Final peak model concentrations from EPA's modeling analysis were
53.1 ppb, occuring over the Patapsco River east of the Fort Smallwood
Complex. Large SO2 emission sources, including coal fired
units at Brandon Shores and Wagner, are the largest contributors to the
peak modeled SO2 design concentration in our modeling
analysis. EPA also gauged impacts from other nearby sources to the
primary sources. Modeled design concentrations in these nearby areas
were much lower that the peak modeled design concentrations found in
the main modeling domain.
Ambient air monitoring of the area does not show any violations of
the NAAQS based on the most recently available data for the period
between 2019-2021, though the area of modeled peak concentration is at
a location other than the monitor locations. Recent trend data has
shown both declining emissions and declining monitor 99th percentile
and peak 1-hour monitor values. Based on this available monitoring data
and the accompanying modeling analysis, we have demonstrated that the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area is attaining the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS, based on actual meteorology and emissions during
the 2019-2021 time period. As a result, we have shown that the Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS meets
EPA criteria for the area to qualify for a CDD.
D. EPA Review of Select Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area Attainment
Plan Elements From Maryland's January 31, 2020 SO2 SIP
Revision Request
In the event EPA issues a final CDD, certain nonattainment planning
requirements under CAA section 172(c) are still required for the Area.
Specifically, these elements include an emissions inventory (EI),
required by CAA section 172(c)(3), and a nonattainment new source
review (NNSR) program required by CAA section 172(c)(5). Maryland
submitted these required attainment plan elements to EPA as part of its
attainment plan SIP revision dated January 31, 2020.
1. Maryland's Base Year Emissions Inventory for the Anne Arundel-
Baltimore County Area
EPA's 2014 SO2 Nonattainment Guidance describes the
statutory elements comprising an SO2 attainment
[[Page 51013]]
plan. These requirements include submission of a comprehensive,
accurate and current base year emissions inventory of all sources of
SO2 within the nonattainment area, per CAA section
172(c)(3).\19\ EPA's 2014 SO2 Nonattainment Guidance
requires that the base year emissions inventory should be consistent
with the Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR) at Subpart A to 40
CFR part 51.\20\ This base year inventory can be represented by a year
that contributed to the three-year design value used for the original
nonattainment designation and should include all sources of
SO2 in the nonattainment area and any sources located
outside the nonattainment area which may affect attainment in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See ``Guidance for 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area
SIP Submissions'' (April 23, 2014).
\20\ The AERR at Subpart A to 40 CFR part 51 cover overarching
Federal reporting requirements for the states to submit emissions
inventories for criteria pollutants to EPA's Emissions Inventory
System. EPA uses these submittals, along with other data sources, to
build the National Emissions Inventory.
\21\ See pp. 46-47 of EPA's ``Guidance for 1[hyphen]Hour
SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions,'' dated April 23,
2014.
\22\ MDE issued a title V permit for Raven Power's Brandon
Shores and Wagner generating stations (which MDE considers a single
source for title V and NSR purposes). The Title V permit is
available at MDE's website, at: https://mde.maryland.gov/programs/permits/AirManagementPermits/Test/Raven%20Power%20Ft.%20Smallwood,%20LLC.pdf. EPA does not intend to
add the Title V permit to the SIP but is referencing it here for
purposes of showing declining emissions.
\23\ See Consent Order between Raven Power Fort Smallwood LLC
and the Maryland Department of the Environment relating to
operations at the Herbert A. Wagner electric generating station, as
it relates to regional haze formation, entered June 24, 2021. The
consent order is available for review in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maryland selected 2014 for the base year emission inventory for the
Area, which is appropriate because the nonattainment designation of the
Area was based on data from 2013-2015. Actual emissions from all the
sources of SO2 in the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area
were reviewed and compiled for the base year emissions inventory
requirement. Maryland's 2014 base year SO2 emission
inventory meets the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and comports
with EPA's 2014 SO2 SIP Guidance.\21\ Maryland's 2014 base
year SO2 emissions inventory for the Area, by emission
source category, is contained in Table 4 in this document.
Table 4--2014 SO2 Emission Base Year Inventory for the Anne Arundel-
Baltimore County Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 annual
Emissions source category emissions (tons
per year)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Point (and Quasi-point) Sources........... 14,797.46
Area Sources......................................... 960.59
Onroad Mobile Sources................................ 96.55
Nonroad Mobile Sources............................... 238.71
------------------
Total............................................ 16,093.31
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2014 base year, point source emissions accounted for 91
percent of all SO2 emissions in the Area. The primary
SO2 point sources were the Brandon Shores, Wagner, and Crane
EGUs, and to a lesser extent the Wheelabrator Baltimore waste-to-energy
incinerator. Table 5 in this document shows the 2014 SO2
emissions of point source facilities in the Area that reported annual
emissions of greater than six tons. As noted previously, emissions for
all of these sources have declined dramatically since 2014, with
additional limits enacted for Wagner and Brandon Shores through more
recent 40 CFR part 70 permits, as well as more stringent emission
limits and operational restrictions placed upon those facilities
through consent orders between MDE and the facility owners, as
described in more detail in sections B and C, in this document.\22\
Further, the Crane facility ceased operation in 2018, Wagner's coal-
fired Unit 2 ceased coal combustion in June 2020, and the remaining
Wagner coal-fired unit (Unit 3) is to cease coal combustion by January
1, 2026.\23\
Table 5--Point Source Contribution to the 2014 SO2 Base Year Emissions
Inventory for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 SO2 annual
Facility emissions (tons
per year)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brandon Shores....................................... 3,145.09
Wagner............................................... 9,610.26
C.P. Crane........................................... 1,887.16
All Other Point Sources Combined..................... 33.26
------------------
Total Point Source Emissions..................... 14,675.76
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has evaluated Maryland's 2014 base year emissions inventory for the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area and has determined that it was
developed in a manner consistent with CAA section 172(c)(3) and with
applicable EPA guidance.
[[Page 51014]]
2. Maryland's New Source Review Program
Section 172(c)(5) of the CAA establishes an attainment plan element
requirement that the state have in place a permitting program for the
construction and operation of new or modified major stationary sources
in a nonattainment area, in accordance with section 173 of the CAA.\24\
Maryland has a fully implemented nonattainment new source review (NNSR)
program under the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR), COMAR 26.11.17
``Nonattainment Provisions for Major New Sources and Major
Modifications,'' addressing the criteria pollutants. EPA has approved
this chapter into the Maryland SIP (77 FR 45949, August 2, 2012; as
updated by 80 FR 39969, July 13, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ The CAA NSR program is composed of three separate programs:
Prevention of significant deterioration (PSD), NNSR, and Minor NSR.
PSD is established in part C of title I of the CAA and applies in
undesignated areas and in areas that meet the NAAQS--designated
``attainment areas''--as well as areas where there is insufficient
information to determine if the area meets the NAAQS--designated
``unclassifiable areas.'' The NNSR program is established in part D
of title I of the CAA and applies in areas that are not in
attainment of the NAAQS--designated ``nonattainment areas.'' The
Minor NSR program addresses construction or modification activities
that do not qualify as ``major'' and applies regardless of the
designation of the area in which a source is located. Together,
these programs are referred to as the NSR programs. Section 173 of
the CAA lays out the NNSR program for preconstruction review of new
major sources or major modifications to existing sources, as
required by CAA section 172(c)(5). The programmatic elements for
NNSR include, among other things, compliance with the lowest
achievable emissions rate and the requirement to obtain emissions
offsets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maryland's NNSR program meets the SO2 applicable
requirements of CAA section 173 as COMAR 26.11.17 applies to any new or
modified major stationary source in an area that has been designated
``nonattainment'' under CAA section 107(d)(1)(A)(i).\25\ The SIP-
approved NNSR program covers the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
SO2 Area and includes SO2 as a ``regulated NSR
pollutant.'' \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See COMAR 26.11.17.02A(3).
\26\ See COMAR 26.11.17.01B(24).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maryland's NNSR program rule, as codified at COMAR 26.11.17,
defines ``major stationary source'' as ``any stationary source of air
pollution which emits or has the potential to emit 100 tons or more of
any regulated NSR pollutant,'' which by definition includes
SO2.\27\ A ``significant'' net increase in SO2
emissions is defined as 40 tons per year. ``Best Available Control
Technology'' is defined as an emissions limitation ``based on the
maximum degree of [emissions] reduction for each regulated NSR
pollutant which would be emitted from any proposed major stationary
source or major modification.'' All permits and approvals required by
Maryland's NNSR permitting program, under COMAR 26.11, must be obtained
before construction or modification of a subject emissions source.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See COMAR 26.11.17.01B(17).
\28\ See COMAR 26.11.17.03A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has reviewed Maryland's NNSR program and determined that its
SIP-approved NNSR program under COMAR 26.11 meets the requirements for
NSR under CAA sections 172(c)(5) and 173 and 40 CFR 51.165 for
SO2 sources undergoing construction or major modification in
the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County Area without need for modification of
the SIP-approved NNSR program. Therefore, EPA concludes that the
Maryland SIP meets the NNSR requirements of CAA section 172(c)(5)
applicable to attainment plan requirements for the Area.
3. Maryland Limits on Stationary SO2 Sources
Although EPA is not taking action upon Maryland's attainment
demonstration submitted as part of the January 31, 2020 attainment
plan, EPA has reviewed Maryland's submitted emission limits and
emissions control requirements for large SO2 sources in the
Area. EPA proposes to add to the Maryland SIP as a SIP strengthening
measure a consent order between MDE and Raven Power Fort Smallwood LLC
and a consent order between MDE and C.P. Crane LLC that require
enforceable SO2 limits and operational limitations at the
Fort Smallwood Complex and at the Crane facility.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Appendix B of Maryland's January 30, 2020 attainment
plan SIP revision request to EPA. Specifically, Appendix B1--Consent
Order--Brandon Shores and Wagner Generating Stations, dated December
4, 2019; and Appendix B-2: Consent Order--C.P. Crane Generating
Station, dated October 9, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These consent orders establish SO2 emission limits for
these facilities (beginning in January 2019 and additional limits
beginning in 2021), as summarized herein. Effective October 2019, Crane
Units 1 and 2 are limited to combined SO2 emissions of 2,900
pounds per hour (lbs/hr SO2). Beginning January 2021,
Brandon Shores Units 1 and 2 and Wagner Unit 3 combined (whether
operating individually or in tandem) are limited to 3,860 lb/hr
SO2, on a 30-day rolling average basis. Beginning January
2021, Brandon Shores Units 1 and 2 (operating either individually or in
tandem) shall not exceed a cumulative total of 435 hours per calendar
year when the applicable units are operating at a combined
SO2 emissions rate greater than 2,851 pounds per hour.
Beginning January 2021, Brandon Shores Units 1 and 2 cannot exceed
9,980 lbs/hr SO2, on a 3-hour rolling average basis.
Beginning January 2021, Brandon Shores Units 1 and 2 combined are
limited to three hours per calendar year with combined emissions
greater than 5,150 lbs/hr SO2 (on a 1-hour average basis)
when Wagner Unit 3 is not operating; and are limited to 435 hours per
calendar year of combined emissions greater than 2,851 lbs/hr
SO2 when Wagner Unit 3 is also operating.
Wagner Unit 3 alone cannot emit more than 3,289 lbs/hr
SO2 (on a 1-hour averaging basis); is limited to emitting
1,904 lbs/hr SO2 (on a 30-day rolling average); and is
limited to 336 hours per calendar year of emissions greater than 2,299
lbs/hr SO2 (on a 1-hour averaging basis).
Beginning January 2021, Wagner Unit 1 alone shall not emit more
than 480 lbs/hour SO2 (on a 1-hour averaging basis); and is
limited to operating 438 hours per calendar year burning fuel oil.
Beginning January 2021, at all times when operating, Wagner Unit 3
shall not exceed 1,904 lbs/hr SO2 (as measured on a 30-day
rolling average); and Unit 3 shall not exceed a maximum rate of 3,289
lbs/hr SO2 at all times when operating (on a 1-hour average
basis). Beginning January 2021, at all times when operating, Wagner
Unit 3 shall not exceed a cumulative total operation of 336 hours per
calendar year when the Unit's SO2 emissions rate is greater
than 2,299 lbs/hr SO2 (on a one-hour average basis).
Beginning January 2021, Wagner Unit 4 alone cannot emit more than 1,350
lbs/hr SO2 (on a 1-hour average basis); and is limited to
operating 438 hours per calendar year using fuel oil--though both Units
1 and 4 can operate additional hours each year using natural gas. By
July 2020, Wagner Unit 2 was required to cease operation or to convert
from burning coal to burning natural gas. Annual Emissions reported to
EPA's Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) database and to MDE for the
Crane facility dropped to zero for 2019-2021.
By incorporating these consent decrees between MDE and Raven Power
into the Maryland SIP, EPA is strengthening the SIP and making these
additional permitted limits and operating conditions federally
enforceable.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to issue a CDD for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
County Area. Finalizing this CDD would
[[Page 51015]]
suspend the requirements for Maryland to submit an attainment
demonstration and certain other associated nonattainment planning
requirements for so long as the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
nonattainment area continues to attain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
and would suspend EPA's obligation to promulgate a FIP associated with
the FFS issued on September 20, 2019. This proposed action is
consistent with EPA's long-held interpretation of CAA requirements.
Finalizing this action would not constitute a redesignation of the
Anne Arundel-Baltimore County nonattainment area to attainment of the
2010 SO2 NAAQS under section 107(d)(3) of the CAA. The Anne
Arundel-Baltimore County Area will remain designated nonattainment for
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS until such time as EPA determines that
the area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment and
takes action to redesignate the area.
EPA is simultaneously proposing to approve select elements of the
SO2 attainment plan SIP revision for the Area submitted by
Maryland to EPA on January 31, 2020. EPA is approving select elements
of the attainment plan that would not be suspended under a final CDD--a
base year emission inventory and a showing that the area is covered by
an EPA-approved NNSR program. EPA has determined that Maryland's 2014
base year emissions inventory for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore County
Area comports with relevant EPA emissions inventory guidance, and
therefore pursuant to section 172(c)(3), EPA proposes to approve
Maryland's 2014 base year emissions inventory for the Area. EPA has
also determined that Maryland's NNSR program meets applicable
requirements for NSR under CAA section 173 for SO2 sources
undergoing construction or major modification in the Area. EPA
therefore proposes to approve Maryland's NNSR element of its attainment
plan as meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(5). If EPA's
approval of these elements is finalized, EPA's obligation to promulgate
a FIP as to those elements will be terminated.
Finally, EPA is approving as SIP strengthening measures certain
SO2 emission limit requirements on large SO2
emission sources that were submitted as part of Maryland's attainment
plan for the nonattainment area.
EPA proposes to incorporate by reference several consent orders
between MDE and Raven Power with the January 30, 2020 attainment plan
as SIP strengthening measures to provide federally enforceable limits
on the major SO2 emissions sources in the Anne Arundel-
Baltimore County Area, which are contained in Appendix B of Maryland's
January 30, 2020 SO2 attainment plan SIP revision to
EPA.\30\ EPA proposes to approve this portion of the Maryland's January
2020 submitted plan as a SIP strengthening measure and these consent
orders are available for review in the docket for this action. However,
EPA is not proposing to approve in this action the CAA section
172(c)(1) attainment modeling demonstration submitted as part of the
January 30, 2020 plan revision, nor is EPA proposing to approve the
state's submitted CAA section 172(c)(1) RACM/RACT, CAA section
172(c)(2) RFP, CAA section 172(c)(6) emission limits necessary to
provide for attainment, or CAA section 172(c)(9) contingency measures
elements. As noted, EPA's obligation to promulgate a FIP as to these
elements would be suspended by a CDD, for as long as the CDD remains in
place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Appendix B of the January 30, 2020 attainment plan SIP
Revision. Specifically, Appendix B1--Consent Order--Brandon Shores
and Wagner Generating Stations, dated December 4, 2019; and Appendix
B-2: Consent Order--C.P. Crane Generating Station, dated October 9,
2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference (as described in Section IV of this preamble) two consent
orders between MDE and Raven Power governing SO2 emissions
limitations and operating limitations at the Fort Smallwood Complex
facilities and the Crane facility, as contained in Appendix B of
Maryland's January 30, 2020 SO2 attainment plan SIP revision
to EPA. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials
generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region
III Office (please contact the person identified in the For Further
Information Contact section of this preamble for more information).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action proposes to make a CDD for the Anne Arundel-Baltimore
County Area for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS based on air quality data
which would result in the suspension of the requirement to submit
certain Federal requirements and does not impose any additional
regulatory requirements on sources beyond those required by state law
or existing Federal law. Moreover, 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).
In this case, EPA is proposing approval of two elements of a larger SIP
revision (the 2020 SO2 attainment plan) and is also
proposing approval of two SIP-strengthening consent orders between MDE
and the owner of two major SO2 emitting sources that tighten
SO2 emission limits and impose specific operating conditions
and hours. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly,
this action pertaining to the approval of two elements of the SIP
submission merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements
and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. For these reasons, 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);
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 subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action as defined
by Executive Order 12866;
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
[[Page 51016]]
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, this proposed CDD and accompanying approval of
selected elements of Maryland's January 30, 2020 SO2
attainment plan do not have tribal implications, as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP
is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, and
EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Adam Ortiz,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2022-17341 Filed 8-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
