Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Conditional Approval of the Detroit Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area Plan, 17488-17495 [2023-05819]
Download as PDF
17488
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Proposed Rules
quantity of raw materials and waste,
including continuous emissions
monitoring data and audits, and results
of stack or performance tests.
Updates to NR 400.03 and 484.06(4)
were included to align with Federal
emissions reporting terminology and the
updated emissions inventory process.
The update to NR 400.03 incorporates
an acronym definition used in the
revision of NR 438, while the update to
NR 484.06 corrected citations amended
in NR 438 to reflect EPA’s updated
emissions factor database.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
B. Section 110(a)(2)(F)—Stationary
Source Monitoring System
Section 110(a)(2)(F) contains several
requirements, each of which are
described below.
States must establish a system to
monitor emissions from stationary
sources and submit periodic emissions
reports. Each plan shall also require the
installation, maintenance, and
replacement of equipment, and the
implementation of other necessary
steps, by owners or operators of
stationary sources to monitor emissions
from such sources. The state plan shall
also require periodic reports on the
nature and amounts of emissions and
emissions-related data from such
sources, and correlation of such reports
by each state agency with any emission
limitations or standards established
pursuant to this chapter. Lastly, the
reports shall be available at reasonable
times for public inspection.
WDNR requires regulated sources to
submit various reports, dependent on
applicable requirements and the type of
permit issued, to the Bureau of Air
Management Compliance Team. Basic
authority for Wisconsin’s Federally
mandated Compliance Assurance
Monitoring reporting structure is
provided in Wis. Stats. 285.65. NR 438
and NR 439 set forth the minimum
emissions reporting requirements that
must be reported to EPA annually, and
monitoring and testing requirements,
respectively, for applicable facilities.
Considering the proposed revisions to
NR 438, EPA proposes that Wisconsin
has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F)
with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 and 2015
ozone NAAQS.
II. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve WDNR’s
request to incorporate by reference the
revisions to NR 400.03, 484.06(4), and
438 contained in Rule AM–31–19 into
Wisconsin’s SIP in order to update the
emission reporting requirements.
Further, EPA is proposing to approve
110(a)(2)(F) of Wisconsin’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
infrastructure SIP submission, required
under the 2012 PM2.5 and 2015 ozone
NAAQS, based on the updated rule
submission. Approving this element
would lead to full approval of
Wisconsin’s 2012 PM2.5 infrastructure
SIP.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
revisions to Wisconsin Administrative
Code rules NR 400.03, NR 438, and NR
484.06(4) Table 4D Row (a), as
published in the Wisconsin Register
July 2022 No. 799, effective August 1,
2022, discussed in section I of this
preamble. EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents
generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region 5 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: March 9, 2023.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2023–05281 Filed 3–22–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2022–0976; FRL–10788–
01–R5]
Air Plan Approval; Michigan;
Conditional Approval of the Detroit
Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area
Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to
conditionally approve the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23MRP1.SGM
23MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Proposed Rules
submitted by Michigan on December 20,
2022, and supplemented on February
21, 2023, which amends a SIP
submission previously submitted to
EPA on May 31, 2016 and June 30, 2016,
for attaining the 1-hour sulfur dioxide
(SO2) primary national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS) for the
Detroit SO2 nonattainment area. If this
action is finalized, EPA will propose to
convert the conditional approval of the
SIP revision to a full approval upon
Michigan timely meeting its
commitment to submit the issued
permits.
Comments must be received on
or before April 24, 2023.
DATES:
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2022–0976 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
arra.sarah@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.,
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
ADDRESSES:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Abigail Teener, Environmental
Engineer, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604, (312) 353–7314, teener.abigail@
epa.gov. The EPA Region 5 office is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays and facility closures
due to COVID–19.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
17489
Rule 430 under state law in the
Michigan Court of Claims. The decision
invalidated Rule 430 on October 4,
2017. United States Steel Corp. v. Dept.
I. Why was Michigan required to submit an
of Environmental Quality, No. 16–
SO2 plan for the Detroit area?
II. Requirements for SO2 Nonattainment Area 000202–MZ, 2017 WL 5974195 (Mich.
Plans
Ct. Cl. Oct. 4, 2017). Because the State’s
III. Review of Michigan’s Attainment Plan
submitted attainment demonstration
IV. Review of Other Plan Requirements
relied on a limitation that had become
A. RACM/RACT
unenforceable and, therefore, could not
B. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
meet the requirements of CAA sections
C. Contingency Measures
110 and 172, EPA could not fully
V. What action is EPA taking?
approve Michigan’s 2016 plan.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
On March 19, 2021, EPA partially
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
approved and partially disapproved
I. Why was Michigan required to
Michigan’s SO2 plan as submitted in
submit an SO2 plan for the Detroit area? 2016 (86 FR 14827) (effective April 19,
On June 22, 2010, EPA published a
2021). EPA approved the base-year
new 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS of 75
emissions inventory and affirmed that
parts per billion (ppb), which is met at
the new source review (NSR)
an ambient air quality monitoring site
requirements for the area had previously
when the 3-year average of the annual
been met on December 16, 2013 (78 FR
99th percentile of daily maximum 176064). EPA also approved the
hour average concentrations does not
enforceable control measures for two
exceed 75 ppb, as determined in
facilities as SIP strengthening. At that
accordance with appendix T of 40 CFR
time, EPA disapproved the attainment
part 50. See 75 FR 35520, codified at 40 demonstration, as well as the
CFR 50.17(a)–(b). On August 5, 2013,
requirements for meeting reasonable
EPA designated 29 areas of the country
further progress (RFP) toward
as nonattainment for the 2010 SO2
attainment of the NAAQS, reasonably
NAAQS, including the Detroit area
available control measures and
within the State of Michigan. See 78 FR reasonably available control technology
47191, codified at 40 CFR part 81,
(RACM/RACT), and contingency
subpart C. These area designations
measures. Additionally, EPA
became effective on October 4, 2013.
disapproved the plan’s control measures
Section 191 of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
for two facilities as not demonstrating
directs states to submit SIPs for areas
attainment. EPA’s March 19, 2021,
designated as nonattainment for the SO2 partial disapproval started a sanctions
NAAQS to EPA within 18 months of the clock which is permanently stopped
effective date of the designation, i.e., by only by meeting the conditions of EPA’s
no later than April 4, 2015, in this case.
regulations at 40 CFR 52.31(d).
On October 12, 2022, EPA
These SIPs were required to
promulgated a Federal Implementation
demonstrate that their respective areas
will attain the NAAQS as expeditiously Plan (FIP) for the Detroit SO2
nonattainment area (87 FR 61514),
as practicable, but no later than 5 years
which satisfied EPA’s duty to
from the effective date of designation,
promulgate a FIP for the area under
which was October 4, 2018.
For a number of nonattainment areas, CAA section 110(c) that resulted from
including the Detroit area, EPA
the previous finding of failure to submit.
published an action on March 18, 2016
However, it did not affect the sanctions
(effective April 18, 2016), finding that
clock started under CAA section 179
Michigan and other pertinent states had resulting from EPA’s partial disapproval
failed to submit the required SO2
of the prior SIP, which would be
nonattainment plan by the submittal
permanently stopped only by meeting
deadline (81 FR 14736). Michigan
the conditions of EPA’s regulations at 40
submitted an attainment plan for the
CFR 52.31(d)(5).
While EPA’s FIP for the Detroit area
Detroit SO2 area on May 31, 2016, and
meets the requirements for SO2
submitted associated final enforceable
nonattainment area plans, the FIP does
measures on June 30, 2016. As part of
not relieve Michigan of the requirement
its 2016 plan, Michigan imposed
under Section 191 of the CAA to submit
emission limits for U.S. Steel it
a plan that provides for attainment of
concluded were necessary to bring the
the SO2 NAAQS for the Detroit
Detroit area into attainment via
nonattainment area. On December 20,
Michigan Administrative Code (MAC)
2022, Michigan submitted a revised
336.1430 (‘‘Rule 430’’). Michigan
attainment plan for the Detroit SO2
submitted Rule 430 to EPA as an
enforceable limitation element for
nonattainment area mirroring EPA’s FIP
approval as part of its SO2 plan.
in order to remedy Michigan’s 2016
plan deficiencies specified in EPA’s
Subsequently, U.S. Steel challenged
This
supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\23MRP1.SGM
23MRP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
17490
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Proposed Rules
March 19, 2021 rulemaking. Michigan’s
December 20, 2022, plan depends, in
part, on permits that have not yet been
issued but will include limits and
associated requirements for the U.S.
Steel and Dearborn Industrial
Generation (DIG) facilities that are no
less stringent than those set forth in
EPA’s FIP, codified at 40 CFR 52.1189.
Under section 110(k)(4) of the CAA,
EPA may conditionally approve a plan
based on a commitment from the State
to adopt specific enforceable measures
within one year from the date of
approval. EPA’s October 28, 1992,
memorandum, entitled ‘‘State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions
Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act
(Act) Deadlines,’’ states that such
commitments should include a formal
request that EPA approve the
commitment, be subject to public
hearing pursuant of 40 CFR 51.102, and
include a schedule for the adoption of
the required measures. Therefore,
Michigan included in its December 20,
2022, submittal, which was subject to
public hearing, a request that EPA
conditionally approve its revised plan
for the Detroit area, conditional upon
the issuance and submission for
incorporation into the SIP of the NSR
permits for the U.S. Steel and DIG
facilities, as well as a commitment to
submit the permits to EPA within one
year of a conditional approval. On
February 21, 2023, Michigan submitted
a letter clarifying the schedule for the
conditional approval, including
Michigan’s commitment to submit the
necessary permits by April 30, 2024,
and the schedule Michigan expects to
follow to meet that commitment.
Michigan’s expected schedule includes
ensuring all necessary permit
applications are submitted by March 31,
2023, beginning the 240-day permit
review process by April 1, 2023, issuing
permits by December 1, 2023, and
submitting permits to EPA by December
31, 2023. Michigan’s expected date of
submittal provides some cushion to
ensure the State is able to meet its
commitment to submit the permits by
April 30, 2024, and EPA finds that
Michigan’s schedule is reasonable.
If EPA finalizes this conditional
approval, the State must meet its
commitment to submit the necessary
permits by April 30, 2024. If the State
fails to do so, the action will become a
disapproval. In such case, EPA will
notify the State by letter of the
disapproval and subsequently publish a
document in the Federal Register
notifying the public that the conditional
approval automatically converted to a
disapproval.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
If the State meets its commitment
within the applicable time frame, the
conditionally approved submission will
remain a part of the SIP until EPA takes
final action approving or disapproving
the new submittal. If EPA disapproves
the new submittal, Michigan’s
conditionally approved Detroit SO2 plan
will also be disapproved at that time. If
EPA approves the submittal, Michigan’s
Detroit SO2 plan will be fully approved
in its entirety and replace the
conditionally approved element in the
SIP.
Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(2)(ii), if the
State has submitted a revised plan to
correct the deficiency, and EPA
proposes to conditionally approve the
plan and issues an interim final
determination that the revised plan
corrects the deficiency, application of
the new source offset sanction shall be
stayed and application of the highway
sanction shall be deferred. However, if
the State does not meet its commitment
and the plan is disapproved, the new
source offset sanction shall reapply and
the highway sanction shall apply on the
date of proposed or final disapproval. In
the Detroit SO2 nonattainment area, the
two-to-one new source offset sanction
took effect on October 19, 2022 (18
months following the effective date of
March 19, 2021, rulemaking that
triggered the sanctions clock), and the
highway funding sanction was
scheduled to take effect on April 19,
2023 (6 months after the date of the
offset sanctions), as the result of the
March 19, 2021, partial disapproval.
The remainder of this action describes
the requirements that SO2
nonattainment plans must meet in order
to obtain EPA approval, provides a
review of Michigan’s revised plan with
respect to these requirements, and
describes EPA’s proposed conditional
approval of the plan.
II. Requirements for SO2
Nonattainment Area Plans
Nonattainment SIPs must meet the
applicable requirements of the CAA,
and specifically CAA sections 110, 172,
191 and 192. EPA’s regulations
governing nonattainment SIPs are set
forth at 40 CFR part 51, with specific
procedural requirements and control
strategy requirements residing at
subparts F and G, respectively. Soon
after Congress enacted the 1990
Amendments to the CAA, EPA issued
comprehensive guidance on SIPs, in a
document entitled the ‘‘General
Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the CAA Amendments of
1990,’’ published at 57 FR 13498 (April
16, 1992) (General Preamble). Among
other things, the General Preamble
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
addressed SO2 SIPs and fundamental
principles for SIP control strategies. Id.,
at 13545–49, 13567–68. On April 23,
2014, EPA issued recommended
guidance for meeting the statutory
requirements in SO2 SIPs, in a
document entitled, ‘‘Guidance for 1Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP
Submissions,’’ available at https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/
2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_
nonattainment_sip.pdf. In this guidance
EPA described the statutory
requirements for a complete
nonattainment area SIP, which includes:
An accurate emissions inventory of
current emissions for all sources of SO2
within the nonattainment area; an
attainment demonstration;
demonstration of RFP; implementation
of RACM (including RACT); NSR;
emissions limitations and control
measures as necessary to attain the
NAAQS; and adequate contingency
measures for the affected area. EPA
already concluded in its March 19,
2021, rulemaking that Michigan has met
the emissions inventory and NSR
requirements.
In order for EPA to approve a SIP as
meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 110, 172 and 191–192 and
EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR part 51, the
SIP for the affected area needs to
demonstrate to EPA’s satisfaction that
each of the aforementioned
requirements have been met. Under
CAA sections 110(l) and 193, EPA may
not approve a SIP that would interfere
with any applicable requirement
concerning NAAQS attainment and
RFP, or any other applicable
requirement, and no requirement in
effect (or required to be adopted by an
order, settlement, agreement, or plan in
effect before November 15, 1990) in any
area which is a nonattainment area for
any air pollutant, may be modified in
any manner unless it ensures equivalent
or greater emission reductions of such
air pollutant.
CAA section 172(c)(1) directs states
with areas designated as nonattainment
to demonstrate that the submitted plan
provides for attainment of the NAAQS.
40 CFR part 51, subpart G, further
delineates the control strategy
requirements that SIPs must meet, and
EPA has long required that all SIPs and
control strategies reflect four
fundamental principles of
quantification, enforceability,
replicability, and accountability.
General Preamble at 13567–68. SO2
attainment plans must consist of two
components: (1) Emission limits and
other control measures that ensure
implementation of permanent,
enforceable and necessary emission
E:\FR\FM\23MRP1.SGM
23MRP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Proposed Rules
controls, and (2) a modeling analysis
which meets the requirements of 40 CFR
part 51, appendix W, which
demonstrates that these emission limits
and control measures provide for timely
attainment of the primary SO2 NAAQS
as expeditiously as practicable, but by
no later than the attainment date for the
affected area. In all cases, the emission
limits and control measures must be
accompanied by appropriate methods
and conditions to determine compliance
with the respective emission limits and
control measures and must be
quantifiable (i.e., a specific amount of
emission reduction can be ascribed to
the measures), fully enforceable
(specifying clear, unambiguous and
measurable requirements for which
compliance can be practicably
determined), replicable (the procedures
for determining compliance are
sufficiently specific and non-subjective
so that two independent entities
applying the procedures would obtain
the same result), and accountable
(source specific limits must be
permanent and must reflect the
assumptions used in the SIP
demonstrations).
Preferred air quality models for use in
regulatory applications are described in
appendix A of EPA’s Guideline on Air
Quality Models (40 CFR part 51,
appendix W). In 2005, EPA promulgated
AERMOD as the Agency’s preferred
near-field dispersion modeling for a
wide range of regulatory applications
addressing stationary sources (for
example in estimating SO2
concentrations) in all types of terrain
based on extensive developmental and
performance evaluation. Supplemental
guidance on modeling for purposes of
demonstrating attainment of the SO2
standard is provided in appendix A to
the April 23, 2014, SO2 nonattainment
area SIP guidance document referenced
above. Appendix A provides extensive
guidance on the modeling domain, the
source inputs, assorted types of
meteorological data, and background
concentrations. Consistency with the
recommendations in this guidance is
generally necessary for the attainment
demonstration to offer adequately
reliable assurance that the plan provides
for attainment.
As stated previously, attainment
demonstrations for the 2010 1-hour
primary SO2 NAAQS must demonstrate
future attainment and maintenance of
the NAAQS in the entire area
designated as nonattainment (i.e., not
just at the violating monitor). This is
demonstrated by using air quality
dispersion modeling (see appendix W to
40 CFR part 51) that shows that the mix
of sources, enforceable control
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
measures, and emission rates in an
identified area will not lead to a
violation of the SO2 NAAQS. For a
short-term (i.e., 1-hour) standard, EPA
believes that dispersion modeling, using
allowable emissions and addressing
stationary sources in the affected area
(and in some cases those sources located
outside the nonattainment area which
may affect attainment in the area) is
technically appropriate, efficient and
effective in demonstrating attainment in
nonattainment areas because it takes
into consideration combinations of
meteorological and emission source
operating conditions that may
contribute to peak ground-level
concentrations of SO2.
The meteorological data used in the
analysis should generally be processed
with the most recent version of
AERMET. Estimated concentrations
should include ambient background
concentrations, should follow the form
of the standard, and should be
calculated as described in section
2.6.1.2 of the August 23, 2010,
clarification memo on ‘‘Applicability of
Appendix W Modeling Guidance for the
1-hr SO2 National Ambient Air Quality
Standard’’ (U.S. EPA, 2010).
For a more in-depth discussion on the
requirements of SO2 nonattainment
plans, including the use of longer-term
average limits, see EPA’s proposed FIP
(87 FR 33095).
III. Review of Michigan’s Attainment
Plan
Michigan’s plan for the Detroit
nonattainment area mirrors EPA’s
promulgated FIP for the area. Therefore,
Michigan’s plan relies on the modeling
analysis EPA used to support its FIP,
which is attached as appendix B of
Michigan’s December 20, 2022,
submittal, to demonstrate attainment of
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in the Detroit
area. A more in-depth discussion of the
modeling analysis may be found in
EPA’s proposed FIP (87 FR 33095) and
the associated technical support
document, which is included in the
docket for this action as appendix B of
Michigan’s December 20, 2022,
submittal.
An important aspect of an attainment
plan is that the emission limits that
provide for attainment be quantifiable,
fully enforceable, replicable, and
accountable. See General Preamble at
13567–68. Michigan’s attainment plan
includes the same limits for the U.S.
Steel, EES Coke, Cleveland-Cliffs Steel
Corporation, DIG, Carmeuse Lime, and
DTE Trenton Channel facilities that are
included in EPA’s FIP, and which are
all shown below in Table 1. The plan
also includes the same requirement that
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
17491
a 170-foot stack be constructed at U.S.
Steel Boilerhouse 2 by November 14,
2024, as set forth in EPA’s FIP. The FIP
made all of these limits and
requirements federally enforceable, via
either incorporation of permits
containing the limits and requirements
into Michigan’s SIP or inclusion in the
FIP regulatory language, codified at 40
CFR 52.1189. As Michigan’s plan cannot
rely on the FIP regulatory language, the
enforceability mechanisms of all the
limits relied upon by Michigan’s plan
are described in the remainder of this
section.
In preparing its 2016 plan, Michigan
adopted Permit to Install 193–14A,
governing the Carmeuse Lime SO2
emissions, and Permit to Install 125–
11C, governing the DTE Trenton
Channel SO2 emissions. These
construction permit revisions were
adopted by Michigan following
established, appropriate public review
procedures. The permit compliance
dates were October 1, 2018 for
Carmeuse Lime and January 1, 2017 for
DTE Trenton Channel. Both of these
permits were incorporated into
Michigan’s SIP as part of EPA’s March
19, 2021, action partially approving and
partially disapproving Michigan’s SO2
plan (86 FR 14827). DTE Trenton
Channel has since permanently shut
down as of June 19, 2022, under court
order.1 However, the DTE Trenton
Channel permitted limit was included
in the FIP analysis and included in
Michigan’s revised plan as a
precautionary measure. The Carmeuse
Lime and DTE Trenton Channel permits
were incorporated into Michigan’s SIP
as part of EPA’s March 19, 2021, action,
so EPA is not proposing to reincorporate them into 40 CFR part 52 in
this action.
Emission limits and associated
requirements for EES Coke and
Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation are
contained in permits Permit to Install
51–08C, effective November 21, 2014,
and Permit MI–ROP–A8640–2016a,
modified January 19, 2017, respectively.
These limits and associated monitoring
requirements were also included in
EPA’s FIP, codified at 40 CFR 52.1189.
The permit revisions were adopted by
Michigan following established,
appropriate public review procedures.
EPA finds that these permit revisions
provide for permanent enforceability
and is proposing to incorporate these
permits into Michigan’s SIP in this
action.
1 See https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/
files/267-1_-_sierra_club_-_dte_separate_
agreement.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\23MRP1.SGM
23MRP1
17492
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Michigan has committed to issue
permits for the emission limits and
associated construction, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements for the U.S. Steel and DIG
units, including the construction of a
new 170-foot stack for U.S. Steel
Boilerhouse 2 by November 14, 2024,
that are no less stringent than those
specified in 40 CFR 52. 1189. These
enforceable requirements will be
contained in permits or permit revisions
that have not yet been issued, but that
Michigan has committed to submit to
EPA by April 30, 2024. While EPA
cannot incorporate permits containing
emission limits for the U.S. Steel and
DIG unit limits into Michigan’s SIP at
this time, these limits were previously
adopted into EPA’s FIP and will
continue to remain federally enforceable
as part of the regulatory text of EPA’s
FIP, codified at 40 CFR 52.1189.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to
conditionally approve Michigan’s plan,
pending the issuance and timely
submission of the appropriate permits to
EPA for incorporation into the SIP.
TABLE 1—EMISSION LIMITS INCLUDED IN MICHIGAN’S DETROIT SO2 NONATTAINMENT AREA PLAN
SO2 emission
limit
(lb/hr)
Unit
Permit No. or status
SIP status
U.S. Steel—Zug Island
Boilerhouse 1 (all stacks combined) ......
A1 Blast Furnace ....................................
B2 Blast Furnace ....................................
D4 Blast Furnace ...................................
A/B Blas Furnace Flares ........................
D Furnace Flare .....................................
Boilerhouse 2 .........................................
55.00
0.00
40.18
40.18
60.19
60.19
* 750.00/81.00
Permit issuance in progress ..................
If this action is finalized, approval of
Michigan’s plan will be conditional
upon the timely submission of these
permits for incorporation into the SIP.
Permit issuance in progress.
U.S. Steel—Ecorse
Hot Strip Mill—Slab Reheat Furnace 1 ..
Hot Strip Mill—Slab Reheat Furnace 2 ..
Hot Strip Mill—Slab Reheat Furnace 3 ..
Hot Strip Mill—Slab Reheat Furnace 4 ..
Hot Strip Mill—Slab Reheat Furnace 5 ..
No. 2 Baghouse .....................................
Main Plant Boiler No. 8 ..........................
Main Plant Boiler No. 9 ..........................
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
0.31
3.30
0.07
0.07
Permit issuance in progress ..................
If this action is finalized, approval of
Michigan’s plan will be conditional
upon the timely submission of this
permit for incorporation into the SIP.
EES Coke
Combustion Stack ..................................
544.6
Permit to Install 51–08C ........................
EPA is proposing to incorporate this
permit into Michigan’s SIP.
DTE Trenton Channel **
Trenton Channel Unit 9 ..........................
5,907
Permit to Install 125–11C ......................
Incorporated into Michigan’s SIP as part
of March 19, 2021 action (86 FR
14827). However, the source has
since shut down.
Carmeuse Lime
Carmeuse Lime Stack ............................
470
Permit to Install 193–14A ......................
Incorporated into Michigan’s SIP as part
of March 19, 2021 action (86 FR
14827).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation **
Furnace B Baghouse Stack ...................
Furnace B Stove Stack ..........................
Furnace B Baghouse and Stove Stacks
(combined).
Furnace C Baghouse Stack ...................
Furnace C Stove Stack ..........................
Furnace C Baghouse and Stove Stacks
(combined).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
71.9
38.75
77.8
Permit MI–ROP–A8640–2016a .............
EPA is proposing to incorporate this
permit into Michigan’s SIP.
179.65
193.6
271.4
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\23MRP1.SGM
23MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Proposed Rules
17493
TABLE 1—EMISSION LIMITS INCLUDED IN MICHIGAN’S DETROIT SO2 NONATTAINMENT AREA PLAN—Continued
SO2 emission
limit
(lb/hr)
Unit
Permit No. or status
SIP status
DIG **
Boilers 1, 2, and 3 (combined) ...............
Boilers 1, 2, and 3 and Flares 1 and 2
(combined).
420
840
Permit issuance in progress ..................
If this action is finalized, approval of
Michigan’s plan will be conditional
upon the timely submission of this
permit for incorporation into the SIP.
* U.S. Steel—Zug Island Boilerhouse 2 shall emit less than 750.00 lbs/hr unless Boilerhouse 1, A1 Blast Furnace, B2 Blast Furnace, D4 Blast
Furnace, A/B Blast Furnace Flares, or D Furnace Flare is operating, in which case it shall emit less than 81.00 lbs/hr. In addition to the limit, this
permit will also require a new 170-foot stack to be constructed for Boilerhouse 2 by November 14, 2024.
** The limit for Trenton Channel is expressed as a 30-day average limit, and the limits for Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation and DIG are expressed as daily average limits. EPA’s FIP proposal addresses the use of these longer-term average limits, both with respect to the general suitability of using such limits for demonstrating attainment and with respect to whether the particular limits included in the plan have been suitably
demonstrated to provide for attainment.
If this action is finalized and
Michigan fails to submit the permits
containing the necessary requirements
for the U.S. Steel and DIG units, the
action will become a disapproval one
year from the date of final conditional
approval. If EPA disapproves the new
submittal, Michigan’s conditionally
approved Detroit SO2 plan will also be
disapproved at that time. Additionally,
the new source offset sanction shall
reapply and the highway sanction shall
apply on the date of proposed or final
disapproval.
Michigan commits to issue permits
that contain requirements that are no
less stringent than EPA’s FIP, codified at
40 CFR 52.1189. Because Michigan’s
commitment relies on the same
modeling analysis that supports EPA’s
FIP and will contain emission limits
and associated requirements that are no
less stringent that EPA’s FIP, EPA is
proposing to conditionally approve
Michigan’s plan, conditional upon the
timely submission of permits containing
the necessary SO2 emission limits and
associated requirements for the U.S.
Steel and DIG units.
IV. Review of Other Plan Requirements
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
A. RACM/RACT
CAA section 172(c)(1) states that
nonattainment plans shall provide for
the implementation of all RACM as
expeditiously as practicable (including
such reductions in emissions from
existing sources in the area as may be
obtained through the adoption, at a
minimum, of RACT) and shall provide
for attainment of the NAAQS. For most
criteria pollutants, RACT is control
technology as needed to meet the
NAAQS that is reasonably available
considering technological and economic
feasibility. However, the definition of
RACT for SO2 is, simply, that control
technology which is necessary to
achieve the NAAQS (see 40 CFR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
51.100(o)). CAA section 172(c)(6)
requires plans to include enforceable
emissions limitations, and such other
control measures as may be necessary or
appropriate to provide for attainment of
the NAAQS.
In its March 19, 2021, rulemaking,
EPA disapproved Michigan’s 2016
attainment plan because it relied on
Rule 430, which was invalidated and so
was no longer an enforceable
mechanism. Therefore, the plan could
not be considered to provide an
appropriate attainment demonstration,
and it did not demonstrate RACM/
RACT or meet the requirement for
necessary emissions limitations or
control measures.
EPA’s FIP for attaining the 1-hour SO2
NAAQS in the Detroit area is based on
a variety of measures, including permits
for Carmeuse Lime (effective date of
October 1, 2018) and DTE Trenton
Channel (effective date of January 1,
2017) that have been incorporated into
Michigan’s SIP, as well as the FIP
regulatory language, codified at 40 CFR
52.1189, regarding U.S. Steel, EES Coke,
Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation, and
DIG emissions. The FIP requires
compliance by November 14, 2024, for
U.S. Steel Boilerhouse 2 and November
14, 2022, for all other units. The
compliance schedule for U.S. Steel
Boilerhouse 2 allows time for the owner
or operator to submit a construction
permit application to the State of
Michigan (required by February 12,
2023), as well as time for the State of
Michigan to issue the permit, the owner
or operator to send out requests for
proposal and award a construction
contract and procure materials, and for
completion of construction. Since
Michigan’s plan follows the same
compliance schedule by requiring
compliance on the same dates as the
FIP, EPA proposes to determine that
these measures suffice to provide for
attainment and proposes to conclude
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
that the Michigan’s plan satisfies the
requirement in sections 172(c)(1) and (6)
to adopt and submit all RACM/RACT
and emissions limitations or control
measures as needed to attain the
standards as expeditiously as
practicable.
B. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
Section 171(1) of the CAA defines
RFP as such annual incremental
reductions in emissions of the relevant
air pollutant as are required by part D
or may reasonably be required by EPA
for the purpose of ensuring attainment
of the applicable NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date. This
definition is most appropriate for
pollutants that are emitted by numerous
and diverse sources, where the
relationship between any individual
source and the overall air quality is not
explicitly quantified, and where the
emission reductions necessary to attain
the NAAQS are inventory-wide. (See
EPA’s April 2014 SO2 nonattainment
planning guidance, page 40.) For SO2,
there is usually a single ‘‘step’’ between
pre-control nonattainment and postcontrol attainment. Therefore, for SO2,
with its discernible relationship
between emissions and air quality, and
significant and immediate air quality
improvements, RFP is best construed as
adherence to an ambitious compliance
schedule. (See General Preamble at 74
FR 13547 (April 16, 1992)).
In its March 19, 2021, rulemaking,
EPA concluded that Michigan had not
satisfied the requirement in section
172(c)(2) to provide for RFP toward
attainment. Michigan’s 2016 attainment
plan did not demonstrate that the
implementation of the control measures
required under the plan were sufficient
to provide for attainment of the NAAQS
in the Detroit SO2 nonattainment area,
as some control measures were not
enforceable due to the invalidation of
Rule 430. Therefore, a compliance
E:\FR\FM\23MRP1.SGM
23MRP1
17494
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
schedule to implement those controls
was not sufficient to provide for RFP.
EPA’s FIP requires compliance by
November 14, 2024, for U.S. Steel
Boilerhouse 2 and November 14, 2022,
for all other units. As described in
section V.B above, the 2-year
compliance schedule for U.S. Steel
Boilerhouse 2 allows 90 days for the
owner or operator to submit a
construction permit application to the
State of Michigan, as well as time for the
State of Michigan to issue the permit,
the owner or operator to send out
requests for proposal and award a
construction contract and procure
materials, and for completion of
construction. For DTE Trenton Channel
and Carmeuse lime, compliance was
required by January 1, 2017, and
October 1, 2018, respectively. EPA
concluded in the FIP that this is an
ambitious compliance schedule, as that
term is used in the April 2014 guidance
for SO2 nonattainment plans. As
Michigan’s plan follows the same
compliance schedule as the FIP, EPA
concludes that this plan therefore
provides for RFP in accordance with the
approach to RFP described in EPA’s
2014 guidance.
C. Contingency Measures
EPA guidance describes special
features of SO2 planning that influence
the suitability of alternative means of
addressing the requirement in section
172(c)(9) for contingency measures for
SO2, such that in particular an
appropriate means of satisfying this
requirement is for the air agency to have
a comprehensive enforcement program
that identifies sources of violations of
the SO2 NAAQS and to undertake an
aggressive follow-up for compliance and
enforcement. (See EPA’s April 2014 SO2
nonattainment planning guidance, page
41.) Michigan has such an enforcement
program, pursuant to section 5526 of
part 55, Air Pollution Control, of the
Natural Resources and Environmental
Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as
amended, Michigan Compiled Laws
324.5526. Michigan enforcement and
compliance authority is furthered by the
State’s title V program, which includes
a compliance monitoring program,
periodic inspections, review of
company monitoring records, reporting,
and issuance of violation notices for all
violations shown from inspections or
data. In addition, Michigan stated that it
responds promptly to citizen
complaints, reports all high priority
violations to EPA, and puts all
inspection reports and violation notices
on Michigan’s website. Therefore, EPA
proposes that Michigan’s plan satisfies
the contingency measure requirement in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
accordance with the approach to
contingency measures described in
EPA’s 2014 guidance.
V. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to conditionally
approve Michigan’s revised SIP
submission, which the State submitted
to EPA on December 20, 2022, for
attaining the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
for the Detroit area and for meeting
other nonattainment area planning
requirements, pending the timely
submission of permits containing
emission limits for the U.S. Steel and
DIG facilities. This SO2 attainment plan
includes Michigan’s attainment
demonstration for the Detroit area. The
plan also addresses requirements for
RFP, RACT/RACM, and contingency
measures. EPA previously concluded
that Michigan has addressed the
requirements for emissions inventories
for the Detroit area and nonattainment
area NSR. EPA has determined that
Michigan’s Detroit SO2 plan meets
applicable requirements of section 172
of the CAA, conditioned upon the
timely submission of the appropriate
permits.
Michigan’s Detroit SO2 plan is based
on the Carmeuse Lime emission limits
specified in Permit to Install 193–14A,
the DTE Trenton Channel emission
limits specified in Permit to Install 125–
11C, the EES Coke limits specified in
Permit to Install 51–08C, ClevelandCliffs Steel Corporation emission limits
specified in Permit MI–ROP–A8640–
2016a, and U.S. Steel and DIG limits
that will be included in permits that
Michigan has committed to submit for
incorporation into Michigan’s SIP by
April 30, 2024. Regardless of whether
these permits are incorporated into
Michigan’s SIP, the U.S. Steel and DIG
limits will remain federally enforceable
in EPA’s FIP, codified at 40 CFR
52.1189, until further action. The
Carmeuse Lime and DTE Trenton
Channel permits have already been
incorporated into Michigan’s SIP and
EPA is not proposing to re-incorporate
them into 40 CFR part 52 here. EPA is
proposing to incorporate Permit to
Install 51–08C, governing EES Coke SO2
emissions and Permit MI–ROP–A8640–
2016a, governing Cleveland-Cliffs Steel
Corporation SO2 emissions into
Michigan’s SIP in this action.
If EPA finalizes this conditional
approval, the State must meet its
commitment to submit the necessary
permits by April 30, 2024. If the State
fails to do so, the action will become a
disapproval one year from the date of
final conditional approval. In such case,
EPA will notify the State by letter of the
disapproval and subsequently publish a
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
document in the Federal Register
notifying the public that the conditional
approval automatically converted to a
disapproval.
If the State meets its commitment
within the applicable time frame, the
conditionally approved submission will
remain a part of the SIP until EPA takes
final action approving or disapproving
the new permits. If EPA disapproves the
new submittal, Michigan’s conditionally
approved Detroit SO2 plan will also be
disapproved at that time. If EPA
approves the submittal, Michigan’s
Detroit SO2 plan will be approved in its
entirety and replace the conditionally
approved element in the SIP.
Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(2)(ii), if the
State has submitted a revised plan to
correct the deficiency, and EPA
proposes to conditionally approve the
plan and issues an interim final
determination that the revised plan
corrects the deficiency, application of
the new source offset sanction shall be
stayed and application of the highway
sanction shall be deferred. However, if
the State does not meet its commitment
and the plan is disapproved, the new
source offset sanction shall reapply and
the highway sanction shall apply on the
date of proposed or final disapproval. In
the Detroit area, the offset sanction was
imposed on October 19, 2022, and the
highway sanction, if not deferred,
would be imposed on April 19, 2022.
EPA is taking public comments for
thirty days following the publication of
this proposed action in the Federal
Register. EPA will take all comments
into consideration in the final action.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
Permit to Install 51–08C, effective
November 21, 2014, governing EES Coke
SO2 emissions and Permit MI–ROP–
A8640–2016a, modified January 19,
2017, governing Cleveland-Cliffs Steel
Corporation SO2 emissions, as discussed
in Section III of this preamble. EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region 5 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
E:\FR\FM\23MRP1.SGM
23MRP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 56 / Thursday, March 23, 2023 / Proposed Rules
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001); and
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA.
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies
to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on minority populations
and low-income populations to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 22, 2023
Jkt 259001
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect
to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further
defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ‘‘no group of people should bear a
disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’
The air agency did not evaluate
environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and
applicable implementing regulations
neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ
analysis and did not consider EJ in this
action. Due to the nature of the action
being taken here, this action is expected
to have a neutral to positive impact on
the air quality of the affected area.
Consideration of EJ is not required as
part of this action, and there is no
information in the record inconsistent
with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of
achieving environmental justice for
people of color, low-income
populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: March 16, 2023.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2023–05819 Filed 3–22–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[WC Docket No. 17–310; FCC No. 23–6; FR
ID 129966]
Promoting Telehealth in Rural America
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) continues its efforts to
improve the Rural Health Care (RHC)
Program. The RHC Program seeks to
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
17495
support rural health care providers with
the costs of broadband and other
communications services for patients in
rural areas that may have limited
resources, fewer doctors, and higher
rates than urban areas.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
April 24, 2023, and reply comments are
due on or before May 22, 2023. If you
anticipate that you will be submitting
comments but find it difficult to do so
within the period of time allowed by
this document, you should advise the
contact listed as soon as possible.
ADDRESSES: Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and
1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR
1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file
comments and reply comments. You
may submit comments, identified by
WC Docket No. 17–310, by any of the
following methods:
Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the internet by
accessing the ECFS: https://
www.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
one copy of each filing. Filings can be
sent by commercial overnight courier or
by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal
Service mail. All filings must be
addressed to the Commission’s
Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission.
Commercial overnight mail (other
than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail
and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050
Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD
20701.
U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be
addressed to 45 L Street NE,
Washington, DC 20554.
Effective March 19, 2020, and until
further notice, the Commission no
longer accepts any hand or messenger
delivered filings at its headquarters.
This is a temporary measure taken to
help protect the health and safety of
individuals, and to mitigate the
transmission of COVID–19. See FCC
Announces Closure of FCC
Headquarters Open Window and
Change in Hand-Delivery Policy, Public
Notice, DA 20–304 (March 19, 2020),
https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcccloses-headquarters-open-window-andchanges-hand-delivery-policy.
People with Disabilities: To request
materials in accessible formats for
people with disabilities (Braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format),
send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call
the Consumer & Governmental Affairs
Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202)
418–0432 (TTY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bryan P. Boyle Bryan.Boyle@fcc.gov,
E:\FR\FM\23MRP1.SGM
23MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17488-17495]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-05819]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2022-0976; FRL-10788-01-R5]
Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Conditional Approval of the Detroit
Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
conditionally approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
[[Page 17489]]
submitted by Michigan on December 20, 2022, and supplemented on
February 21, 2023, which amends a SIP submission previously submitted
to EPA on May 31, 2016 and June 30, 2016, for attaining the 1-hour
sulfur dioxide (SO2) primary national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) for the Detroit SO2 nonattainment area. If
this action is finalized, EPA will propose to convert the conditional
approval of the SIP revision to a full approval upon Michigan timely
meeting its commitment to submit the issued permits.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 24, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2022-0976 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Abigail Teener, Environmental
Engineer, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-7314,
[email protected]. The EPA Region 5 office is open from 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and
facility closures due to COVID-19.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:
I. Why was Michigan required to submit an SO2 plan for
the Detroit area?
II. Requirements for SO2 Nonattainment Area Plans
III. Review of Michigan's Attainment Plan
IV. Review of Other Plan Requirements
A. RACM/RACT
B. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
C. Contingency Measures
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Why was Michigan required to submit an SO2 plan for the Detroit
area?
On June 22, 2010, EPA published a new 1-hour primary SO2
NAAQS of 75 parts per billion (ppb), which is met at an ambient air
quality monitoring site when the 3-year average of the annual 99th
percentile of daily maximum 1-hour average concentrations does not
exceed 75 ppb, as determined in accordance with appendix T of 40 CFR
part 50. See 75 FR 35520, codified at 40 CFR 50.17(a)-(b). On August 5,
2013, EPA designated 29 areas of the country as nonattainment for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS, including the Detroit area within the State
of Michigan. See 78 FR 47191, codified at 40 CFR part 81, subpart C.
These area designations became effective on October 4, 2013. Section
191 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) directs states to submit SIPs for areas
designated as nonattainment for the SO2 NAAQS to EPA within
18 months of the effective date of the designation, i.e., by no later
than April 4, 2015, in this case. These SIPs were required to
demonstrate that their respective areas will attain the NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 5 years from the
effective date of designation, which was October 4, 2018.
For a number of nonattainment areas, including the Detroit area,
EPA published an action on March 18, 2016 (effective April 18, 2016),
finding that Michigan and other pertinent states had failed to submit
the required SO2 nonattainment plan by the submittal
deadline (81 FR 14736). Michigan submitted an attainment plan for the
Detroit SO2 area on May 31, 2016, and submitted associated
final enforceable measures on June 30, 2016. As part of its 2016 plan,
Michigan imposed emission limits for U.S. Steel it concluded were
necessary to bring the Detroit area into attainment via Michigan
Administrative Code (MAC) 336.1430 (``Rule 430''). Michigan submitted
Rule 430 to EPA as an enforceable limitation element for approval as
part of its SO2 plan. Subsequently, U.S. Steel challenged
Rule 430 under state law in the Michigan Court of Claims. The decision
invalidated Rule 430 on October 4, 2017. United States Steel Corp. v.
Dept. of Environmental Quality, No. 16-000202-MZ, 2017 WL 5974195
(Mich. Ct. Cl. Oct. 4, 2017). Because the State's submitted attainment
demonstration relied on a limitation that had become unenforceable and,
therefore, could not meet the requirements of CAA sections 110 and 172,
EPA could not fully approve Michigan's 2016 plan.
On March 19, 2021, EPA partially approved and partially disapproved
Michigan's SO2 plan as submitted in 2016 (86 FR 14827)
(effective April 19, 2021). EPA approved the base-year emissions
inventory and affirmed that the new source review (NSR) requirements
for the area had previously been met on December 16, 2013 (78 FR
76064). EPA also approved the enforceable control measures for two
facilities as SIP strengthening. At that time, EPA disapproved the
attainment demonstration, as well as the requirements for meeting
reasonable further progress (RFP) toward attainment of the NAAQS,
reasonably available control measures and reasonably available control
technology (RACM/RACT), and contingency measures. Additionally, EPA
disapproved the plan's control measures for two facilities as not
demonstrating attainment. EPA's March 19, 2021, partial disapproval
started a sanctions clock which is permanently stopped only by meeting
the conditions of EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 52.31(d).
On October 12, 2022, EPA promulgated a Federal Implementation Plan
(FIP) for the Detroit SO2 nonattainment area (87 FR 61514),
which satisfied EPA's duty to promulgate a FIP for the area under CAA
section 110(c) that resulted from the previous finding of failure to
submit. However, it did not affect the sanctions clock started under
CAA section 179 resulting from EPA's partial disapproval of the prior
SIP, which would be permanently stopped only by meeting the conditions
of EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 52.31(d)(5).
While EPA's FIP for the Detroit area meets the requirements for
SO2 nonattainment area plans, the FIP does not relieve
Michigan of the requirement under Section 191 of the CAA to submit a
plan that provides for attainment of the SO2 NAAQS for the
Detroit nonattainment area. On December 20, 2022, Michigan submitted a
revised attainment plan for the Detroit SO2 nonattainment
area mirroring EPA's FIP in order to remedy Michigan's 2016 plan
deficiencies specified in EPA's
[[Page 17490]]
March 19, 2021 rulemaking. Michigan's December 20, 2022, plan depends,
in part, on permits that have not yet been issued but will include
limits and associated requirements for the U.S. Steel and Dearborn
Industrial Generation (DIG) facilities that are no less stringent than
those set forth in EPA's FIP, codified at 40 CFR 52.1189.
Under section 110(k)(4) of the CAA, EPA may conditionally approve a
plan based on a commitment from the State to adopt specific enforceable
measures within one year from the date of approval. EPA's October 28,
1992, memorandum, entitled ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions
Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act (Act) Deadlines,'' states that
such commitments should include a formal request that EPA approve the
commitment, be subject to public hearing pursuant of 40 CFR 51.102, and
include a schedule for the adoption of the required measures.
Therefore, Michigan included in its December 20, 2022, submittal, which
was subject to public hearing, a request that EPA conditionally approve
its revised plan for the Detroit area, conditional upon the issuance
and submission for incorporation into the SIP of the NSR permits for
the U.S. Steel and DIG facilities, as well as a commitment to submit
the permits to EPA within one year of a conditional approval. On
February 21, 2023, Michigan submitted a letter clarifying the schedule
for the conditional approval, including Michigan's commitment to submit
the necessary permits by April 30, 2024, and the schedule Michigan
expects to follow to meet that commitment. Michigan's expected schedule
includes ensuring all necessary permit applications are submitted by
March 31, 2023, beginning the 240-day permit review process by April 1,
2023, issuing permits by December 1, 2023, and submitting permits to
EPA by December 31, 2023. Michigan's expected date of submittal
provides some cushion to ensure the State is able to meet its
commitment to submit the permits by April 30, 2024, and EPA finds that
Michigan's schedule is reasonable.
If EPA finalizes this conditional approval, the State must meet its
commitment to submit the necessary permits by April 30, 2024. If the
State fails to do so, the action will become a disapproval. In such
case, EPA will notify the State by letter of the disapproval and
subsequently publish a document in the Federal Register notifying the
public that the conditional approval automatically converted to a
disapproval.
If the State meets its commitment within the applicable time frame,
the conditionally approved submission will remain a part of the SIP
until EPA takes final action approving or disapproving the new
submittal. If EPA disapproves the new submittal, Michigan's
conditionally approved Detroit SO2 plan will also be
disapproved at that time. If EPA approves the submittal, Michigan's
Detroit SO2 plan will be fully approved in its entirety and
replace the conditionally approved element in the SIP.
Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(2)(ii), if the State has submitted a revised
plan to correct the deficiency, and EPA proposes to conditionally
approve the plan and issues an interim final determination that the
revised plan corrects the deficiency, application of the new source
offset sanction shall be stayed and application of the highway sanction
shall be deferred. However, if the State does not meet its commitment
and the plan is disapproved, the new source offset sanction shall
reapply and the highway sanction shall apply on the date of proposed or
final disapproval. In the Detroit SO2 nonattainment area,
the two-to-one new source offset sanction took effect on October 19,
2022 (18 months following the effective date of March 19, 2021,
rulemaking that triggered the sanctions clock), and the highway funding
sanction was scheduled to take effect on April 19, 2023 (6 months after
the date of the offset sanctions), as the result of the March 19, 2021,
partial disapproval.
The remainder of this action describes the requirements that
SO2 nonattainment plans must meet in order to obtain EPA
approval, provides a review of Michigan's revised plan with respect to
these requirements, and describes EPA's proposed conditional approval
of the plan.
II. Requirements for SO2 Nonattainment Area Plans
Nonattainment SIPs must meet the applicable requirements of the
CAA, and specifically CAA sections 110, 172, 191 and 192. EPA's
regulations governing nonattainment SIPs are set forth at 40 CFR part
51, with specific procedural requirements and control strategy
requirements residing at subparts F and G, respectively. Soon after
Congress enacted the 1990 Amendments to the CAA, EPA issued
comprehensive guidance on SIPs, in a document entitled the ``General
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of
1990,'' published at 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) (General Preamble).
Among other things, the General Preamble addressed SO2 SIPs
and fundamental principles for SIP control strategies. Id., at 13545-
49, 13567-68. On April 23, 2014, EPA issued recommended guidance for
meeting the statutory requirements in SO2 SIPs, in a
document entitled, ``Guidance for 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment
Area SIP Submissions,'' available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_nonattainment_sip.pdf. In this guidance EPA described
the statutory requirements for a complete nonattainment area SIP, which
includes: An accurate emissions inventory of current emissions for all
sources of SO2 within the nonattainment area; an attainment
demonstration; demonstration of RFP; implementation of RACM (including
RACT); NSR; emissions limitations and control measures as necessary to
attain the NAAQS; and adequate contingency measures for the affected
area. EPA already concluded in its March 19, 2021, rulemaking that
Michigan has met the emissions inventory and NSR requirements.
In order for EPA to approve a SIP as meeting the requirements of
CAA sections 110, 172 and 191-192 and EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part
51, the SIP for the affected area needs to demonstrate to EPA's
satisfaction that each of the aforementioned requirements have been
met. Under CAA sections 110(l) and 193, EPA may not approve a SIP that
would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning NAAQS
attainment and RFP, or any other applicable requirement, and no
requirement in effect (or required to be adopted by an order,
settlement, agreement, or plan in effect before November 15, 1990) in
any area which is a nonattainment area for any air pollutant, may be
modified in any manner unless it ensures equivalent or greater emission
reductions of such air pollutant.
CAA section 172(c)(1) directs states with areas designated as
nonattainment to demonstrate that the submitted plan provides for
attainment of the NAAQS. 40 CFR part 51, subpart G, further delineates
the control strategy requirements that SIPs must meet, and EPA has long
required that all SIPs and control strategies reflect four fundamental
principles of quantification, enforceability, replicability, and
accountability. General Preamble at 13567-68. SO2 attainment
plans must consist of two components: (1) Emission limits and other
control measures that ensure implementation of permanent, enforceable
and necessary emission
[[Page 17491]]
controls, and (2) a modeling analysis which meets the requirements of
40 CFR part 51, appendix W, which demonstrates that these emission
limits and control measures provide for timely attainment of the
primary SO2 NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but by no
later than the attainment date for the affected area. In all cases, the
emission limits and control measures must be accompanied by appropriate
methods and conditions to determine compliance with the respective
emission limits and control measures and must be quantifiable (i.e., a
specific amount of emission reduction can be ascribed to the measures),
fully enforceable (specifying clear, unambiguous and measurable
requirements for which compliance can be practicably determined),
replicable (the procedures for determining compliance are sufficiently
specific and non-subjective so that two independent entities applying
the procedures would obtain the same result), and accountable (source
specific limits must be permanent and must reflect the assumptions used
in the SIP demonstrations).
Preferred air quality models for use in regulatory applications are
described in appendix A of EPA's Guideline on Air Quality Models (40
CFR part 51, appendix W). In 2005, EPA promulgated AERMOD as the
Agency's preferred near-field dispersion modeling for a wide range of
regulatory applications addressing stationary sources (for example in
estimating SO2 concentrations) in all types of terrain based
on extensive developmental and performance evaluation. Supplemental
guidance on modeling for purposes of demonstrating attainment of the
SO2 standard is provided in appendix A to the April 23,
2014, SO2 nonattainment area SIP guidance document
referenced above. Appendix A provides extensive guidance on the
modeling domain, the source inputs, assorted types of meteorological
data, and background concentrations. Consistency with the
recommendations in this guidance is generally necessary for the
attainment demonstration to offer adequately reliable assurance that
the plan provides for attainment.
As stated previously, attainment demonstrations for the 2010 1-hour
primary SO2 NAAQS must demonstrate future attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS in the entire area designated as nonattainment
(i.e., not just at the violating monitor). This is demonstrated by
using air quality dispersion modeling (see appendix W to 40 CFR part
51) that shows that the mix of sources, enforceable control measures,
and emission rates in an identified area will not lead to a violation
of the SO2 NAAQS. For a short-term (i.e., 1-hour) standard,
EPA believes that dispersion modeling, using allowable emissions and
addressing stationary sources in the affected area (and in some cases
those sources located outside the nonattainment area which may affect
attainment in the area) is technically appropriate, efficient and
effective in demonstrating attainment in nonattainment areas because it
takes into consideration combinations of meteorological and emission
source operating conditions that may contribute to peak ground-level
concentrations of SO2.
The meteorological data used in the analysis should generally be
processed with the most recent version of AERMET. Estimated
concentrations should include ambient background concentrations, should
follow the form of the standard, and should be calculated as described
in section 2.6.1.2 of the August 23, 2010, clarification memo on
``Applicability of Appendix W Modeling Guidance for the 1-hr
SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard'' (U.S. EPA,
2010).
For a more in-depth discussion on the requirements of
SO2 nonattainment plans, including the use of longer-term
average limits, see EPA's proposed FIP (87 FR 33095).
III. Review of Michigan's Attainment Plan
Michigan's plan for the Detroit nonattainment area mirrors EPA's
promulgated FIP for the area. Therefore, Michigan's plan relies on the
modeling analysis EPA used to support its FIP, which is attached as
appendix B of Michigan's December 20, 2022, submittal, to demonstrate
attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in the Detroit area. A more
in-depth discussion of the modeling analysis may be found in EPA's
proposed FIP (87 FR 33095) and the associated technical support
document, which is included in the docket for this action as appendix B
of Michigan's December 20, 2022, submittal.
An important aspect of an attainment plan is that the emission
limits that provide for attainment be quantifiable, fully enforceable,
replicable, and accountable. See General Preamble at 13567-68.
Michigan's attainment plan includes the same limits for the U.S. Steel,
EES Coke, Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation, DIG, Carmeuse Lime, and
DTE Trenton Channel facilities that are included in EPA's FIP, and
which are all shown below in Table 1. The plan also includes the same
requirement that a 170-foot stack be constructed at U.S. Steel
Boilerhouse 2 by November 14, 2024, as set forth in EPA's FIP. The FIP
made all of these limits and requirements federally enforceable, via
either incorporation of permits containing the limits and requirements
into Michigan's SIP or inclusion in the FIP regulatory language,
codified at 40 CFR 52.1189. As Michigan's plan cannot rely on the FIP
regulatory language, the enforceability mechanisms of all the limits
relied upon by Michigan's plan are described in the remainder of this
section.
In preparing its 2016 plan, Michigan adopted Permit to Install 193-
14A, governing the Carmeuse Lime SO2 emissions, and Permit
to Install 125-11C, governing the DTE Trenton Channel SO2
emissions. These construction permit revisions were adopted by Michigan
following established, appropriate public review procedures. The permit
compliance dates were October 1, 2018 for Carmeuse Lime and January 1,
2017 for DTE Trenton Channel. Both of these permits were incorporated
into Michigan's SIP as part of EPA's March 19, 2021, action partially
approving and partially disapproving Michigan's SO2 plan (86
FR 14827). DTE Trenton Channel has since permanently shut down as of
June 19, 2022, under court order.\1\ However, the DTE Trenton Channel
permitted limit was included in the FIP analysis and included in
Michigan's revised plan as a precautionary measure. The Carmeuse Lime
and DTE Trenton Channel permits were incorporated into Michigan's SIP
as part of EPA's March 19, 2021, action, so EPA is not proposing to re-
incorporate them into 40 CFR part 52 in this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See https://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/267-1_-_sierra_club_-_dte_separate_agreement.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission limits and associated requirements for EES Coke and
Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation are contained in permits Permit to
Install 51-08C, effective November 21, 2014, and Permit MI-ROP-A8640-
2016a, modified January 19, 2017, respectively. These limits and
associated monitoring requirements were also included in EPA's FIP,
codified at 40 CFR 52.1189. The permit revisions were adopted by
Michigan following established, appropriate public review procedures.
EPA finds that these permit revisions provide for permanent
enforceability and is proposing to incorporate these permits into
Michigan's SIP in this action.
[[Page 17492]]
Michigan has committed to issue permits for the emission limits and
associated construction, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements for the U.S. Steel and DIG units, including the
construction of a new 170-foot stack for U.S. Steel Boilerhouse 2 by
November 14, 2024, that are no less stringent than those specified in
40 CFR 52. 1189. These enforceable requirements will be contained in
permits or permit revisions that have not yet been issued, but that
Michigan has committed to submit to EPA by April 30, 2024. While EPA
cannot incorporate permits containing emission limits for the U.S.
Steel and DIG unit limits into Michigan's SIP at this time, these
limits were previously adopted into EPA's FIP and will continue to
remain federally enforceable as part of the regulatory text of EPA's
FIP, codified at 40 CFR 52.1189. Therefore, EPA is proposing to
conditionally approve Michigan's plan, pending the issuance and timely
submission of the appropriate permits to EPA for incorporation into the
SIP.
Table 1--Emission Limits Included in Michigan's Detroit SO2 Nonattainment Area Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 emission
Unit limit (lb/hr) Permit No. or status SIP status
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Steel--Zug Island
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boilerhouse 1 (all stacks combined).... 55.00 Permit issuance in If this action is
A1 Blast Furnace....................... 0.00 progress. finalized, approval of
B2 Blast Furnace....................... 40.18 Michigan's plan will be
D4 Blast Furnace....................... 40.18 conditional upon the
timely submission of
these permits for
incorporation into the
SIP.
A/B Blas Furnace Flares................ 60.19
D Furnace Flare........................ 60.19
Boilerhouse 2.......................... * 750.00/81.00 Permit issuance in
progress.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Steel--Ecorse
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hot Strip Mill--Slab Reheat Furnace 1.. 0.31 Permit issuance in If this action is
Hot Strip Mill--Slab Reheat Furnace 2.. 0.31 progress. finalized, approval of
Hot Strip Mill--Slab Reheat Furnace 3.. 0.31 Michigan's plan will be
Hot Strip Mill--Slab Reheat Furnace 4.. 0.31 conditional upon the
timely submission of
this permit for
incorporation into the
SIP.
Hot Strip Mill--Slab Reheat Furnace 5.. 0.31
No. 2 Baghouse......................... 3.30
Main Plant Boiler No. 8................ 0.07
Main Plant Boiler No. 9................ 0.07
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EES Coke
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Combustion Stack....................... 544.6 Permit to Install 51-08C.. EPA is proposing to
incorporate this permit
into Michigan's SIP.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTE Trenton Channel **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trenton Channel Unit 9................. 5,907 Permit to Install 125-11C. Incorporated into
Michigan's SIP as part
of March 19, 2021 action
(86 FR 14827). However,
the source has since
shut down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carmeuse Lime
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carmeuse Lime Stack.................... 470 Permit to Install 193-14A. Incorporated into
Michigan's SIP as part
of March 19, 2021 action
(86 FR 14827).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furnace B Baghouse Stack............... 71.9 Permit MI-ROP-A8640-2016a. EPA is proposing to
Furnace B Stove Stack.................. 38.75 incorporate this permit
into Michigan's SIP.
Furnace B Baghouse and Stove Stacks 77.8
(combined).
Furnace C Baghouse Stack............... 179.65
Furnace C Stove Stack.................. 193.6
Furnace C Baghouse and Stove Stacks 271.4
(combined).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 17493]]
DIG **
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boilers 1, 2, and 3 (combined)......... 420 Permit issuance in If this action is
Boilers 1, 2, and 3 and Flares 1 and 2 840 progress. finalized, approval of
(combined). Michigan's plan will be
conditional upon the
timely submission of
this permit for
incorporation into the
SIP.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* U.S. Steel--Zug Island Boilerhouse 2 shall emit less than 750.00 lbs/hr unless Boilerhouse 1, A1 Blast
Furnace, B2 Blast Furnace, D4 Blast Furnace, A/B Blast Furnace Flares, or D Furnace Flare is operating, in
which case it shall emit less than 81.00 lbs/hr. In addition to the limit, this permit will also require a new
170-foot stack to be constructed for Boilerhouse 2 by November 14, 2024.
** The limit for Trenton Channel is expressed as a 30-day average limit, and the limits for Cleveland-Cliffs
Steel Corporation and DIG are expressed as daily average limits. EPA's FIP proposal addresses the use of these
longer-term average limits, both with respect to the general suitability of using such limits for
demonstrating attainment and with respect to whether the particular limits included in the plan have been
suitably demonstrated to provide for attainment.
If this action is finalized and Michigan fails to submit the
permits containing the necessary requirements for the U.S. Steel and
DIG units, the action will become a disapproval one year from the date
of final conditional approval. If EPA disapproves the new submittal,
Michigan's conditionally approved Detroit SO2 plan will also
be disapproved at that time. Additionally, the new source offset
sanction shall reapply and the highway sanction shall apply on the date
of proposed or final disapproval.
Michigan commits to issue permits that contain requirements that
are no less stringent than EPA's FIP, codified at 40 CFR 52.1189.
Because Michigan's commitment relies on the same modeling analysis that
supports EPA's FIP and will contain emission limits and associated
requirements that are no less stringent that EPA's FIP, EPA is
proposing to conditionally approve Michigan's plan, conditional upon
the timely submission of permits containing the necessary
SO2 emission limits and associated requirements for the U.S.
Steel and DIG units.
IV. Review of Other Plan Requirements
A. RACM/RACT
CAA section 172(c)(1) states that nonattainment plans shall provide
for the implementation of all RACM as expeditiously as practicable
(including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in the
area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of RACT)
and shall provide for attainment of the NAAQS. For most criteria
pollutants, RACT is control technology as needed to meet the NAAQS that
is reasonably available considering technological and economic
feasibility. However, the definition of RACT for SO2 is,
simply, that control technology which is necessary to achieve the NAAQS
(see 40 CFR 51.100(o)). CAA section 172(c)(6) requires plans to include
enforceable emissions limitations, and such other control measures as
may be necessary or appropriate to provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
In its March 19, 2021, rulemaking, EPA disapproved Michigan's 2016
attainment plan because it relied on Rule 430, which was invalidated
and so was no longer an enforceable mechanism. Therefore, the plan
could not be considered to provide an appropriate attainment
demonstration, and it did not demonstrate RACM/RACT or meet the
requirement for necessary emissions limitations or control measures.
EPA's FIP for attaining the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in the
Detroit area is based on a variety of measures, including permits for
Carmeuse Lime (effective date of October 1, 2018) and DTE Trenton
Channel (effective date of January 1, 2017) that have been incorporated
into Michigan's SIP, as well as the FIP regulatory language, codified
at 40 CFR 52.1189, regarding U.S. Steel, EES Coke, Cleveland-Cliffs
Steel Corporation, and DIG emissions. The FIP requires compliance by
November 14, 2024, for U.S. Steel Boilerhouse 2 and November 14, 2022,
for all other units. The compliance schedule for U.S. Steel Boilerhouse
2 allows time for the owner or operator to submit a construction permit
application to the State of Michigan (required by February 12, 2023),
as well as time for the State of Michigan to issue the permit, the
owner or operator to send out requests for proposal and award a
construction contract and procure materials, and for completion of
construction. Since Michigan's plan follows the same compliance
schedule by requiring compliance on the same dates as the FIP, EPA
proposes to determine that these measures suffice to provide for
attainment and proposes to conclude that the Michigan's plan satisfies
the requirement in sections 172(c)(1) and (6) to adopt and submit all
RACM/RACT and emissions limitations or control measures as needed to
attain the standards as expeditiously as practicable.
B. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
Section 171(1) of the CAA defines RFP as such annual incremental
reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant as are required
by part D or may reasonably be required by EPA for the purpose of
ensuring attainment of the applicable NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date. This definition is most appropriate for pollutants
that are emitted by numerous and diverse sources, where the
relationship between any individual source and the overall air quality
is not explicitly quantified, and where the emission reductions
necessary to attain the NAAQS are inventory-wide. (See EPA's April 2014
SO2 nonattainment planning guidance, page 40.) For
SO2, there is usually a single ``step'' between pre-control
nonattainment and post-control attainment. Therefore, for
SO2, with its discernible relationship between emissions and
air quality, and significant and immediate air quality improvements,
RFP is best construed as adherence to an ambitious compliance schedule.
(See General Preamble at 74 FR 13547 (April 16, 1992)).
In its March 19, 2021, rulemaking, EPA concluded that Michigan had
not satisfied the requirement in section 172(c)(2) to provide for RFP
toward attainment. Michigan's 2016 attainment plan did not demonstrate
that the implementation of the control measures required under the plan
were sufficient to provide for attainment of the NAAQS in the Detroit
SO2 nonattainment area, as some control measures were not
enforceable due to the invalidation of Rule 430. Therefore, a
compliance
[[Page 17494]]
schedule to implement those controls was not sufficient to provide for
RFP. EPA's FIP requires compliance by November 14, 2024, for U.S. Steel
Boilerhouse 2 and November 14, 2022, for all other units. As described
in section V.B above, the 2-year compliance schedule for U.S. Steel
Boilerhouse 2 allows 90 days for the owner or operator to submit a
construction permit application to the State of Michigan, as well as
time for the State of Michigan to issue the permit, the owner or
operator to send out requests for proposal and award a construction
contract and procure materials, and for completion of construction. For
DTE Trenton Channel and Carmeuse lime, compliance was required by
January 1, 2017, and October 1, 2018, respectively. EPA concluded in
the FIP that this is an ambitious compliance schedule, as that term is
used in the April 2014 guidance for SO2 nonattainment plans.
As Michigan's plan follows the same compliance schedule as the FIP, EPA
concludes that this plan therefore provides for RFP in accordance with
the approach to RFP described in EPA's 2014 guidance.
C. Contingency Measures
EPA guidance describes special features of SO2 planning
that influence the suitability of alternative means of addressing the
requirement in section 172(c)(9) for contingency measures for
SO2, such that in particular an appropriate means of
satisfying this requirement is for the air agency to have a
comprehensive enforcement program that identifies sources of violations
of the SO2 NAAQS and to undertake an aggressive follow-up
for compliance and enforcement. (See EPA's April 2014 SO2
nonattainment planning guidance, page 41.) Michigan has such an
enforcement program, pursuant to section 5526 of part 55, Air Pollution
Control, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act,
1994 PA 451, as amended, Michigan Compiled Laws 324.5526. Michigan
enforcement and compliance authority is furthered by the State's title
V program, which includes a compliance monitoring program, periodic
inspections, review of company monitoring records, reporting, and
issuance of violation notices for all violations shown from inspections
or data. In addition, Michigan stated that it responds promptly to
citizen complaints, reports all high priority violations to EPA, and
puts all inspection reports and violation notices on Michigan's
website. Therefore, EPA proposes that Michigan's plan satisfies the
contingency measure requirement in accordance with the approach to
contingency measures described in EPA's 2014 guidance.
V. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to conditionally approve Michigan's revised SIP
submission, which the State submitted to EPA on December 20, 2022, for
attaining the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for the Detroit area and
for meeting other nonattainment area planning requirements, pending the
timely submission of permits containing emission limits for the U.S.
Steel and DIG facilities. This SO2 attainment plan includes
Michigan's attainment demonstration for the Detroit area. The plan also
addresses requirements for RFP, RACT/RACM, and contingency measures.
EPA previously concluded that Michigan has addressed the requirements
for emissions inventories for the Detroit area and nonattainment area
NSR. EPA has determined that Michigan's Detroit SO2 plan
meets applicable requirements of section 172 of the CAA, conditioned
upon the timely submission of the appropriate permits.
Michigan's Detroit SO2 plan is based on the Carmeuse
Lime emission limits specified in Permit to Install 193-14A, the DTE
Trenton Channel emission limits specified in Permit to Install 125-11C,
the EES Coke limits specified in Permit to Install 51-08C, Cleveland-
Cliffs Steel Corporation emission limits specified in Permit MI-ROP-
A8640-2016a, and U.S. Steel and DIG limits that will be included in
permits that Michigan has committed to submit for incorporation into
Michigan's SIP by April 30, 2024. Regardless of whether these permits
are incorporated into Michigan's SIP, the U.S. Steel and DIG limits
will remain federally enforceable in EPA's FIP, codified at 40 CFR
52.1189, until further action. The Carmeuse Lime and DTE Trenton
Channel permits have already been incorporated into Michigan's SIP and
EPA is not proposing to re-incorporate them into 40 CFR part 52 here.
EPA is proposing to incorporate Permit to Install 51-08C, governing EES
Coke SO2 emissions and Permit MI-ROP-A8640-2016a, governing
Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation SO2 emissions into
Michigan's SIP in this action.
If EPA finalizes this conditional approval, the State must meet its
commitment to submit the necessary permits by April 30, 2024. If the
State fails to do so, the action will become a disapproval one year
from the date of final conditional approval. In such case, EPA will
notify the State by letter of the disapproval and subsequently publish
a document in the Federal Register notifying the public that the
conditional approval automatically converted to a disapproval.
If the State meets its commitment within the applicable time frame,
the conditionally approved submission will remain a part of the SIP
until EPA takes final action approving or disapproving the new permits.
If EPA disapproves the new submittal, Michigan's conditionally approved
Detroit SO2 plan will also be disapproved at that time. If
EPA approves the submittal, Michigan's Detroit SO2 plan will
be approved in its entirety and replace the conditionally approved
element in the SIP.
Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(2)(ii), if the State has submitted a revised
plan to correct the deficiency, and EPA proposes to conditionally
approve the plan and issues an interim final determination that the
revised plan corrects the deficiency, application of the new source
offset sanction shall be stayed and application of the highway sanction
shall be deferred. However, if the State does not meet its commitment
and the plan is disapproved, the new source offset sanction shall
reapply and the highway sanction shall apply on the date of proposed or
final disapproval. In the Detroit area, the offset sanction was imposed
on October 19, 2022, and the highway sanction, if not deferred, would
be imposed on April 19, 2022.
EPA is taking public comments for thirty days following the
publication of this proposed action in the Federal Register. EPA will
take all comments into consideration in the final action.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference Permit to Install 51-08C, effective November 21, 2014,
governing EES Coke SO2 emissions and Permit MI-ROP-A8640-
2016a, modified January 19, 2017, governing Cleveland-Cliffs Steel
Corporation SO2 emissions, as discussed in Section III of
this preamble. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 5
Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the
[[Page 17495]]
CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR
52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA.
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean that
``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
The air agency did not evaluate environmental justice
considerations as part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ
in this action. Due to the nature of the action being taken here, this
action is expected to have a neutral to positive impact on the air
quality of the affected area. Consideration of EJ is not required as
part of this action, and there is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for people of color, low-income populations, and
Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: March 16, 2023.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2023-05819 Filed 3-22-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P