Air Plan Revisions; California; Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District; Reasonably Available Control Technology District, 54748-54753 [2024-14336]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
54748
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Announcement 2023–16, 2023–20
I.R.B. 854 (May 15, 2023), provides that
public hearings will be conducted in
person, although the IRS will continue
to provide a telephonic option for
individuals who wish to attend or
testify at a hearing by telephone. Any
telephonic hearing will be made
accessible to people with disabilities.
Drafting Information
The principal author of these
regulations is Crystal Jackson-Kaloz of
the Office of the Associate Chief
Counsel (Procedure and
Administration). However, other
personnel from the Treasury
Department and the IRS participated in
their development.
List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 301
Employment taxes, Estate taxes,
Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income taxes,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Proposed Amendments to the
Regulations
Accordingly, the Treasury Department
and IRS propose to amend 26 CFR part
301 as follows:
PART 301—PROCEDURE AND
ADMINISTRATION
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 301 continues to read in part as
follows:
■
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
Par. 2. Section 301.6311–2 is
amended by:
■ 1. Revising paragraph (d)(1).
■ 2. Removing paragraph (e).
■ 3. Redesignating paragraphs (f), (g),
and (h) as paragraphs (e), (f), and (g).
■ 4. Revising newly redesignated
paragraph (e).
■ 5. In new paragraph (f), removing the
text ‘‘Internal Revenue Service’’ and
adding the text ‘‘IRS’’ in its place.
■ 6. Revising newly redesignated
paragraph (g).
The revisions read as follows:
■
§ 301.6311–2
debit card.
Payment by credit card and
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * * (1) In general. Payments of
taxes by credit card or debit card, and
payments of reimbursement fees
referred to in paragraph (e)(2) of this
section, are subject to the applicable
error resolution procedures of section
161 of the Truth in Lending Act (15
U.S.C. 1666), section 908 of the
Electronic Fund Transfer Act (15 U.S.C.
1693f), or any similar provisions of State
or local law, for the purpose of resolving
errors relating to the credit card or debit
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:12 Jul 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
card account, but not for the purpose of
resolving any errors, disputes or
adjustments relating to the underlying
tax liability.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Authority to enter into contracts.
(1) In general. The Commissioner may
enter into contracts related to receiving
payments of tax by credit card or debit
card if such contracts are cost beneficial
to the government. The determination of
whether the contract is cost beneficial
will be based on an analysis appropriate
for the contract at issue and at a level
of detail appropriate to the size of the
government’s investment or interest.
(2) Contracts under which fees are
prohibited. The Commissioner may
enter into contracts that provide that the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will not
pay a fee, charge, or other monetary
consideration under such contracts
related to payments of tax by credit card
or debit card. For payments of tax under
such contracts, this section does not
prohibit the imposition of fees or
charges by issuers of credit cards or
debit cards or by any other financial
institutions or persons participating in
the credit card or debit card transaction.
The IRS may not receive any part of any
such fees that may be charged.
(3) Contracts under which fees are
permitted and must be recouped. The
Commissioner may enter into contracts
that provide that the IRS will pay a fee,
charge, or other monetary consideration
under such contracts related to
payments of tax by credit card or debit
card. If the IRS pays a fee under such
contracts, it must recoup the full
amount paid under such contracts as a
reimbursement fee from the persons
paying tax by credit card or debit card.
The reimbursement fees will be limited
to the amount of the fees that IRS pays
under any such contract and will be
paid at the time of, and in addition to,
the tax payment. The reimbursement fee
is not a tax imposed by the Code, and
no portion of the reimbursement fee is
eligible for refund or credit under
section 6402 of the Code. The error
resolution procedures described in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section will
apply to any errors concerning the
reimbursement fee. In negotiating
contracts under paragraph (e)(3) of this
section, the Commissioner will seek to
minimize the amount of the fees paid.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Applicability date. The rules of
this section apply to payments of taxes
and reimbursement fees made on or
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
after [date of publication of final
regulations in the Federal Register].
Douglas W. O’Donnell,
Deputy Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 2024–14002 Filed 7–1–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0197; FRL–11981–
01–R9]
Air Plan Revisions; California;
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District; Reasonably
Available Control Technology District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions from the Sacramento
Metropolitan Air Quality Management
District (SMAQMD or ‘‘District’’) to
address Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’)
requirements related to the 2008 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS or ‘‘standards’’).
These revisions concern emissions of
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) from boilers,
gas turbines, and miscellaneous (misc)
combustion units and reasonably
available control technology (RACT)
requirements for major sources of NOX
in the portion of the Sacramento Metro,
CA, nonattainment area that is subject to
SMAQMD jurisdiction. We are taking
comments on this proposal and plan to
follow with a final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 1, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2024–0197 at https://
www.regulations.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish
any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
54749
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets. If you need
assistance in a language other than
English or if you are a person with a
disability who needs a reasonable
accommodation at no cost to you, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Eugene Chen, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street (AIR–3–3), San
Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415)
947–4304 or by email at chen.eugene@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
A. How is the EPA evaluating the
submitted documents?
B. Do the submitted documents meet the
evaluation criteria?
1. Boilers
2. Gas Turbines
3. Miscellaneous Combustion Units
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What documents did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of the
submitted documents?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
documents?
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
Action
A. What documents did the State
submit?
Table 1 lists the documents addressed
by this proposal with the dates that they
were adopted by the local air agency
and submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS
Local
agency
SMAQMD
Document/rule
No.
Document title
........................
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Permits for Major Stationary
Sources of Nitrogen Oxides.
On March 28, 2024, SMAQMD
adopted portions of several permits
issued under the District’s SIP-approved
New Source Review (NSR) permit
program for submittal into the SIP.
These permits contain requirements that
regulate emissions of NOX, and the
Adopted
District adopted these permits for SIP
submission to ensure that its major
sources of NOX are subject to federally
enforceable RACT requirements. A list
of the permits (‘‘District Permits’’)
contained in this SIP revision is
included in Table 2 below. On April 11,
03/28/2024
Submitted
04/11/2024
2024, CARB submitted this SIP revision
to the EPA for approval as a revision to
the California SIP. The EPA has
reviewed this submittal and finds that it
fulfills the completeness criteria of
appendix V.1
TABLE 2—DISTRICT PERMITS INCLUDED IN APRIL 11, 2024 SUBMITTAL
Source name
Permit No.
Mitsubishi Chemical Carbon Fiber and
Composites.
24611
25925
24613
24614
25397
25398
25399
17549
20216
20217
20218
20219
27410
27141
27142
27143
27144
25801
25800
27118
27151
27154
27156
UC Davis Medical Center .......................
Sacramento Metropolitan Utility District
(SMUD) Procter & Gamble Power
Plant.
SMUD Cosumnes Power Plant ...............
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SMUD Campbell Power Plant .................
SMUD Carson Power Plant ....................
Unit name/ID
Unit size
(MMBtu/hr)
Oxidation Oven 1 ....................................
Oxidation Oven 2 ....................................
Oxidation Oven 3 ....................................
Oxidation Oven 4 ....................................
Oxidation Oven—Line 31 .......................
Oxidation Oven—Line 31 .......................
Cleaver Brooks Boiler .............................
Combined Cycle Turbine ........................
Boiler 1 ...................................................
Boiler 2 ...................................................
Boiler 3 ...................................................
Boiler 4 ...................................................
Babcock & Wilcox Boiler ........................
Gas Turbine 1A ......................................
Gas Turbine 1B ......................................
Gas Turbine 1C ......................................
Boiler 1B .................................................
Turbine 2 ................................................
Turbine 3 ................................................
Gas Turbine ............................................
Turbine 27151 ........................................
Cleaver Brooks Boiler .............................
Turbine 27156 ........................................
2
2
2
2
3
3
6
260
32
32
32
32
109
583
583
500
109
2,200
2,200
1,410
600
100
450
1 See Docket Item A–14, 40 CFR Appendix V to
Part 51—Criteria for Determining the Completeness
of Plan Submissions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Unit type
Misc Combustion
Misc Combustion
Misc Combustion
Misc Combustion
Misc Combustion
Misc Combustion
Boiler.
Gas Turbine.
Boiler.
Boiler.
Boiler.
Boiler.
Boiler.
Gas Turbine.
Gas Turbine.
Gas Turbine.
Boiler.
Gas Turbine.
Gas Turbine.
Gas Turbine.
Gas Turbine.
Boiler.
Gas Turbine.
Unit.
Unit.
Unit.
Unit.
Unit.
Unit.
54750
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
B. Are there other versions of the
submitted documents?
We have not previously approved
district permits into the SIP for any of
the sources listed in Table 2. The
District Permits were submitted to
address our June 30, 2023 action that
finalized a partial approval and partial
disapproval of the District’s
‘‘Demonstration of Reasonably Available
Control Technology for the 2008 Ozone
NAAQS’’ (‘‘2017 RACT SIP’’). The
District’s 2017 RACT SIP was submitted
to demonstrate that its stationary
sources are subject to RACT rules for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.2 Our partial
disapproval related solely to the RACT
element for major sources of NOX that
relied upon three district rules: Rule 411
(NOX from Boilers, Process Heaters and
Steam Generators), Rule 413 (Stationary
Gas Turbines), and Rule 419 (NOX from
Miscellaneous Combustion Units). Rules
411 and 413 have previously been
approved into the SIP, but Rule 419 was
locally adopted and submitted to the
EPA as part of the 2017 RACT SIP
development process and has not been
approved into the SIP. As part of our
June 30, 2023 final action, we identified
deficiencies with the submitted version
of Rule 419 but did not act to approve
or disapprove that rule. As discussed in
greater detail below, the District elected
to submit source-specific permits, rather
than submitting rule revisions, to
address the deficiencies we identified in
our June 30, 2023 final action.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
documents?
Emissions of NOX contribute to the
production of ground-level ozone, smog
and particulate matter (PM), which
harm human health and the
environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires states to submit plans that
provide for implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of the
NAAQS. In addition, CAA sections
182(b)(2) and (f) require that SIPs for
ozone nonattainment areas classified as
‘‘Moderate’’ or higher implement RACT
for any category of sources covered by
a control techniques guidelines (CTG)
document and for any major stationary
source of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) or NOX. The SMAQMD regulates
the Sacramento County portion of the
Sacramento Metro, CA, ozone
nonattainment area that is classified as
‘‘Severe’’ nonattainment for the 2008
ozone NAAQS.3 Therefore, the
SMAQMD must, at a minimum, ensure
that all categories of sources covered by
2 88
3 40
FR 42248.
CFR 81.305.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
a CTG document and all major
stationary sources of VOCs or NOX
within the District implement RACTlevel controls. In a Severe ozone
nonattainment area, any stationary
source that emits or has the potential to
emit at least 25 tons per year (tpy) of
VOCs or NOX is considered a major
stationary source.
The SMAQMD relies upon several
district rules to implement RACT for
major sources of NOX, including Rule
411 (NOX from Boilers, Process Heaters
and Steam Generators), Rule 413
(Stationary Gas Turbines), and Rule 419
(NOX from Miscellaneous Combustion
Units). As we explained in our June 30,
2023 final action on the 2017 RACT SIP,
Rule 413 contains a provision that
explicitly exempts affected units from
complying with emission limitations
during periods of startup and shutdown
and does not provide for an alternative
emission limitation during such
periods. Rules 411 and 419 contain
monitoring provisions that preclude the
use of specified data for determining
compliance with emission limitations
during periods of startup and shutdown.
These provisions are inconsistent with
the EPA’s Startup, Shutdown, and
Malfunction (SSM) Policy as established
in the EPA’s 2015 SSM SIP Action.4 The
deficiencies with these three rules were
the basis for our disapproval of the
major source NOX element of the 2017
RACT SIP.
In Environ. Comm. Fl. Elec. Power v.
EPA, 94 F.4th 77 (D.C. Cir. 2024), the
D.C. Circuit held that the EPA
impermissibly issued a SIP call, under
CAA section 110(k)(5), in its 2015 SSM
SIP Action 5 for certain SIP provisions
applicable to emissions during SSM
events, including certain automatic
exemption type provisions that the EPA
had previously approved.6 While the
D.C. Circuit vacated certain SIP calls in
EPA’s 2015 SSM SIP Action, that
vacatur was premised on the view that
the Agency did not make a predicate
determination that the specific
provisions at issue were emissions
limitations or that it was ‘‘necessary or
appropriate’’ under CAA 110(a)(2)(A)
that the SIP provisions must be
emission limitations. EPA continues to
interpret its longstanding interpretation
that, pursuant to CAA section 302(k),
4 ‘‘State Implementation Plans: Response to
Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of
EPA’s SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of
Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls To Amend
Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During
Periods of Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction,’’ 80
FR 33840 (June 12, 2015).
5 See 80 FR 33840.
6 See Environ. Comm. Fl. Elec. Power v. EPA, 94
F.4th 77 (D.C. Cir. 2024).
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
emission limitations must be
continuous and apply at all times,
consistent with the decision in Environ.
Comm. Fl. Elec. Power v. EPA. The
Court did not vacate EPA’s longstanding
guidance for developing alternative
emission limitations (AELs), should a
state or air jurisdiction choose to
develop and submit AELs into their SIP
as a means to ensuring they are meeting
the applicable CAA requirement that
emission limitations must be
continuous.7 States and/or air
jurisdictions are not precluded from
submitting a SIP revision that
establishes AELs, as SMAQMD did so
here.
Following our June 30, 2023 final
action disapproving the major source
NOX RACT element, SMAQMD
examined the permits issued under the
District’s SIP-approved NSR permit
program for each of the NOX major
sources that rely upon Rule 411, 413, or
419 for RACT. The District identified
conditions in each district permit that
established NOX emission limits that
apply at all times. SMAQMD also
identified monitoring, recordkeeping,
and reporting conditions from each
district permit to determine compliance
with the rule and permit requirements.
These District Permits are intended to
remedy the SSM deficiencies, in
combination with Rule 411 and Rule
413 requirements, and are intended to
implement RACT for major sources of
NOX in the District. Our technical
support document (TSD) has more
detailed information about these District
Permits.
In addition, we note that the locallyadopted NSR permits that served as the
basis of the submitted District Permits
contain emission limits and other
requirements unrelated to NOX RACT
that the District is not seeking to
approve into the SIP. As a result, the
District has redacted those portions of
the submitted permits, such as
conditions related to carbon monoxide
(CO), particulate matter (PM), state
toxics, and other requirements that are
not necessary for implementing NOX
RACT.
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the
submitted documents?
Rules in the SIP must be enforceable
(see CAA section 110(a)(2)) and must
not interfere with applicable
requirements concerning attainment and
7 See 80 FR 33912–33914 and State
Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding Excess
Emissions During Malfunction, Startup, and
Shutdown (1999 SSM Guidance).
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
reasonable further progress or other
CAA requirements (see CAA section
110(l)). Generally, SIP rules must
require the implementation of RACT for
each category of sources covered by a
CTG, as well as each major source of
NOX or VOC in ozone nonattainment
areas classified as Moderate or higher
(see CAA section 182(b)(2)). The
SMAQMD regulates a portion of an
ozone nonattainment area classified as
Severe for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and
is therefore responsible for ensuring that
the applicable sources implement
RACT-level controls for that ozone
standard. The District Permits were
submitted to be incorporated into the
SIP to implement RACT-level controls
and to fulfill the requirements
associated with the major source NOX
element for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Guidance and policy documents that
we used to evaluate enforceability,
revision/relaxation, and stringency
requirements for the applicable criteria
pollutants include the following:
1. ‘‘State Implementation Plans;
General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR
13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070
(April 28, 1992).
2. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation
Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,’’ EPA, May 25, 1988 (the
Bluebook, revised January 11, 1990).
3. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting
Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,’’ EPA Region 9, August 21,
2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. State Implementation Plans:
Response to Petition for Rulemaking;
Restatement and Update of EPA’s SSM
Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of
Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to
Amend Provisions Applying to Excess
Emissions During Periods of Startup,
Shutdown and Malfunction,’’ 80 FR
33839, June 12, 2015.
5. ‘‘Guidance Memorandum:
Withdrawal of the October 9, 2020,
Memorandum Addressing Startup,
Shutdown, and Malfunctions in State
Implementation Plans and
Implementation of the Prior Policy,’’
September 30, 2021.
B. Do the submitted documents meet the
evaluation criteria?
We have grouped our evaluation of
the submitted documents into three
categories corresponding to the three
types of units that comprise the major
NOX sources listed in Table 2.
1. Boilers
The SMAQMD is relying upon
requirements contained in the current
SIP-approved version of Rule 411 and in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
the submitted District Permits to
implement RACT for the boilers listed
in Table 2. In our June 30, 2023 final
action on the 2017 RACT SIP, we
evaluated the stringency of applicable
Rule 411 NOX limits, which vary from
9 parts per million (ppm) to 15 ppm,
and do not apply during periods of
startup and shutdown.8 We determined
that the emission limits in SIP-approved
Rule 411 achieve RACT-level
stringency, but we disapproved based
on the Agency’s SSM policy. We have
not identified any information since our
June 30, 2023 final action to alter our
evaluation that the stringency of the
NOX emission limits are RACT.
The District Permits contain sourcespecific pound per day (lb/day) NOX
limits for each boiler listed in Table 2.
These lb/day mass emission limits are
continuous and apply at all times. They
were developed by converting the
allowable short-term pound per hour
(lb/hr) emission limit applicable during
normal operations for each source to a
24-hr average basis. The allowable lb/hr
emission limit for each source was
established pursuant to the control
technology determinations made via the
NSR permitting process and is based
upon a concentration limit that varies
by district permit between 5 to 9 ppm.9
Submitting these lb/day limits into the
SIP will ensure that mass emissions
during startup and shutdown do not
exceed the mass emissions allowed
during periods of normal operation on
a 24-hour average basis. As discussed
above, we consider the Rule 411 NOX
limits to achieve RACT-level stringency,
and these lb/hr District Permit limits
achieve or exceed this same level of
stringency on a mass basis, and they are
applicable at all times. As a result, when
combined with Rule 411 limits, these
District permit limits will ensure that
the affected units are subject to limits
with RACT-level stringency at all times.
In addition, we determined that the
emission limits contained in these
District Permits are consistent with the
criteria recommended in the EPA’s SSM
Policy as appropriate considerations for
developing emission limitations in the
SIP provisions applicable during startup
and shutdown. Additional information
regarding our evaluation of District
Permit limits, including their
consistency with SSM policy criteria, is
included in our TSD for this action.
Based on the existing SIP-approved NOX
limits in Rule 411, combined with the
FR 42248. See TSD for that action, which is
also included in the docket for this rulemaking.
9 In no case is any source’s short term lb/hr
emission limit based on a concentration higher than
9 ppm, which is also the most stringent NOX
emission standard established in Rule 411.
PO 00000
8 88
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
54751
NOX limits that apply at all times
contained in the submitted District
Permits, we propose to determine that
the District has established
requirements in the SIP that are
consistent with the EPA’s SSM policy
and implement RACT for the boilers
listed in Table 2.
2. Gas Turbines
For the gas turbines listed in Table 2,
the SMAQMD is relying upon
requirements contained in the current
SIP-approved version of Rule 413 and in
the submitted District Permits to
implement RACT. In our June 30, 2023
final action on the 2017 RACT SIP, we
evaluated the stringency of the 9 ppm
NOX limit established by the SIPapproved version of Rule 413.10 We
determined that the emission limit in
SIP-approved Rule 413 achieves RACTlevel stringency but disapproved based
on the Agency’s SSM policy because the
emission limits in the rule do not apply
during periods of startup and shutdown.
We have not identified any information
since our June 30, 2023 final action to
alter our evaluation that the stringency
of the NOX emission limits comprise
RACT.
The District Permits contain sourcespecific lb/day NOX limits for each gas
turbine listed in Table 2. These lb/day
mass emission limits are continuous
and apply at all times. The sourcespecific lb/day NOX limits for the gas
turbines were developed by examining
the maximum number of hours of each
mode of operation is allowed in a single
day, the maximum lb/hr emission rate
for each mode of operation (either
startup or normal operation), and
summing the 24 hourly mass emission
values corresponding to each hour’s
mode of operation to develop a total lb/
day emission limit. The maximum lb/hr
emission limit during normal operations
for each source was established
pursuant to the control technology
determinations made via the NSR
permitting process and is based on a
concentration limit that varies by
district permit between 2.5 to 5 ppm.11
As a result, the lb/day limits in each
source’s district permit, which apply at
all times, will constrain mass emissions
of NOX to a level consistent with
maximum permitted frequency and
duration of shutdown events and also to
a level of normal operations that is more
stringent than Rule 413 concentration
10 88 FR 42252. See also TSD for that action,
which is available in the docket for this rulemaking.
11 In all cases, each source’s short term lb/hr
emission limit during normal operations is based on
a concentration limit that is more stringent than 9
ppm, which is the most stringent NOX emission
standard established in Rule 413.
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
54752
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
limits. In other words, we consider the
Rule 413 NOX limits to achieve RACTlevel stringency because these District
Permit limits achieve or exceed the most
stringent level of control in these limits
on a mass basis and they are applicable
at all times. Thus, when combined with
Rule 413 emission limits, the District
permit limits will ensure that the
affected units are subject to RACT-level
stringency at all times. We have
determined that the lb/day emission
limits contained in these District
Permits are consistent with the criteria
recommended in the EPA’s SSM Policy
as appropriate considerations for
developing emission limitations in SIP
provisions applicable during startup
and shutdown. Further details regarding
our evaluation of District Permit limits,
including their consistency with SSM
policy criteria, are included in our TSD
for this action.
Based on the existing SIP-approved
NOX limits in Rule 413, combined with
the NOX limits that apply at all times
contained in the submitted District
Permits, we propose to determine that
the District has established
requirements in the SIP that are
consistent with the EPA’s SSM policy
and implement RACT for the gas
turbines listed in Table 2.
3. Miscellaneous Combustion Units
Unlike for boilers and gas turbines,
the SMAQMD is not relying upon Rule
419 requirements to implement RACT
for the miscellaneous combustion units
(carbon fiber oxidation ovens) listed in
Table 2. Instead, it is only relying upon
the requirements contained in the
submitted District Permits. As discussed
in our June 30, 2023 final action on the
2017 RACT SIP, the ovens listed in
Table 2 are subject to Rule 419, which
was submitted to the EPA for
incorporation into the SIP on January
31, 2019. We have not yet proposed
action on Rule 419, and no version of
it has been previously approved into the
SIP.
The District Permits establish NOX
concentration limits of 30 ppm for each
oven. These limits are continuous and
apply at all times. The EPA has not
published a CTG document or
Alternative Control Techniques (ACT)
document that is relevant for the control
of NOX emissions for units such as the
carbon fiber oxidation ovens. As a
result, we have evaluated the District
Permit limits through comparison with
NOX limits established in miscellaneous
combustion unit rules from other
California air districts. We have
summarized these values in Table 3
below.
TABLE 3—COMPARISON OF MISCELLANEOUS COMBUSTION UNIT EMISSION LIMITS (GASEOUS FUEL ONLY)
Sacramento
metro AQMD
district permits
Equipment category
San Joaquin
Valley unified
(SJVU)
air pollution
control district
(APCD) rule
4309
South coast
AQMD rule
1147
Imperial
county APCD
rule 400.4
Ventura county
APCD rule
74.34
NOX emission limit in parts per mission by volume (ppmv)
Asphalt Manufacturing ........................................................
Incinerator/Crematory .........................................................
Metal Heat Treating/Metal Melting Furnace .......................
Oven, Dehydrator, Dryer, Heater, or Kiln ...........................
Other Miscellaneous combustion unit .................................
All miscellaneous combustion units when liquid fuel-fired
Cooking Unit .......................................................................
........................
........................
........................
30
........................
........................
........................
40
........................
........................
........................
40
40–110
........................
40 ...................
60.
60 ...................
30 or 60 a .......
30 ...................
40 or 60.a
........................
........................
40.
........................
30 c .................
........................
60.
80.
30 or 60.a
40 or 60.b
ppm if process temperature ≥1,200 deg F.
ppm if process temperature ≥500 deg F.
c Imperial County APCD Rule 400.4 applies to wallboard kilns only.
a 60
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
b 60
As seen in Table 3 above, the 30 ppm
limit established in the District Permits
is equal to or exceeds the NOX emission
limit established for ovens in other
examined ozone nonattainment areas. In
particular, the limit established in the
District Permits could be considered the
most stringent limit among all of those
evaluated, since it does not provide a
separate limit when a unit is operating
above specific process temperatures.
The District Permits also contain
source-specific lb/day NOX limits for
each oven. These lb/day mass emission
limits are continuous and apply at all
times. They were developed by
converting the allowable short-term lb/
hr emission limit applicable during
normal operations for each source to a
24-hr average basis. The allowable lb/hr
emission limit for each source was
established pursuant to the control
technology determinations made via the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Jul 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
NSR permitting process and
corresponds to the 30 ppm NOX
concentration limit. Submitting these
lb/day limits into the SIP will provide
an additional constraint to ensure that
mass emissions during startup and
shutdown do not exceed the mass
emissions allowed during periods of
normal operation on a 24-hour average
basis. As a result, we propose to
determine that the District has
established requirements in the SIP that
implement RACT for the miscellaneous
combustion units listed in Table 2.
Finally, for each of the boilers, gas
turbines, and miscellaneous combustion
units listed in Table 2, we are proposing
to determine that our approval of the
District Permits for each of the sources
would comply with CAA section 110(l),
because the proposed SIP revision
would strengthen the SIP by adding new
requirements and would not interfere
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
with any applicable CAA requirements,
including requirements for RFP and
attainment of the NAAQS. CAA section
193 does not apply to this action
because the District Permit conditions
have not previously been approved into
the SIP and were therefore not in effect
before November 15, 1990.
C. Public Comment and Proposed
Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, the EPA proposes to approve
the District Permits, as adopted on
March 28, 2024, into the California SIP.
Based on our discussion in Section II.B
of this document, we propose to
determine that the District Permits will
comply with the EPA’s SSM policy and
other applicable CAA requirements and
will, in conjunction with the SIPapproved NOX limits already
established in Rule 411 and 413,
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 127 / Tuesday, July 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
implement RACT for each major NOX
source in the District.
In addition, as discussed in our June
30, 2023 final action, the absence of
emission limits that apply at all times
was the basis for our disapproval of the
major source NOX element of the 2017
RACT SIP. Since we are proposing to
determine that the District Permits, in
conjunction with the SIP-approved NOX
limits already established in Rule 411
and 413, implement RACT for each
major NOX source in the District, we are
also proposing to approve the major
source NOX element of the District’s
2017 RACT SIP.
We will accept comments from the
public on this proposal until August 1,
2024. If we take final action to approve
the District Permits as proposed, our
final action will incorporate these
District Permits into the federally
enforceable SIP. In addition, it will
permanently stop the sanctions and
Federal implementation plan (FIP)
clocks started by our June 30, 2023 final
action, and it will address the EPA’s
obligation to promulgate a FIP arising
from our February 3, 2017 finding of
failure to submit.12
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the 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, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
the District Permits listed in Table 2, as
adopted on March 28, 2024, which
regulate NOX emissions from boilers,
gas turbines, and miscellaneous
combustion units. The EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these
materials available through https://
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region IX 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 provision of the
Act and applicable federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 740(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus,
in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA’s
role is to review state choices, and
approve those choices if they meet the
minimum criteria of the Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action
merely proposes to approve state law as
12 82 FR 9158. The sanctions clock triggered by
this finding of failure to submit was permanently
stopped by a finding of completeness made by the
EPA on August 23, 2018 for the District’s 2017
RACT SIP submittal.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Jul 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
meeting federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR
21879, April 11, 2023);
• 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 subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
because it proposes to approve a state
program;
• 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 the 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. The 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,
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
54753
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ The 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 State did not evaluate EJ
considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation.
The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis
and did not consider EJ in this action.
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 EJ for people of color, lowincome populations, and Indigenous
peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 25, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024–14336 Filed 7–1–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0237; FRL–11999–
01–R9]
Air Plan Revisions; California; Motor
Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance
Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Under the Clean Air Act
(CAA or ‘‘Act’’), the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). This
revision addresses the CAA
requirements for the motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M)
programs (also referred to as ‘‘Smog
Check’’ programs) for the 2015 8-hour
ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (‘‘2015 ozone NAAQS’’). We
are taking comments on this proposal
and plan to follow with a final action.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54748-54753]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-14336]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2024-0197; FRL-11981-01-R9]
Air Plan Revisions; California; Sacramento Metropolitan Air
Quality Management District; Reasonably Available Control Technology
District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve state implementation plan (SIP) revisions from the Sacramento
Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD or ``District'')
to address Clean Air Act (CAA or ``Act'') requirements related to the
2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or
``standards''). These revisions concern emissions of oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) from boilers, gas turbines, and miscellaneous (misc) combustion
units and reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements
for major sources of NOX in the portion of the Sacramento Metro, CA,
nonattainment area that is subject to SMAQMD jurisdiction. We are
taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final
action.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 1, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2024-0197 at https://www.regulations.gov. For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not
[[Page 54749]]
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a
language other than English or if you are a person with a disability
who needs a reasonable accommodation at no cost to you, please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene Chen, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street (AIR-3-3), San Francisco, CA 94105. By phone: (415)
947-4304 or by email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State's Submittal
A. What documents did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of the submitted documents?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted documents?
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted documents?
B. Do the submitted documents meet the evaluation criteria?
1. Boilers
2. Gas Turbines
3. Miscellaneous Combustion Units
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State's Submittal
A. What documents did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the documents addressed by this proposal with the
dates that they were adopted by the local air agency and submitted by
the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Table 1--Submitted Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document/rule
Local agency No. Document title Adopted Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SMAQMD........................ .............. Reasonably Available Control 03/28/2024 04/11/2024
Technology (RACT) Permits for
Major Stationary Sources of
Nitrogen Oxides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 28, 2024, SMAQMD adopted portions of several permits
issued under the District's SIP-approved New Source Review (NSR) permit
program for submittal into the SIP. These permits contain requirements
that regulate emissions of NOX, and the District adopted
these permits for SIP submission to ensure that its major sources of
NOX are subject to federally enforceable RACT requirements.
A list of the permits (``District Permits'') contained in this SIP
revision is included in Table 2 below. On April 11, 2024, CARB
submitted this SIP revision to the EPA for approval as a revision to
the California SIP. The EPA has reviewed this submittal and finds that
it fulfills the completeness criteria of appendix V.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Docket Item A-14, 40 CFR Appendix V to Part 51--Criteria
for Determining the Completeness of Plan Submissions.
Table 2--District Permits Included in April 11, 2024 Submittal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit size
Source name Permit No. Unit name/ID (MMBtu/hr) Unit type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitsubishi Chemical Carbon 24611 Oxidation Oven 1 2 Misc Combustion Unit.
Fiber and Composites. 25925 Oxidation Oven 2 2 Misc Combustion Unit.
24613 Oxidation Oven 3 2 Misc Combustion Unit.
24614 Oxidation Oven 4 2 Misc Combustion Unit.
25397 Oxidation Oven-- 3 Misc Combustion Unit.
Line 31.
25398 Oxidation Oven-- 3 Misc Combustion Unit.
Line 31.
25399 Cleaver Brooks 6 Boiler.
Boiler.
UC Davis Medical Center....... 17549 Combined Cycle 260 Gas Turbine.
Turbine.
20216 Boiler 1........ 32 Boiler.
20217 Boiler 2........ 32 Boiler.
20218 Boiler 3........ 32 Boiler.
20219 Boiler 4........ 32 Boiler.
Sacramento Metropolitan 27410 Babcock & Wilcox 109 Boiler.
Utility District (SMUD) 27141 Boiler. 583 Gas Turbine.
Procter & Gamble Power Plant. 27142 Gas Turbine 1A.. 583 Gas Turbine.
27143 Gas Turbine 1B.. 500 Gas Turbine.
27144 Gas Turbine 1C.. 109 Boiler.
Boiler 1B.......
SMUD Cosumnes Power Plant..... 25801 Turbine 2....... 2,200 Gas Turbine.
25800 Turbine 3....... 2,200 Gas Turbine.
SMUD Campbell Power Plant..... 27118 Gas Turbine..... 1,410 Gas Turbine.
SMUD Carson Power Plant....... 27151 Turbine 27151... 600 Gas Turbine.
27154 Cleaver Brooks 100 Boiler.
Boiler.
27156 Turbine 27156... 450 Gas Turbine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 54750]]
B. Are there other versions of the submitted documents?
We have not previously approved district permits into the SIP for
any of the sources listed in Table 2. The District Permits were
submitted to address our June 30, 2023 action that finalized a partial
approval and partial disapproval of the District's ``Demonstration of
Reasonably Available Control Technology for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS''
(``2017 RACT SIP''). The District's 2017 RACT SIP was submitted to
demonstrate that its stationary sources are subject to RACT rules for
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\2\ Our partial disapproval related solely
to the RACT element for major sources of NOX that relied
upon three district rules: Rule 411 (NOX from Boilers,
Process Heaters and Steam Generators), Rule 413 (Stationary Gas
Turbines), and Rule 419 (NOX from Miscellaneous Combustion
Units). Rules 411 and 413 have previously been approved into the SIP,
but Rule 419 was locally adopted and submitted to the EPA as part of
the 2017 RACT SIP development process and has not been approved into
the SIP. As part of our June 30, 2023 final action, we identified
deficiencies with the submitted version of Rule 419 but did not act to
approve or disapprove that rule. As discussed in greater detail below,
the District elected to submit source-specific permits, rather than
submitting rule revisions, to address the deficiencies we identified in
our June 30, 2023 final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 88 FR 42248.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. What is the purpose of the submitted documents?
Emissions of NOX contribute to the production of ground-
level ozone, smog and particulate matter (PM), which harm human health
and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to
submit plans that provide for implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the NAAQS. In addition, CAA sections 182(b)(2) and (f)
require that SIPs for ozone nonattainment areas classified as
``Moderate'' or higher implement RACT for any category of sources
covered by a control techniques guidelines (CTG) document and for any
major stationary source of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or
NOX. The SMAQMD regulates the Sacramento County portion of
the Sacramento Metro, CA, ozone nonattainment area that is classified
as ``Severe'' nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\3\ Therefore, the
SMAQMD must, at a minimum, ensure that all categories of sources
covered by a CTG document and all major stationary sources of VOCs or
NOX within the District implement RACT-level controls. In a
Severe ozone nonattainment area, any stationary source that emits or
has the potential to emit at least 25 tons per year (tpy) of VOCs or
NOX is considered a major stationary source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 40 CFR 81.305.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SMAQMD relies upon several district rules to implement RACT for
major sources of NOX, including Rule 411 (NOX
from Boilers, Process Heaters and Steam Generators), Rule 413
(Stationary Gas Turbines), and Rule 419 (NOX from
Miscellaneous Combustion Units). As we explained in our June 30, 2023
final action on the 2017 RACT SIP, Rule 413 contains a provision that
explicitly exempts affected units from complying with emission
limitations during periods of startup and shutdown and does not provide
for an alternative emission limitation during such periods. Rules 411
and 419 contain monitoring provisions that preclude the use of
specified data for determining compliance with emission limitations
during periods of startup and shutdown. These provisions are
inconsistent with the EPA's Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction (SSM)
Policy as established in the EPA's 2015 SSM SIP Action.\4\ The
deficiencies with these three rules were the basis for our disapproval
of the major source NOX element of the 2017 RACT SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for
Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to
SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls To Amend
Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup,
Shutdown and Malfunction,'' 80 FR 33840 (June 12, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Environ. Comm. Fl. Elec. Power v. EPA, 94 F.4th 77 (D.C. Cir.
2024), the D.C. Circuit held that the EPA impermissibly issued a SIP
call, under CAA section 110(k)(5), in its 2015 SSM SIP Action \5\ for
certain SIP provisions applicable to emissions during SSM events,
including certain automatic exemption type provisions that the EPA had
previously approved.\6\ While the D.C. Circuit vacated certain SIP
calls in EPA's 2015 SSM SIP Action, that vacatur was premised on the
view that the Agency did not make a predicate determination that the
specific provisions at issue were emissions limitations or that it was
``necessary or appropriate'' under CAA 110(a)(2)(A) that the SIP
provisions must be emission limitations. EPA continues to interpret its
longstanding interpretation that, pursuant to CAA section 302(k),
emission limitations must be continuous and apply at all times,
consistent with the decision in Environ. Comm. Fl. Elec. Power v. EPA.
The Court did not vacate EPA's longstanding guidance for developing
alternative emission limitations (AELs), should a state or air
jurisdiction choose to develop and submit AELs into their SIP as a
means to ensuring they are meeting the applicable CAA requirement that
emission limitations must be continuous.\7\ States and/or air
jurisdictions are not precluded from submitting a SIP revision that
establishes AELs, as SMAQMD did so here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 80 FR 33840.
\6\ See Environ. Comm. Fl. Elec. Power v. EPA, 94 F.4th 77 (D.C.
Cir. 2024).
\7\ See 80 FR 33912-33914 and State Implementation Plans: Policy
Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunction, Startup, and Shutdown
(1999 SSM Guidance).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following our June 30, 2023 final action disapproving the major
source NOX RACT element, SMAQMD examined the permits issued
under the District's SIP-approved NSR permit program for each of the
NOX major sources that rely upon Rule 411, 413, or 419 for
RACT. The District identified conditions in each district permit that
established NOX emission limits that apply at all times.
SMAQMD also identified monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
conditions from each district permit to determine compliance with the
rule and permit requirements. These District Permits are intended to
remedy the SSM deficiencies, in combination with Rule 411 and Rule 413
requirements, and are intended to implement RACT for major sources of
NOX in the District. Our technical support document (TSD)
has more detailed information about these District Permits.
In addition, we note that the locally-adopted NSR permits that
served as the basis of the submitted District Permits contain emission
limits and other requirements unrelated to NOX RACT that the
District is not seeking to approve into the SIP. As a result, the
District has redacted those portions of the submitted permits, such as
conditions related to carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM),
state toxics, and other requirements that are not necessary for
implementing NOX RACT.
II. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the submitted documents?
Rules in the SIP must be enforceable (see CAA section 110(a)(2))
and must not interfere with applicable requirements concerning
attainment and
[[Page 54751]]
reasonable further progress or other CAA requirements (see CAA section
110(l)). Generally, SIP rules must require the implementation of RACT
for each category of sources covered by a CTG, as well as each major
source of NOX or VOC in ozone nonattainment areas classified
as Moderate or higher (see CAA section 182(b)(2)). The SMAQMD regulates
a portion of an ozone nonattainment area classified as Severe for the
2008 ozone NAAQS and is therefore responsible for ensuring that the
applicable sources implement RACT-level controls for that ozone
standard. The District Permits were submitted to be incorporated into
the SIP to implement RACT-level controls and to fulfill the
requirements associated with the major source NOX element
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Guidance and policy documents that we used to evaluate
enforceability, revision/relaxation, and stringency requirements for
the applicable criteria pollutants include the following:
1. ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 57
FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
2. ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and
Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook, revised January 11,
1990).
3. ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
4. State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking;
Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings
of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying
to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown and
Malfunction,'' 80 FR 33839, June 12, 2015.
5. ``Guidance Memorandum: Withdrawal of the October 9, 2020,
Memorandum Addressing Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunctions in State
Implementation Plans and Implementation of the Prior Policy,''
September 30, 2021.
B. Do the submitted documents meet the evaluation criteria?
We have grouped our evaluation of the submitted documents into
three categories corresponding to the three types of units that
comprise the major NOX sources listed in Table 2.
1. Boilers
The SMAQMD is relying upon requirements contained in the current
SIP-approved version of Rule 411 and in the submitted District Permits
to implement RACT for the boilers listed in Table 2. In our June 30,
2023 final action on the 2017 RACT SIP, we evaluated the stringency of
applicable Rule 411 NOX limits, which vary from 9 parts per
million (ppm) to 15 ppm, and do not apply during periods of startup and
shutdown.\8\ We determined that the emission limits in SIP-approved
Rule 411 achieve RACT-level stringency, but we disapproved based on the
Agency's SSM policy. We have not identified any information since our
June 30, 2023 final action to alter our evaluation that the stringency
of the NOX emission limits are RACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 88 FR 42248. See TSD for that action, which is also included
in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District Permits contain source-specific pound per day (lb/day)
NOX limits for each boiler listed in Table 2. These lb/day
mass emission limits are continuous and apply at all times. They were
developed by converting the allowable short-term pound per hour (lb/hr)
emission limit applicable during normal operations for each source to a
24-hr average basis. The allowable lb/hr emission limit for each source
was established pursuant to the control technology determinations made
via the NSR permitting process and is based upon a concentration limit
that varies by district permit between 5 to 9 ppm.\9\ Submitting these
lb/day limits into the SIP will ensure that mass emissions during
startup and shutdown do not exceed the mass emissions allowed during
periods of normal operation on a 24-hour average basis. As discussed
above, we consider the Rule 411 NOX limits to achieve RACT-
level stringency, and these lb/hr District Permit limits achieve or
exceed this same level of stringency on a mass basis, and they are
applicable at all times. As a result, when combined with Rule 411
limits, these District permit limits will ensure that the affected
units are subject to limits with RACT-level stringency at all times. In
addition, we determined that the emission limits contained in these
District Permits are consistent with the criteria recommended in the
EPA's SSM Policy as appropriate considerations for developing emission
limitations in the SIP provisions applicable during startup and
shutdown. Additional information regarding our evaluation of District
Permit limits, including their consistency with SSM policy criteria, is
included in our TSD for this action. Based on the existing SIP-approved
NOX limits in Rule 411, combined with the NOX
limits that apply at all times contained in the submitted District
Permits, we propose to determine that the District has established
requirements in the SIP that are consistent with the EPA's SSM policy
and implement RACT for the boilers listed in Table 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ In no case is any source's short term lb/hr emission limit
based on a concentration higher than 9 ppm, which is also the most
stringent NOX emission standard established in Rule 411.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Gas Turbines
For the gas turbines listed in Table 2, the SMAQMD is relying upon
requirements contained in the current SIP-approved version of Rule 413
and in the submitted District Permits to implement RACT. In our June
30, 2023 final action on the 2017 RACT SIP, we evaluated the stringency
of the 9 ppm NOX limit established by the SIP-approved
version of Rule 413.\10\ We determined that the emission limit in SIP-
approved Rule 413 achieves RACT-level stringency but disapproved based
on the Agency's SSM policy because the emission limits in the rule do
not apply during periods of startup and shutdown. We have not
identified any information since our June 30, 2023 final action to
alter our evaluation that the stringency of the NOX emission
limits comprise RACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 88 FR 42252. See also TSD for that action, which is
available in the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District Permits contain source-specific lb/day NOX
limits for each gas turbine listed in Table 2. These lb/day mass
emission limits are continuous and apply at all times. The source-
specific lb/day NOX limits for the gas turbines were
developed by examining the maximum number of hours of each mode of
operation is allowed in a single day, the maximum lb/hr emission rate
for each mode of operation (either startup or normal operation), and
summing the 24 hourly mass emission values corresponding to each hour's
mode of operation to develop a total lb/day emission limit. The maximum
lb/hr emission limit during normal operations for each source was
established pursuant to the control technology determinations made via
the NSR permitting process and is based on a concentration limit that
varies by district permit between 2.5 to 5 ppm.\11\ As a result, the
lb/day limits in each source's district permit, which apply at all
times, will constrain mass emissions of NOX to a level
consistent with maximum permitted frequency and duration of shutdown
events and also to a level of normal operations that is more stringent
than Rule 413 concentration
[[Page 54752]]
limits. In other words, we consider the Rule 413 NOX limits
to achieve RACT-level stringency because these District Permit limits
achieve or exceed the most stringent level of control in these limits
on a mass basis and they are applicable at all times. Thus, when
combined with Rule 413 emission limits, the District permit limits will
ensure that the affected units are subject to RACT-level stringency at
all times. We have determined that the lb/day emission limits contained
in these District Permits are consistent with the criteria recommended
in the EPA's SSM Policy as appropriate considerations for developing
emission limitations in SIP provisions applicable during startup and
shutdown. Further details regarding our evaluation of District Permit
limits, including their consistency with SSM policy criteria, are
included in our TSD for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ In all cases, each source's short term lb/hr emission limit
during normal operations is based on a concentration limit that is
more stringent than 9 ppm, which is the most stringent
NOX emission standard established in Rule 413.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the existing SIP-approved NOX limits in Rule
413, combined with the NOX limits that apply at all times
contained in the submitted District Permits, we propose to determine
that the District has established requirements in the SIP that are
consistent with the EPA's SSM policy and implement RACT for the gas
turbines listed in Table 2.
3. Miscellaneous Combustion Units
Unlike for boilers and gas turbines, the SMAQMD is not relying upon
Rule 419 requirements to implement RACT for the miscellaneous
combustion units (carbon fiber oxidation ovens) listed in Table 2.
Instead, it is only relying upon the requirements contained in the
submitted District Permits. As discussed in our June 30, 2023 final
action on the 2017 RACT SIP, the ovens listed in Table 2 are subject to
Rule 419, which was submitted to the EPA for incorporation into the SIP
on January 31, 2019. We have not yet proposed action on Rule 419, and
no version of it has been previously approved into the SIP.
The District Permits establish NOX concentration limits
of 30 ppm for each oven. These limits are continuous and apply at all
times. The EPA has not published a CTG document or Alternative Control
Techniques (ACT) document that is relevant for the control of
NOX emissions for units such as the carbon fiber oxidation
ovens. As a result, we have evaluated the District Permit limits
through comparison with NOX limits established in
miscellaneous combustion unit rules from other California air
districts. We have summarized these values in Table 3 below.
Table 3--Comparison of Miscellaneous Combustion Unit Emission Limits (Gaseous Fuel Only)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Joaquin
Valley unified
Sacramento (SJVU) air
metro AQMD pollution Imperial county APCD rule Ventura county APCD rule
Equipment category district control South coast AQMD rule 1147 400.4 74.34
permits district
(APCD) rule
4309
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX emission limit in parts per mission by volume (ppmv)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asphalt Manufacturing............... .............. 40 40........................ .......................... 40.
Incinerator/Crematory............... .............. .............. 60........................
Metal Heat Treating/Metal Melting .............. .............. 60........................ .......................... 60.
Furnace.
Oven, Dehydrator, Dryer, Heater, or 30 .............. 30 or 60 \a\.............. 30 \c\.................... 80.
Kiln.
Other Miscellaneous combustion unit. .............. 40 30........................ .......................... 30 or 60.\a\
All miscellaneous combustion units .............. 40-110 40 or 60.\a\
when liquid fuel-fired.
Cooking Unit........................ .............. .............. .......................... 40 or 60.\b\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ 60 ppm if process temperature >=1,200 deg F.
\b\ 60 ppm if process temperature >=500 deg F.
\c\ Imperial County APCD Rule 400.4 applies to wallboard kilns only.
As seen in Table 3 above, the 30 ppm limit established in the
District Permits is equal to or exceeds the NOX emission
limit established for ovens in other examined ozone nonattainment
areas. In particular, the limit established in the District Permits
could be considered the most stringent limit among all of those
evaluated, since it does not provide a separate limit when a unit is
operating above specific process temperatures.
The District Permits also contain source-specific lb/day
NOX limits for each oven. These lb/day mass emission limits
are continuous and apply at all times. They were developed by
converting the allowable short-term lb/hr emission limit applicable
during normal operations for each source to a 24-hr average basis. The
allowable lb/hr emission limit for each source was established pursuant
to the control technology determinations made via the NSR permitting
process and corresponds to the 30 ppm NOX concentration
limit. Submitting these lb/day limits into the SIP will provide an
additional constraint to ensure that mass emissions during startup and
shutdown do not exceed the mass emissions allowed during periods of
normal operation on a 24-hour average basis. As a result, we propose to
determine that the District has established requirements in the SIP
that implement RACT for the miscellaneous combustion units listed in
Table 2.
Finally, for each of the boilers, gas turbines, and miscellaneous
combustion units listed in Table 2, we are proposing to determine that
our approval of the District Permits for each of the sources would
comply with CAA section 110(l), because the proposed SIP revision would
strengthen the SIP by adding new requirements and would not interfere
with any applicable CAA requirements, including requirements for RFP
and attainment of the NAAQS. CAA section 193 does not apply to this
action because the District Permit conditions have not previously been
approved into the SIP and were therefore not in effect before November
15, 1990.
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA proposes to
approve the District Permits, as adopted on March 28, 2024, into the
California SIP. Based on our discussion in Section II.B of this
document, we propose to determine that the District Permits will comply
with the EPA's SSM policy and other applicable CAA requirements and
will, in conjunction with the SIP-approved NOX limits
already established in Rule 411 and 413,
[[Page 54753]]
implement RACT for each major NOX source in the District.
In addition, as discussed in our June 30, 2023 final action, the
absence of emission limits that apply at all times was the basis for
our disapproval of the major source NOX element of the 2017
RACT SIP. Since we are proposing to determine that the District
Permits, in conjunction with the SIP-approved NOX limits
already established in Rule 411 and 413, implement RACT for each major
NOX source in the District, we are also proposing to approve
the major source NOX element of the District's 2017 RACT
SIP.
We will accept comments from the public on this proposal until
August 1, 2024. If we take final action to approve the District Permits
as proposed, our final action will incorporate these District Permits
into the federally enforceable SIP. In addition, it will permanently
stop the sanctions and Federal implementation plan (FIP) clocks started
by our June 30, 2023 final action, and it will address the EPA's
obligation to promulgate a FIP arising from our February 3, 2017
finding of failure to submit.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 82 FR 9158. The sanctions clock triggered by this finding
of failure to submit was permanently stopped by a finding of
completeness made by the EPA on August 23, 2018 for the District's
2017 RACT SIP submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the 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, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the District Permits listed in Table 2, as adopted on March
28, 2024, which regulate NOX emissions from boilers, gas
turbines, and miscellaneous combustion units. The EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these materials available through https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region IX 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 provision of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 740(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to review state choices,
and approve those choices if they meet the minimum criteria of the Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve state law
as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
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 subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a state program;
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 the 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.
The 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.'' The 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 State did not evaluate EJ considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation. The EPA did not perform an EJ
analysis and did not consider EJ in this action. 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 EJ
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, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 25, 2024.
Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2024-14336 Filed 7-1-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
