Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Nitrogen Oxide Emissions Control Requirements, 58097-58099 [2024-15598]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 137 / Wednesday, July 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
preamble. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this proposed rule.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to call or email the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places, or vessels.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
V. Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We view public participation as
essential to effective rulemaking and
will consider all comments and material
received during the comment period.
Your comment can help shape the
outcome of this rulemaking. If you
submit a comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking,
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation.
Submitting comments. We encourage
you to submit comments through the
Federal Decision-Making Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. To do so,
go to https://www.regulations.gov, type
USCG–2024–0618 in the search box and
click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, look for this
document in the Search Results column,
and click on it. Then click on the
Comment option. If you cannot submit
your material by using https://
www.regulations.gov, call or email the
person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this proposed rule
for alternate instructions.
Viewing material in docket. To view
documents mentioned in this proposed
rule as being available in the docket,
find the docket as described in the
previous paragraph, and then select
‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the
Document Type column. Public
comments will also be placed in our
online docket and can be viewed by
following instructions on the https://
www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked
Questions web page. Also, if you click
on the Dockets tab and then the
proposed rule, you should see a
‘‘Subscribe’’ option for email alerts. The
option will notify you when comments
are posted, or a final rule is published.
We review all comments received, but
we will only post comments that
address the topic of the proposed rule.
We may choose not to post off-topic,
inappropriate, or duplicate comments
that we receive.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Jul 16, 2024
Jkt 262001
Personal information. We accept
anonymous comments. Comments we
post to https://www.regulations.gov will
include any personal information you
have provided. For more about privacy
and submissions to the docket in
response to this document, see DHS’s
eRulemaking System of Records notice
(85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020).
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Dated: July 11, 2024.
Aja L. Kirksey,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Sector Honolulu.
[FR Doc. 2024–15694 Filed 7–16–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing
to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows:
40 CFR Part 52
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
AGENCY:
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051, 70124;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3.
2. Add § 165.T14–0618 to read as
follows
■
§ 165.T14–0618 Safety Zone, Kahanamoku
Beach, Honolulu, HI
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: All waters offshore of
Kahanamoku Beach, from surface to
bottom, encompassed by a line
connecting the following points
beginning at 21°16′52.02″ N
157°50′27.88″ W, thence to 21°16′44.24″
N 157°50′29.67″ W, thence to
21°16′40.06″ N 157°50′16.65″ W, thence
to 21°16′47.24″ N 157°50′13.39″ W, back
to the beginning point. These
coordinates are based on 1984 World
Geodetic System (WGS 84).
(b) Regulations. (1) Under the general
safety zone regulations in subpart C of
this part, you may not enter the safety
zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section unless authorized by the COTP
or the COTP’s designated representative.
(2) To seek permission to enter,
contact the COTP or the COTP’s
representative by calling Sector
Honolulu Command Center at 808–842–
2603. During the enforcement periods,
all persons and vessels permitted to
enter the safety zone must comply with
all lawful orders or directions given to
them by the COTP or the COTP’s
designated representative.
(d) Enforcement periods. This section
will be enforced from 9 p.m. to 4:30
a.m., daily, on August 13, 2024 through
August 15, 2024 and from 6:30 to 9:30
p.m., daily, on August 15, 17 and 18,
2024.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58097
[EPA–R05–OAR–2024–0184; FRL–11968–
01–R5]
Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin;
Nitrogen Oxide Emissions Control
Requirements
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
Wisconsin’s additions and amendments
to chapters NR 400, 428, and 484 of the
Wisconsin Administrative Code (Wis.
Adm. Code). These changes clarify
existing requirements and ensure clear
and consistent implementation of
Wisconsin’s control requirements for
emissions of nitrogen oxide (NOX).
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 16, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2024–0184 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 the
docket. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI), Proprietary
Business Information (PBI), 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, PBI, or
multimedia submissions, and general
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17JYP1.SGM
17JYP1
58098
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 137 / Wednesday, July 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Katie Mullen, Air and Radiation
Division (AR–18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604, (312) 353–3490,
mullen.kathleen@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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
I. What is the background of this SIP
submission?
Chapter NR 428, Wis. Adm. Code,
regulates the emissions of NOX from
certain stationary sources located in
Wisconsin’s current ozone
nonattainment areas and areas with a
history of ozone nonattainment,
including Kenosha, Manitowoc,
Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine,
Sheboygan, Washington, and Waukesha
counties.
Since the promulgation of the 2001
and 2007 revisions to chapter NR 428,
Wis. Adm. Code, Wisconsin has
identified several implementation issues
associated with certain parts of this
chapter. The purpose of Wisconsin’s
proposed revisions is to ensure clear
and consistent implementation of NOX
control requirements in chapter NR 428.
Wisconsin is not currently seeking
approval of this rule as it pertains to the
reasonably available control technology
(RACT) requirements under the 2015
ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). EPA will be
addressing RACT at a later date.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
II. What is EPA’s analysis of the
proposed SIP revision?
Wisconsin’s April 10, 2024, submittal
requested that EPA approve revisions to
NOX control requirements in chapters
NR 400, NR 428, and NR 484 of the Wis.
Adm. Code. Wisconsin’s proposed
revisions clarify emission limits for
units using more than one type of fuel,
incorporate procedures for approving a
site-specific emission limit alternative
to ensure that limits are achievable in
practice, revise and clarify existing
compliance and monitoring
requirements, clarify an applicability
exception, update cross references, and
include definitions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Jul 16, 2024
Jkt 262001
A. Clarification of NOX Emission Limits
During Secondary Fuel Useage
Wisconsin has revised sections NR
428.04(2)(i), 428.05(2)(b), 428.05(2)(f),
428.05(3)(f), 428.22(1), and 428.22(3) of
the Wis. Adm. Code to clarify that a unit
firing secondary fuel is not subject to
emission limits and monitoring
requirements when using only the
secondary fuel under certain limited
circumstances, which include any of the
following conditions:
a. The emissions unit heat input
capacity or maximum design power
output while utilizing the secondary
fuel is less than the corresponding
applicability thresholds.
b. The emissions unit burns the
secondary fuel only during periods of
curtailment or supply interruption of
other fuel(s) not to exceed 500 hours in
a 12 consecutive month period.
c. During periodic testing,
maintenance, or operator training of the
secondary fuel when the periodic
testing, maintenance, or operator
training does not exceed 48 hours
during any calendar year.
d. The secondary fuel constitutes less
than 1% of the unit’s fuel consumption
within a 12 consecutive month period.
Also, NR 428.04(4)(c), 428.05(5)(c),
and 428.24(1)(c) contain the secondary
fuel recordkeeping requirements. EPA is
proposing that these revisions are
approvable since they clarify the
applicability of emission limits and
monitoring requirements when a facility
uses more than one type of fuel.
B. Procedures for Approving a SiteSpecific Emission Limit Alternative
Section NR 428.055 provides a
pathway for facilities to request a sitespecific emission limit if the facility
demonstrates that compliance with
requirements under sections NR 428.04
or 428.05 are technologically or
economically infeasible. The proposed
site-specific emission limit is only
effective after it has been approved into
the State Implementation Plan (SIP) by
EPA. These revisions are approvable
since they explain the steps needed to
implement a site-specific alternative
emission limit.
C. Clarification of Monitoring
Requirements for Specific Categories of
Emissions Units
Wisconsin has created language under
sections NR 428.08(2)(e), 428.08(2)(f),
and 428.08(3) that clarifies monitoring
requirements and exceptions for NOX
emissions units such as kilns, furnaces,
asphalt plants, process heating units,
and engines. Section NR 428.02(2)(g)
incorporates an alternative to operating
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
a continuous emissions monitoring
system (CEMS) by meeting operational
and performance testing requirements
that are consistent with the SIPapproved compliance demonstration
requirements for emission limitations
under s. NR 428.23(1)(b). Section NR
428.08(2)(g)4. a. requires that emissions
performance tests be conducted
according to Method 7, 7A, 7B, 7C, 7D,
or 7E under 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A. Section NR 484.04 table 2 Row
(15m), which incorporates these Federal
test methods by reference, is revised to
cross-reference to section NR
428.08(2)(g)(4)(a). These revisions are
approvable since they clarify the
monitoring requirements and exceptions
for NOX emission units subject to this
rule.
D. Revision of Compliance Monitoring
Plan Submittal Deadline
Wisconsin has revised its deadline for
compliance monitoring plan submittals
under section NR 428.07(1)(a)2., Wis.
Adm. Code, from ‘‘at least 180 days
prior to initial operation’’ to ‘‘at least
180 days prior to initial operation, or an
alternative date less than 180 days
approved by the department.’’ The
previous rule language required plans to
be submitted 180 days before initial
operation. This means a source would
have been required to wait for the 180day period to end prior to operating,
even if the source was permitted and
physically capable of operation prior to
that date. This revised rule is
approvable since it streamlines the
implementation of this section by
allowing the source to request an
alternative date to avoid the waiting
period if warranted.
E. Clarification of Exception
Wisconsin’s revisions clarify that the
unit exception under section NR
428.21(3), Wis. Adm. Code, applies only
to units constructed before August 1,
2007, as originally intended. This
revision is approvable since it clarifies
which emission units qualify for this
exception.
F. Definitions and Cross References
The proposed rule incorporates a
definition for SIP, the acronym for State
Implementation Plan, under section NR
400.03(4)(mf). Wisconsin has also added
definitions for ‘‘primary fuel’’,
‘‘secondary fuel’’, ‘‘simple cycle
stationary combustion turbine’’, and
‘‘supply interruption’’ or ‘‘curtailment’’
under section NR 428.02(7i), (7p), (7u)
and (7w). Wisconsin has also updated
cross references through Ch. NR 428,
Wis. Adm. Code, to be consistent with
the proposed rule language. These
E:\FR\FM\17JYP1.SGM
17JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 137 / Wednesday, July 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules
administrative type revisions are
approvable since they ensure terms
included in the new rule language are
defined and cross references are
updated.
EPA has reviewed the amendments
contained in Wisconsin’s submittal, as
discussed in detail above, and is
proposing to approve the amended
portions of NR 400, 428, and 484.
Because these changes provide clarity
and generally strengthen the currently
approved SIP, EPA is proposing that
these changes will not interfere with
any applicable requirement concerning
attainment, reasonable further progress,
or any other Clean Air Act (CAA)
requirement, and therefore, fulfill
section 110(l) of the CAA.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve the
revisions in NR 400, 428, and 484 of the
Wisconsin Administrative Code since
these changes clarify and streamline
Wisconsin’s NOX control regulatory
requirements.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
Wisconsin rule(s) 400.03(4)(mf),
428.02(7i), 428.02(7p), 428.02(7u),
428.02(7w), 428.04(2)(i), 428.04(4)(c),
428.05(2)(b), 428.05(2)(f), 428.05(3)(f),
428.05(5)(c), 428.22(1), 428.22(3),
428.24(1)(c), 428.08(2)(e)(title),
428.08(2)(f)(title), 428.08(2)(g),
428.08(3), 484.04 Table 2 Row (15m),
and 428.21(3)(d), effective April 1, 2024,
discussed in section II of this preamble.
EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these documents generally
available through https://
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).
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
V. 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Jul 16, 2024
Jkt 262001
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 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 approves 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 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,
February 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
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58099
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 WDNR did not evaluate EJ
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 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 dioxide, Ozone, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: June 10, 2024.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2024–15598 Filed 7–16–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2023–0318; FRL–11926–
01–R5]
Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Greif
Packaging LLC
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
under the Clean Air Act (CAA), a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to
the sulfur dioxide (SO2) regulations
under Chapter 3745–18 of the Ohio
Administrative Code (OAC). Ohio
submitted the request to EPA on June 8,
2023. The revision removes SO2
emissions limitations for fuel burning
equipment at the Greif Packaging, LLC
facility located at 9420 Warmington Rd.
SW in Massillon, Ohio (Greif facility).
The units that were subject to these
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17JYP1.SGM
17JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 17, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58097-58099]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-15598]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2024-0184; FRL-11968-01-R5]
Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; Nitrogen Oxide Emissions Control
Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve Wisconsin's additions and amendments to chapters NR 400, 428,
and 484 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code (Wis. Adm. Code). These
changes clarify existing requirements and ensure clear and consistent
implementation of Wisconsin's control requirements for emissions of
nitrogen oxide (NOX).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 16, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2024-0184 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 the docket. EPA may publish
any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically
any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI), Proprietary Business Information (PBI), 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, PBI, or multimedia submissions,
and general
[[Page 58098]]
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katie Mullen, Air and Radiation
Division (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-3490,
[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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
I. What is the background of this SIP submission?
Chapter NR 428, Wis. Adm. Code, regulates the emissions of
NOX from certain stationary sources located in Wisconsin's
current ozone nonattainment areas and areas with a history of ozone
nonattainment, including Kenosha, Manitowoc, Milwaukee, Ozaukee,
Racine, Sheboygan, Washington, and Waukesha counties.
Since the promulgation of the 2001 and 2007 revisions to chapter NR
428, Wis. Adm. Code, Wisconsin has identified several implementation
issues associated with certain parts of this chapter. The purpose of
Wisconsin's proposed revisions is to ensure clear and consistent
implementation of NOX control requirements in chapter NR
428. Wisconsin is not currently seeking approval of this rule as it
pertains to the reasonably available control technology (RACT)
requirements under the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS). EPA will be addressing RACT at a later date.
II. What is EPA's analysis of the proposed SIP revision?
Wisconsin's April 10, 2024, submittal requested that EPA approve
revisions to NOX control requirements in chapters NR 400, NR
428, and NR 484 of the Wis. Adm. Code. Wisconsin's proposed revisions
clarify emission limits for units using more than one type of fuel,
incorporate procedures for approving a site-specific emission limit
alternative to ensure that limits are achievable in practice, revise
and clarify existing compliance and monitoring requirements, clarify an
applicability exception, update cross references, and include
definitions.
A. Clarification of NOX Emission Limits During Secondary Fuel Useage
Wisconsin has revised sections NR 428.04(2)(i), 428.05(2)(b),
428.05(2)(f), 428.05(3)(f), 428.22(1), and 428.22(3) of the Wis. Adm.
Code to clarify that a unit firing secondary fuel is not subject to
emission limits and monitoring requirements when using only the
secondary fuel under certain limited circumstances, which include any
of the following conditions:
a. The emissions unit heat input capacity or maximum design power
output while utilizing the secondary fuel is less than the
corresponding applicability thresholds.
b. The emissions unit burns the secondary fuel only during periods
of curtailment or supply interruption of other fuel(s) not to exceed
500 hours in a 12 consecutive month period.
c. During periodic testing, maintenance, or operator training of
the secondary fuel when the periodic testing, maintenance, or operator
training does not exceed 48 hours during any calendar year.
d. The secondary fuel constitutes less than 1% of the unit's fuel
consumption within a 12 consecutive month period.
Also, NR 428.04(4)(c), 428.05(5)(c), and 428.24(1)(c) contain the
secondary fuel recordkeeping requirements. EPA is proposing that these
revisions are approvable since they clarify the applicability of
emission limits and monitoring requirements when a facility uses more
than one type of fuel.
B. Procedures for Approving a Site-Specific Emission Limit Alternative
Section NR 428.055 provides a pathway for facilities to request a
site-specific emission limit if the facility demonstrates that
compliance with requirements under sections NR 428.04 or 428.05 are
technologically or economically infeasible. The proposed site-specific
emission limit is only effective after it has been approved into the
State Implementation Plan (SIP) by EPA. These revisions are approvable
since they explain the steps needed to implement a site-specific
alternative emission limit.
C. Clarification of Monitoring Requirements for Specific Categories of
Emissions Units
Wisconsin has created language under sections NR 428.08(2)(e),
428.08(2)(f), and 428.08(3) that clarifies monitoring requirements and
exceptions for NOX emissions units such as kilns, furnaces,
asphalt plants, process heating units, and engines. Section NR
428.02(2)(g) incorporates an alternative to operating a continuous
emissions monitoring system (CEMS) by meeting operational and
performance testing requirements that are consistent with the SIP-
approved compliance demonstration requirements for emission limitations
under s. NR 428.23(1)(b). Section NR 428.08(2)(g)4. a. requires that
emissions performance tests be conducted according to Method 7, 7A, 7B,
7C, 7D, or 7E under 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. Section NR 484.04 table
2 Row (15m), which incorporates these Federal test methods by
reference, is revised to cross-reference to section NR
428.08(2)(g)(4)(a). These revisions are approvable since they clarify
the monitoring requirements and exceptions for NOX emission
units subject to this rule.
D. Revision of Compliance Monitoring Plan Submittal Deadline
Wisconsin has revised its deadline for compliance monitoring plan
submittals under section NR 428.07(1)(a)2., Wis. Adm. Code, from ``at
least 180 days prior to initial operation'' to ``at least 180 days
prior to initial operation, or an alternative date less than 180 days
approved by the department.'' The previous rule language required plans
to be submitted 180 days before initial operation. This means a source
would have been required to wait for the 180-day period to end prior to
operating, even if the source was permitted and physically capable of
operation prior to that date. This revised rule is approvable since it
streamlines the implementation of this section by allowing the source
to request an alternative date to avoid the waiting period if
warranted.
E. Clarification of Exception
Wisconsin's revisions clarify that the unit exception under section
NR 428.21(3), Wis. Adm. Code, applies only to units constructed before
August 1, 2007, as originally intended. This revision is approvable
since it clarifies which emission units qualify for this exception.
F. Definitions and Cross References
The proposed rule incorporates a definition for SIP, the acronym
for State Implementation Plan, under section NR 400.03(4)(mf).
Wisconsin has also added definitions for ``primary fuel'', ``secondary
fuel'', ``simple cycle stationary combustion turbine'', and ``supply
interruption'' or ``curtailment'' under section NR 428.02(7i), (7p),
(7u) and (7w). Wisconsin has also updated cross references through Ch.
NR 428, Wis. Adm. Code, to be consistent with the proposed rule
language. These
[[Page 58099]]
administrative type revisions are approvable since they ensure terms
included in the new rule language are defined and cross references are
updated.
EPA has reviewed the amendments contained in Wisconsin's submittal,
as discussed in detail above, and is proposing to approve the amended
portions of NR 400, 428, and 484. Because these changes provide clarity
and generally strengthen the currently approved SIP, EPA is proposing
that these changes will not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment, reasonable further progress, or any other Clean
Air Act (CAA) requirement, and therefore, fulfill section 110(l) of the
CAA.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve the revisions in NR 400, 428, and 484
of the Wisconsin Administrative Code since these changes clarify and
streamline Wisconsin's NOX control regulatory requirements.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference Wisconsin rule(s) 400.03(4)(mf), 428.02(7i), 428.02(7p),
428.02(7u), 428.02(7w), 428.04(2)(i), 428.04(4)(c), 428.05(2)(b),
428.05(2)(f), 428.05(3)(f), 428.05(5)(c), 428.22(1), 428.22(3),
428.24(1)(c), 428.08(2)(e)(title), 428.08(2)(f)(title), 428.08(2)(g),
428.08(3), 484.04 Table 2 Row (15m), and 428.21(3)(d), effective April
1, 2024, discussed in section II of this preamble. EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these documents generally available through
https://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).
V. 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 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 approves 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 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,
February 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 WDNR did not evaluate EJ 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 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 dioxide, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: June 10, 2024.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2024-15598 Filed 7-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P