Determination of Attainment by the Attainment Date for the 2010 1-Hour Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard; Texas; Freestone-Anderson and Titus Counties, 71230-71237 [2024-19599]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
71230
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 3, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2020–0434; FRL–12215–
01–R6]
Determination of Attainment by the
Attainment Date for the 2010 1-Hour
Primary Sulfur Dioxide National
Ambient Air Quality Standard; Texas;
Freestone-Anderson and Titus
Counties
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to the Federal Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is proposing to determine that the sulfur
dioxide (SO2) nonattainment area (NAA)
in Freestone and Anderson Counties
and the SO2 NAA in Titus County have
each attained the 2010 1-hour primary
SO2 national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) by the applicable
attainment date of January 12, 2022.
This determination is based on primary
source shutdowns, available ambient air
quality monitoring data from the 2019–
2021 monitoring period, relevant
modeling analysis, and additional
emissions inventory information. This
action, if finalized, will address the
EPA’s obligation under CAA section
179(c) to determine whether the
Freestone-Anderson and Titus SO2
NAAs attained the 2010 1-hour primary
SO2 NAAQS by the statutory attainment
date of January 12, 2022, for each area.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before October 3, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2020–0434, at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
grady.james@epa.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
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Aug 30, 2024
Jkt 262001
additional submission methods, please
contact James E. Grady, (214) 665–6745,
grady.james@epa.gov. 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-epadockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
www.regulations.gov. While all
documents in the docket are listed in
the index, some information may not be
publicly available due to docket file size
restrictions or content (e.g., CBI).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James E. Grady, EPA Region 6 Office,
Regional Haze and SO2 Section, 1201
Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, TX 72570,
214–665–6745; grady.james@epa.gov.
We encourage the public to submit
comments via https://
www.regulations.gov. Please call or
email the contact listed above if you
need alternative access to material
indexed but not provided in the docket.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
or ‘‘our’’ mean the EPA.
I. Background
A. The 2010 1-Hour Primary SO2
NAAQS
Under section 109 of the CAA, the
EPA has established primary and
secondary NAAQS for certain pervasive
air pollutants (referred to as ‘‘criteria
pollutants’’) and conducts periodic
reviews of the NAAQS to determine
whether they should be revised or
whether new NAAQS should be
established. The primary NAAQS
represent ambient air quality standards
that the EPA has determined are
requisite to protect the public health,
while the secondary NAAQS represent
ambient air quality standards that the
EPA has determined are requisite to
protect the public welfare from any
known or anticipated adverse effects
associated with the presence of such an
air pollutant in the ambient air.
Under the CAA, the EPA must
establish a NAAQS for SO2, which is
primarily released to the atmosphere
through the burning of fossil fuels by
power plants and other industrial
facilities. SO2 is also emitted from
industrial processes including metal
extraction from ore and heavy
equipment that burns fuel with a high
sulfur content. Short-term exposure to
SO2 can damage the human respiratory
system and increase breathing
difficulties. Small children and people
with respiratory conditions, such as
asthma, are more sensitive to the effects
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of SO2. Sulfur oxides at high
concentrations in ambient air can also
react with compounds to form small
particulates (fine particulate matter or
PM2.5) that can penetrate deeply into the
lungs and cause acute health problems
and/or chronic diseases. The EPA first
established primary SO2 standards in
1971 at 140 parts per billion (ppb) over
a 24-hour averaging period and at 30
ppb over an annual averaging period.1
On June 22, 2010, the EPA published
in the Federal Register a strengthened,
primary 1-hour SO2 NAAQS,
establishing a new standard at a level of
75 ppb, based on the 3-year average of
the annual 99th percentile of daily
maximum 1-hour average
concentrations of SO2.2 The revised SO2
NAAQS provides increased protection
of public health. Along with revision of
the SO2 NAAQS, EPA revoked the 1971
primary annual and 24-hour SO2
standards for most areas of the country
following area designations under the
new NAAQS.
B. Designations, Classifications, and
Attainment Dates for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, the EPA is required to
designate all areas of the country as
either ‘‘attainment,’’ ‘‘nonattainment,’’
or ‘‘unclassifiable,’’ pursuant to CAA
section 107(d)(1). On August 5, 2013,
the EPA finalized its first round of
designations for the 2010 1-hour
primary SO2 NAAQS.3 In that 2013
action, the EPA designated 29 areas in
16 states as nonattainment for the 2010
1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS based on
air quality monitoring data. Following
the first round of designations, EPA
entered into a March 2, 2015, Consent
Decree 4 which required the EPA to
complete the remaining area
designations by three specific deadlines
according to a court-ordered schedule.
On July 12, 2016, the EPA finalized its
second round of initial designations
under the 2010 1-hour primary SO2
NAAQS, designating an additional four
areas as nonattainment, effective
September 12, 2016.5 On December 13,
2016 (effective January 12, 2017), EPA
finalized a supplement to the July 12,
2016, second round final action,
designating three more areas in Texas as
nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour
primary SO2 NAAQS.6 Included in that
1 36
FR 8186 (April 30, 1971).
FR 35520.
3 78 FR 47191 (August 5, 2013).
4 Mar. 02, 2015, Consent Decree; Sierra Club and
Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, Case
No. 3:13–cv–3953–SI (N.D. Cal.).
5 81 FR 45039 (July 12, 2016).
6 81 FR 89870 (December 13, 2016).
2 75
E:\FR\FM\03SEP1.SGM
03SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 3, 2024 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
supplement to the second round of
designations was one area in Freestone
and Anderson Counties and one area in
Titus County. These designations were
based on consideration of the data
available at the time of designations,
including air quality modeling.
Pursuant to section 192(a) of the CAA,
the attainment dates for the FreestoneAnderson and Titus NAAs were both no
later than 5 years after the effective date
of initial designation, or January 12,
2022.
CAA section 191(a) requires states
that contain an area designated
nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour
primary SO2 NAAQS to develop and
submit a nonattainment area (NAA)
State Implementation Plan (SIP) to the
EPA within 18 months of the effective
date of an area’s designation as
nonattainment (i.e., by July 12, 2018).
For SO2, a NAA SIP (also referred to as
an attainment plan) must meet the
requirements of CAA sections 110 and
172(c), and 191–192, and provide for
attainment of the NAAQS by the
applicable statutory attainment date, or
no later than 5 years from the effective
date of designation (i.e., by January 12,
2022).
When a NAA is attaining the 2010 1hour primary SO2 NAAQS based on the
most recent available data, the EPA may
issue a Clean Data Determination (CDD),
suspending certain NAA planning
requirements. The EPA issued a CDD for
the Freestone-Anderson and Titus
NAAs based on available monitoring
data, emissions data, and air quality
modeling via a final rule published on
May 14, 2021 (effective June 14, 2021).7
A CDD does not alter the nonattainment
designations for these areas. For the
EPA to redesignate these areas to
attainment, the state must submit, and
the EPA must approve, a redesignation
request for these NAAs that meets the
requirements of CAA section 107(d)(3).
On March 3, 2022, Texas submitted a
request to EPA to redesignate the
Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAAs to
attainment for the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS, and accompanying
maintenance plans for the two areas.
EPA is currently reviewing Texas’
redesignation submission.
C. EPA Determination of Attainment by
the Attainment Date
Section 179(c)(1) of the CAA requires
the EPA to determine whether a NAA
attained an applicable standard by the
applicable statutory attainment date
based on the area’s air quality as of the
attainment date. The EPA is to issue this
determination within 6 months of the
7 86
FR 26401 (May 14, 2021).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Aug 30, 2024
Jkt 262001
attainment date. Thus, the EPA had a
mandatory duty under CAA section
179(c) to determine by July 12, 2022,
whether the NAAs attained the NAAQS
by the statutory attainment date. With
this action, the EPA proposes to
determine, in accordance with CAA
section 179(c), that the FreestoneAnderson and Titus NAAs attained the
2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS by the
January 12, 2022, statutory attainment
date.
A determination of whether an area’s
air quality meets applicable standards is
generally based upon the most recent 3
years of complete, quality-assured data
gathered at established state and local
air monitoring stations (SLAMS) in a
NAA and entered into the EPA’s Air
Quality System (AQS) database, along
with other available information.8 Data
from ambient air monitors operated by
state and local agencies in compliance
with the EPA monitoring requirements
must be submitted to AQS. Monitoring
agencies annually certify that these data
are accurate to the best of their
knowledge. All data are reviewed to
determine the area’s air quality status in
accordance with 40 CFR part 50,
appendix T (for SO2). In general, for SO2
the EPA does not rely exclusively on
monitoring data to determine whether
the NAAQS is met unless it has been
demonstrated that the monitors were
appropriately sited to record expected
maximum ambient concentrations of
SO2 in an area. As such, monitoring data
can be supplemented with other
relevant information, including
dispersion modeling and emissions
inventories, for determining
attainment.9
The attainment date for the FreestoneAnderson and Titus NAAs was January
8 Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR 50.17 and in
accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix T, the
2010 1-hour annual SO2 standard is met at an
ambient air quality monitoring site when the design
value is less than or equal to 75 ppb. Design values
are calculated by computing the 3-year average of
the annual 99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour
average concentrations. An SO2 1-hour primary
standard design value is valid if it encompasses 3
consecutive calendar years of complete data. A year
is considered complete when all four quarters are
complete, and a quarter is complete when at least
75 percent of the sampling days are complete. A
sampling day is considered complete if 75 percent
of the hourly concentration values are reported; this
includes data affected by exceptional events that
have been approved for exclusion by the
Administrator.
9 The memorandum dated April 23, 2014, from
Steve Page, Director, EPA Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards to the EPA Air Division
Directors and titled ‘‘Guidance for 1-hour SO2
Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions’’ provides
guidance for determining attainment for the 2010 1hour primary SO2 NAAQS. This document is
available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/
2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_
nonattainment_sip.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71231
12, 2022. For an area where monitoring
data alone is used in the determination
of attainment, the 3-year design value
for the calendar years preceding the
attainment date is typically used (e.g.,
the design value for January 2019–
December 2021 is the appropriate
design value for an attainment date of
January 12, 2022). In this case for the
Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAAs,
however, to demonstrate attainment
EPA is relying on a combination of
monitoring data, past modeling from the
designation action and discussed in the
May 2021 CDD,10 primary source
shutdowns, and recent emissions data.
II. The EPA’s Proposed Determination
A. Area Characterization
The Freestone-Anderson NAA in
Texas is bound by the following
Universal Traverse Mercator (UTM)
coordinates encompassed by the
following rectangular area vertices in
UTM zone 14 with datum NAD83:
(1) vertices—UTM Easting (m)
766752.69, UTM Northing (m)
3536333.0,
(2) vertices—UTM Easting (m)
784752.69, UTM Northing (m)
3536333.0,
(3) vertices—UTM Easting (m)
784752.69, UTM Northing (m)
3512333.0,
(4) vertices—UTM Easting (m)
766752.69, UTM Northing (m)
3512333.0.
The Titus NAA in Texas is bound by
the following UTM coordinates
encompassed by the following
rectangular area vertices in UTM zone
15 with datum NAD83:
(1) vertices—UTM Easting (m)
304329.030, UTM Northing (m)
3666971.0,
(2) vertices—UTM Easting (m)
311629.030, UTM Northing (m)
3666971.0,
(3) vertices—UTM Easting (m)
311629.03, UTM Northing (m)
3661870.5,
(4) vertices—UTM Easting (m)
304329.03, UTM Northing (m)
3661870.5.
At the time of these area designations,
EPA relied on modeling that indicated
that the Big Brown Steam Electric
Station in Freestone County and the
Monticello Steam Electric Station in
Titus County were the key contributors
to the modeled 2010 SO2 NAAQS
violations in these rural areas. These
two coal-fired power plants were
responsible for contributing almost, if
not equal to, 100 percent of the SO2
10 86 FR 26401 (May 14, 2021). The background
for this action is discussed in detail in our
September 24, 2020, proposal (85 FR 60407).
E:\FR\FM\03SEP1.SGM
03SEP1
71232
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 3, 2024 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
impacts on the maximum modeled
concentrations in each respective area.
Therefore, EPA only included these two
principal sources within these area
boundaries when designating these
areas.11
Shortly after EPA published these
nonattainment designation boundaries,
Luminant announced plans to retire the
Monticello Steam Electric Station
(October 6, 2017) and the Big Brown
Steam Electric Station (October 13,
2017), and to close both facilities at the
beginning of 2018. Luminant
permanently retired the Big Brown
electric generating units 1 and 2 on
February 12, 2018, and the TCEQ
voided the operating permit for these
units on August 3, 2018. The TCEQ
voided most individual NSR permits for
Big Brown units 1 and 2 on March 28,
2018, and the remaining NSR
authorizations were voided on June 30,
2020. On April 18, 2021, the Big Brown
facility was permanently demolished.
Luminant permanently retired the
Monticello electric generating units 1, 2,
and 3 on December 31, 2017, and the
TCEQ voided the operating permit for
these units on August 29, 2018. The
TCEQ voided most individual NSR
permits for Monticello units 1, 2, and 3
on February 14, 2018, and the remaining
NSR authorizations were voided on July
14, 2020. On July 1, 2021, the
Monticello facility was permanently
demolished. Thus, a key factor in our
determination that these two areas
attained the 2010 SO2 standard is the
retirement of these two facilities since
they were the only principal sources
within these area boundaries when
these areas were designated as
nonattainment.
B. Evaluation of SO2 Monitoring Data
On October 30, 2017, Texas deployed
a special purpose SO2 monitor in
Freestone County, Texas near the Big
Brown Steam Electric facility at the
Fairfield Farm to Market (FM) 2570
Ward Ranch site. This special purpose
monitor (Air Quality System (AQS) ID
48–161–1084) was specifically
established to collect information about
the SO2 ambient air concentrations
impacted by emissions from the Big
Brown Electric Station. Though the Big
Brown Steam Electric Station shut down
in February 2018, Texas continues to
operate the monitor. In review of the
available data at the time of the CDD
request, data from the Big Brown
monitor demonstrated a marked
11 See final round two technical support
document (TSD) titled ‘‘Final TSD for
Supplemental SO2 NAAQS Designations for Four
Areas in Texas.pdf’’ (pages 16 and 38). Available in
the docket for this action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Aug 30, 2024
Jkt 262001
improvement in air quality in the NAA
due to the permanent retirement of the
source.12 CAA section 179(c) requires
EPA’s determination of whether the area
attained by the attainment date to be
based on the area’s air quality as of the
attainment date. Therefore, for the
attainment date of January 12, 2022, the
3-year period of 2019 through 2021 is
the relevant time period for evaluation
in fulfilling the Agency’s obligation
under CAA section 179(c). The 2019–
2021 design value for the Big Brown
monitor was 5 ppb (7 percent of the
standard), compared to the standard of
75 ppb. The more recent 2020–2022
design value for the Big Brown monitor
was 7 ppb (9 percent of the standard).
The Freestone County monitor’s 1-hour
SO2 design values have never violated
the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS
for the periods following the source
shutdown. The EPA is proposing to find
that this monitoring data supports the
determination that the FreestoneAnderson NAA has been in attainment
since the Big Brown Steam Electric
Station retired in 2018.
For the Titus County NAA, Texas did
not install a monitor that had been
planned near the Monticello Steam
Electric Station once the retirement of
the facility was announced for 2017.
However, monitoring data from the
Welsh monitor (AQS ID 48–449–1078),
(the Cookville FM 4855 monitor) also
located in Titus County, Texas
approximately 16 km to the east of the
NAA surrounding the Monticello Steam
Electric Station, was evaluated to
provide corroborating evidence that the
source shutdowns have resulted in
attainment. The Welsh Monitor began
operating in January 2017. The Welsh
monitor was located at the Cookville FM
4855 site by Texas to characterize the
SO2 concentrations from the Welsh
Power Plant. The Welsh plant was not
included in the Titus NAA because it
was not identified as a contributing
source to the modeled SO2 NAAQS
violation in the Titus NAA. Although
the Welsh plant was not identified as a
contributing source to the Titus NAA, it
is the only other major SO2 producing
plant in Titus County now that the
Monticello Steam Electric Station has
retired, and its SO2 emissions and
resulting SO2 concentrations are
12 During the initial 107-day period from the start
of monitoring on October 31, 2017, to the shutdown
of Big Brown on February 14, 2018, the 99th
percentile concentration (the 1st high value for this
shorter-than-1-year period) was 77.5 ppb, slightly
above the standard. Post-shutdown, 321 days were
measured during 2018; during this period the 99th
percentile concentration (the 3rd high value) was 14
ppb, 19 percent of the standard. The 99th percentile
concentration for 2019 (the 4th high value) was 5.8
ppb, 8 percent of the standard.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
accounted for with this monitor. And,
moreover, the Welsh monitor which was
sited to capture the impacts of this lone
remaining source is recording SO2
concentrations well below the level of
the NAAQS. The 2019–2021 design
value at the Welsh monitor is 19 ppb,
25 percent of the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
standard. The 2020–2022 design value
is 14 ppb, 19 percent of the standard. As
explained in the CDD final action, these
values represent an upper limit for the
estimated design value for the Titus
County NAA since the Welsh monitor
includes the impacts from the nearby
Welsh Power Plant. Concentrations
within the Titus NAA, farther from the
Welsh plant, would be expected to be
lower since there are no other large
sources nearby. The EPA is proposing to
find that the monitoring data from the
Welsh monitor in Titus County support
the conclusion that the Titus NAA
attained the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
by the January 12, 2022, statutory
attainment date.
C. Evaluation of SO2 Modeling Data
In 2016, Sierra Club and Vistra Energy
submitted modeling data for the most
recent 3 years (2013–2015) at that time.
This modeling provided the basis for the
two nonattainment designations as
discussed earlier. In our CDD,13 we
evaluated this modeling to determine if
there was any possibility these areas
would still be in nonattainment after the
plant shutdowns. Our analysis of the
maximum impacts around Big Brown
and around Monticello found that these
plants were responsible for almost 100
percent of the impacts on the maximum
ambient SO2 concentration. EPA’s
boundaries for the NAAs encompassed
the areas shown to be in violation of the
standard based on the 2013–2015
emissions and the principal sources that
contributed to the violation in each area
(i.e., Big Brown and Monticello). Both
facilities no longer emit any SO2 due to
permanent shutdowns. Big Brown has
emitted zero emissions since the second
quarter of 2018 and Monticello has
emitted zero emissions since the first
quarter of 2018. The only emissions
explicitly modeled were those from Big
Brown and Monticello; the
contributions from all other sources
were represented in the model by an
estimate of the background
concentration. This is a technique in
modeling to address smaller or more
distant source contributions by
examining monitoring data thought to
be representative. In the modeling
evaluated for designations, these
contributions were estimated to be
13 85
E:\FR\FM\03SEP1.SGM
FR 60407, 60411 (September 25, 2020).
03SEP1
71233
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 3, 2024 / Proposed Rules
small, 2 ppb for both areas (much less
than the 75 ppb standard). Consistent
with our analysis in the CDD, we do not
believe that new modeling is required to
determine attainment of the standard by
the attainment date. Because the
emissions from the Big Brown and
Monticello facilities for the 2019–2021
period are zero and their modeled
concentrations would also be zero, the
total concentration within the
nonattainment area would be modeled
as equal to the contribution from all
other sources, or background. In other
words, the modeled design value, if
remodeled, would be small and equal to
the concentrations from all other
sources as represented by the
background concentration.
D. Evaluation of SO2 Emissions Data
Although the initial designation
modeling showed that Big Brown and
Monticello Steam Electric Stations
contributed nearly 100 percent of the
point source emissions in their
nonattainment areas, and those sources
have shutdown, the EPA also evaluated
total County-wide emissions to consider
any point sources that are within the
Counties. The EPA evaluated annual
SO2 point source emission trends for
sources within each County for 2012,
and 2017 through 2022.14
Table 1 shows that Big Brown emitted
nearly 100 percent of the total point
source emissions within Freestone and
Anderson Counties until after its
retirement in 2018. The total SO2 point
source emissions have been 100 tons per
year (tpy) or less each year from 2019
to 2022. A flare from Mosbacher Energy
Company is responsible for the majority
of those remaining annual SO2
emissions (ranging from 28 to 86 tpy)
with the rest coming from Freestone
Energy Center (ranging from 12 to 16
tpy) and other various combined
sources emitting less than 1 tpy each.
TABLE 1—FREESTONE AND ANDERSON COUNTIES COMBINED SO2 POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS FROM TEXAS *
Facility
SO2 emissions
(tpy)
Description
2012
Big Brown Steam Electric
Station.
Freestone Energy Center ......
Mosbacher Energy Company
Teague Gas Plant .................
Other ......................................
Total ...............................
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Boilers 10 and 11 ..................
60,681
47,632
6,659
0
0
0
0
Turbines 1 to 4 ......................
Flare 3 ...................................
Incinerator 5 and unclassified
unit 4.
Various (1 tpy or less
each) **.
11.5
130
243.8
11.7
62.4
0
14
73
0
16
45.2
0
14.6
28
0
12.3
86
0
13.6
67
0
3.4
3.1
2.5
2.5
2.5
2
1.8
................................................
61,070
47,709
6,748
63.7
45.1
100.7
82.4
* Point source data obtained from the State of Texas Air Reporting System (STARS) reported on January 16, 2024.
** The Bethel Gas Plant Incinerator unit 32 was the only unit to exceed 1 tpy with 1.6 tpy in 2012.
In Table 2, EPA provided categorized
County-wide emissions, including
point, non-point and mobile source
emissions from 2017 and 2020 National
Emission Inventory (NEI) 15 data to
compare Big Brown’s impact against the
rest of the emissions inventory in
Freestone and Anderson Counties. The
total SO2 emissions in Freestone and
Anderson Counties were significantly
lower in 2020 after Big Brown’s
retirement, with 171 tpy total. The nonpoint source category made up the
majority of these County-wide
emissions at 122 tpy (71 percent) with
fires (prescribed/agricultural burning,
and wildfires) contributing the most at
108.5 tpy. Oil and gas, waste disposal,
and combustion made up the remaining
non-point emissions but were small at
5.4, 4.1, and 3.5 tpy, respectively. Onroad sources also contributed lightly
with 3.6 tpy. These categorized Countywide emissions show that other source
categories in and outside of the
Freestone-Anderson NAA are very low.
The NAA makes up a very small portion
of the total areas in Freestone and
Anderson Counties, so these Countywide non-point and mobile emissions,
which are few, would make up an even
smaller piece of the overall emissions in
or near the Freestone-Anderson NAA.
The retirement of the Big Brown Steam
Electric Station in 2018 reduced the
emissions in the Freestone-Anderson
NAA by nearly 100 percent from 2012
to 2020 and there are no other
significant emission sources present.
Therefore, this information supports a
determination that the FreestoneAnderson NAA has attained the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS by the statutory
attainment date.
TABLE 2—FREESTONE AND ANDERSON COUNTIES COMBINED 2017 AND 2020 CATEGORIZED NEI SO2 TOTAL EMISSIONS
SO2 emissions
(tpy)
Category
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2017
Point .........................................................................................................................................................................
Non-Point .................................................................................................................................................................
Fires (prescribed/agricultural burning, and wildfires) .......................................................................................
Oil and gas production .....................................................................................................................................
Waste Disposal .................................................................................................................................................
Combustion (residential and industrial) ............................................................................................................
On-Road Mobile .......................................................................................................................................................
Non-Road Mobile .....................................................................................................................................................
14 See spreadsheet titled, ‘‘2010 to 2022 Texas
Point Source Data.xlsx’’ included in the docket of
this action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Aug 30, 2024
Jkt 262001
15 See spreadsheets titled ‘‘NEI emissions by
sector 2012, 2017, 2020.xlsx’’ and ‘‘NEI emissions
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
47,710
179
171.1
3.03
2.9
2.4
12.2
1.5
2020
45.1
122
108.5
5.4
4.1
3.5
3.6
0.1
by unit 2012, 2017, 2020.xlsx’’ included in the
docket of this action.
E:\FR\FM\03SEP1.SGM
03SEP1
71234
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 3, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—FREESTONE AND ANDERSON COUNTIES COMBINED 2017 AND 2020 CATEGORIZED NEI SO2 TOTAL
EMISSIONS—Continued
SO2 emissions
(tpy)
Category
2017
Total ...........................................................................................................................................................
Table 3 shows the SO2 total point
source emissions within Titus County in
2012, and from 2017 to 2022. In 2018,
after Monticello Steam Electric Station
retired, the Welsh Power Plant emitted
nearly 100 percent of the remaining SO2
emissions within Titus County. These
results show that up until 2017 the
Monticello and Welsh plants were the
only primary SO2 point sources emitting
in Titus County. During designations,
EPA’s nonattainment boundary did not
include the Welsh Power Plant and was
limited to the immediate area
surrounding Monticello Steam Electric
Station as the Welsh Power Plant was
not identified as a contributing source to
the modeled SO2 NAAQS violation.
2020
47,903
171
Therefore, since the Welsh Power Plant
did not contribute to the NAAQS
violation in the Titus NAA, and since
there are no other point sources within
Titus County, these County-wide
emission results show that Monticello is
the only point source that could
contribute to nonattainment within the
Titus NAA.
TABLE 3—TITUS COUNTY SO2 POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS FROM TEXAS *
Facility
SO2 emissions
(tpy)
Description
2012
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Monticello Steam Electric
Station.
Welsh Power Plant ................
Other ......................................
Boilers 7, 9, 10, 11, 66 .........
31,450
29,412
0
0
0
0
0
Boilers 10, 11, and 12 ...........
Flares and Fugitive Emissions.
23,212
0
14,075
0.02
14,226
0.3
11,177
0.4
8,168.8
0.4
9,880
0.4
10,916
0.4
Total ...............................
................................................
54,662
43,487
14,226.3
11,177.4
8,169.2
9,880.4
10,916.4
* Point source data obtained from the State of Texas Air Reporting System (STARS) reported on January 16, 2024.
In Table 4, EPA provided categorized
County-wide emissions from 2017 and
2020 NEI data to further compare
Monticello’s impact against the rest of
the emission inventory in Titus County.
The 2017 and 2020 NEI data showed
that the SO2 emissions from other
categories in Titus County were small
when compared to the point source
emissions showing 44 tpy (0.1 percent)
in 2017 and 51.7 tpy (0.6 percent) in
2020. The non-point source category
made up the majority of these low
emissions with 38 tpy in 2017 and 50
tpy in 2020 coming mostly from fires
(19 and 16.3 tpy, respectively, in 2017
and 2020) and combustion (18 and 29.6
tpy, respectively, in 2017 and 2020). Oil
and gas and waste disposal made up the
remaining of these low emissions with
oil and gas showing 2.6 tpy or less and
waste disposal 1.5 tpy or less for both
years. On-road mobile sources also
contributed very lightly as well (5.5 and
1.9 tpy for both years). These
categorized County-wide emissions
show that other source categories in and
outside of the Titus NAA are very low.
The Titus NAA makes up a very small
portion of the total area in Titus County,
so these County-wide non-point and
mobile emissions, which are few, would
make up an even smaller piece of those
overall emissions in or near the Titus
NAA. The retirement of Monticello
Steam Electric Station reduced the
emissions in the Titus NAA by nearly
100 percent from 2012 to 2020, and no
other sources are contributing to that
area from Titus County. This
information supports a determination
that the Titus NAA attained the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS by the statutory
attainment date.
TABLE 4—TITUS COUNTY 2017 AND 2020 CATEGORIZED NEI SO2 TOTAL EMISSIONS
SO2 emissions
(tpy)
Category
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2017
2020
Point (including the Welsh Power Plant) .................................................................................................................
Non-Point .................................................................................................................................................................
Fires (prescribed/agricultural burning, and wildfires) .......................................................................................
Oil and gas production .....................................................................................................................................
Waste Disposal .................................................................................................................................................
Combustion (residential and industrial) ............................................................................................................
On-Road Mobile .......................................................................................................................................................
Non-Road Mobile .....................................................................................................................................................
43,487
38
19
0.01
1.3
18
5.5
0.8
8,169.3
50
16.3
2.6
1.5
29.6
1.9
0.09
Total ...........................................................................................................................................................
43,531
8,221
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Aug 30, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\03SEP1.SGM
03SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 3, 2024 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
E. Conclusion
We propose to determine that the
Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAAs
attained the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
by the statutory attainment date of
January 12, 2022. The supporting
justification for our proposed
determination of attainment by the
attainment date includes the following:
EPA’s previous CDD; the permanent and
enforceable shutdowns of the primary
sources of SO2 emissions in these areas;
the available modeling analysis
demonstrating that the Big Brown Steam
Electric Station in Freestone County and
the Monticello Steam Electric Station in
Titus County were responsible for
almost 100 percent of the SO2 impacts
on the maximum modeled
concentrations in each respective area;
review of emissions data showing
emissions within the FreestoneAnderson and Titus NAA’s have been
reduced by nearly 100 percent with the
retirements of Big Brown and
Monticello Steam Electric Stations in
2018 and that no other sources remain
that are contributing to a violation of the
SO2 NAAQS in those NAAs; and the
Freestone County and Welsh monitors’
reported 2019–2021 design values of 5
ppb (7 percent of the standard) and 19
ppb (25 percent of the standard)
providing additional evidence that these
areas are in attainment. The EPA’s
proposed determination that the area
attained the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
by the attainment date is supported by
all of the available aforementioned
evidence.
If finalized, this action will address
the EPA’s obligation under CAA section
179(c) to determine if the FreestoneAnderson and Titus NAAs attained the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS by the
statutory attainment date of January 12,
2022.
The EPA is soliciting public
comments on this notice. These
comments will be considered before
taking final action.
III. Proposed Action
Based on the EPA’s review of all
available evidence described in this
notice, the EPA is proposing to
determine that the Freestone-Anderson
and Titus NAA’s attained the 2010 1hour primary SO2 NAAQS by the
statutory attainment date of January 12,
2022.
Finalizing this action would not
constitute a redesignation of the
Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAA’s to
attainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS under section 107(d)(3) of the
CAA. If this action is finalized, the
Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAA’s
will remain designated nonattainment
for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS until
EPA revises the area’s designation under
CAA section 107(d)(3).
IV. Environmental Justice
Considerations
Information on Executive Order 12898
(Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income
Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994) and how EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) can be found
in the section, below, titled ‘‘V.
Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews.’’ EPA is providing additional
analysis of environmental justice
associated with this action. We are
doing so for the purpose of providing
information to the public, not as a basis
of our action.
The EPA conducted screening
analyses utilizing EJSCREEN, an
environmental justice mapping and
screening tool that combines various
environmental and demographic
indicators within the area.16 The
EJSCREEN tool presents these indicators
at a Census block group (CBG) level or
a larger user-specified ‘‘buffer’’ area that
covers multiple CBGs.17 An individual
CBG is a cluster of contiguous blocks
within the same census tract and
generally contains between 600 and
3,000 people. EJSCREEN is not a tool for
performing in-depth risk analysis, but is
instead a screening tool that provides an
initial representation of indicators
related to environmental justice and is
subject to uncertainty in some
underlying data (e.g., some
environmental indicators are based on
monitoring data which are not
uniformly available; others are based on
self-reported data).18 We present
EJSCREEN environmental indicators to
help screen for locations where
residents may experience a higher
overall pollution burden than would be
expected for a block group with the
same total population. These indicators
of overall pollution burden include
estimates of ambient PM2.5 and O3
16 The EJSCREEN tool is available at https://
www.epa.gov/ejscreen.
17 See https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/
geography/about/glossary.html.
18 In addition, EJSCREEN relies on the 5-year
block group estimates from the U.S. Census
American Community Survey. The advantage of
using 5-year over 1-year estimates is increased
statistical reliability of the data (i.e., lower sampling
error), particularly for small geographic areas and
population groups. For more information, see
https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/
library/publications/2020/acs/acs_general_
handbook_2020.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Aug 30, 2024
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71235
concentration, air toxics cancer risk, air
toxics respiratory health index, a score
for traffic proximity and volume,
percentage of pre-1960 housing units
(lead paint indicator), and scores for
proximity to Superfund sites, risk
management plan (RMP) sites, and
hazardous waste facilities.19 We note
that the cancer risk and respiratory
health indexes are based on 2017
emissions data, when the sources in
these areas were still operating. The
EPA’s EJSCREEN tool also provides
information on demographic indicators
for vulnerable populations in the area,
including communities of color, percent
low-income, linguistic isolation, and
less than high school-level education.
This action proposes a determination of
NAAQS attainment by the attainment
date for the Freestone-Anderson
Counties and Titus County, Texas
NAAs. The EPA prepared EJSCREEN
reports covering buffer areas containing
the designated boundaries for each
nonattainment area. We selected a 15
km radius around the Big Brown Steam
Electric Station in Freestone-Anderson
Counties and a 10 km radius around the
Monticello Steam Electric Station in
Titus County. These sources were
responsible for almost 100 percent of
the SO2 impacts on the maximum
modeled concentrations in each
respective area. Table 6 presents a
summary of results from the EPA’s
screening-level analysis for the areas
surrounding each nonattainment area
compared to the U.S. as a whole (the
detailed EJSCREEN reports are provided
in the docket for this rulemaking).
This action is proposing our
determination of attainment by the
attainment date for the 2010 1-hour
primary SO2 NAAQS for the FreestoneAnderson and Titus County NAAs by
January 12, 2022. Information on SO2
and its relationship to negative health
impacts can be found at final Federal
Register notice titled ‘‘Primary National
Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur
Dioxide’’ (75 FR 35520, June 22, 2010).
We expect that this particular action
will not have a detrimental effect on the
populations in the NAAs, including
people of color and low-income
populations in the NAAs, as this action
identifies that the areas attained the
NAAQS by the attainment date.
19 For additional information on environmental
indicators and proximity scores in EJSCREEN, see
‘‘EJSCREEN Environmental Justice Mapping and
Screening Tool: EJSCREEN Technical
Documentation,’’ Chapter 3 and Appendix C
(September 2019) at https://www.epa.gov/sites/
default/files/2021-04/documents/ejscreen_
technical_document.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\03SEP1.SGM
03SEP1
71236
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 3, 2024 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6—EJSCREEN ANALYSIS SUMMARY FOR FREESTONE-ANDERSON AND TITUS SO2 NAAS
Values for buffer areas for each NAA and the U.S.
(percentile within U.S. where indicated)
Selected variables
Big Brown Plant in
Freestone-Anderson SO2
NAA
(15 km radius)
Monticello Plant in Titus SO2
NAA
(10 km radius)
U.S. (avg)
Pollution Burden Indicators
(μg/m3)
Particulate matter (PM2.5), annual average
.............
Cancer Risk (lifetime risk per million) ** ................................
Respiratory Health Index ** ...................................................
Ozone (O3), summer seasonal average of daily 8-hour max
(ppb).
Traffic proximity and volume score * .....................................
Lead paint (percent pre-1960 housing) .................................
Superfund proximity score * ...................................................
RMP proximity score * ...........................................................
Hazardous waste proximity score * .......................................
9.12 (64th %ile) .....................
30 (80–90th %ile) ..................
0.31 (<50th %tile) ..................
40.7 (36th %ile) .....................
9.34 (70th %ile) .....................
38 (95–100th %tile) ...............
0.4 (80–90th %tile) ................
40.7 (36th %ile) .....................
8.74
29
0.36
42.6
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
11 (8th %ile) ..........................
0.11 (41st %ile) .....................
0.009 (3rd %ile) .....................
0.065 (7th %ile) .....................
0.022 (1st %ile) .....................
190 (46th %ile) ......................
0.14 (45th %ile) .....................
0.013 (9th %ile) .....................
2.8 (95th %ile) .......................
0.028 (3rd %ile) .....................
710
0.28
0.13
0.75
2.2
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
61% (72nd %ile) ....................
51% (81st %ile) .....................
8% (80th %ile) .......................
22% (82nd %ile) ....................
7% (64th %ile) .......................
14% (48th %ile) .....................
40%
31%
5%
12%
6%
16%
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
(-)
Demographic Indicators
People of color population .....................................................
Low-income population ..........................................................
Linguistically isolated population ...........................................
Population with less than high school education ..................
Population under 5 years of age ...........................................
Population over 64 years of age ...........................................
43% (60th %ile) .....................
30% (53rd %ile) .....................
1% (50th %ile) .......................
23% (84th %ile) .....................
3% (23rd %ile) .......................
12% (38th %ile) .....................
* The traffic proximity and volume indicator is a score calculated by daily traffic count divided by distance in meters to the road. The Superfund
proximity, RMP proximity, and hazardous waste proximity indicators are all scores calculated by site or facility counts divided by distance in kilometers.
** Air toxics cancer risk, and air toxics respiratory hazard index are from the EPA’s 2017 Air Toxics Data Update, which is the Agency’s ongoing, comprehensive evaluation of air toxics in the United States.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
This action proposes to find that areas
attained the NAAQS by the relevant
statutory attainment date and does not
impose additional or modify existing
requirements. 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 an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Aug 30, 2024
Jkt 262001
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001); and
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act.
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,
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’ As noted in Section IV, the
EPA performed an EJ analysis, but we
did not consider EJ as a basis for this
action. Due to the nature of the action
being taken here, this action is expected
to have no impact on the air quality of
the affected area. Consideration of EJ is
not required as part of this action,
which finds that NAAs attained the
2010 SO2 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date, and there is no
information in the record inconsistent
with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of
achieving environmental justice for
people of color, low-income
populations, and Indigenous peoples.
In addition, this proposed
rulemaking, the finding of attainment by
the attainment date for the FreestoneAnderson and Titus SO2 NAAs, does
not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because this action
is not intended to apply in Indian
country located in the State, and the
EPA notes that it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
E:\FR\FM\03SEP1.SGM
03SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 3, 2024 / Proposed Rules
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 27, 2024.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2024–19599 Filed 8–30–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2021–0029; FRL–12218–
01–R6]
Air Plan Disapproval; Texas; Control of
Air Pollution From Visible Emissions
and Particulate Matter
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to the Federal Clean
Air Act (CAA, the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
is proposing to disapprove a revision to
the Texas State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submitted by the State of Texas
through the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ) on
August 20, 2020. The SIP submittal
addresses emissions during planned
Maintenance, Startup and Shutdown
(MSS) activities for certain Electric
Generating Units (EGUs) and includes
requirements intended to address
visible emissions (opacity) and
Particulate Matter (PM) emissions
during planned MSS activities The
requirements are included in eight
Agreed Orders (AOs) issued by TCEQ to
the affected EGUs and provided in the
SIP revision. EPA is proposing to
determine that the requirements
contained in these AOs do not meet the
CAA requirements that emission
limitations must be practically
enforceable and must apply on a
continuous basis. We are taking this
action in accordance with section 110 of
the Act.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before October 3, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2021–0029 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:10 Aug 30, 2024
Jkt 262001
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact Mr. Michael Feldman, (214)
665–9793, Feldman.Michael@epa.gov.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for
this action is available electronically at
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at the EPA Region 6 Office, 1201 Elm
Street, Suite 500, Dallas, Texas 75270.
While all documents in the docket are
listed in the index, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material), and some may not be publicly
available at either location (e.g., CBI).
Mr.
Michael Feldman, Regional Haze and
SO2 Section, EPA Region 6 Office, 1201
Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, Texas
75270, (214) 665–9793,
Feldman.Michael@epa.gov. We
encourage the public to submit
comments via https://
www.regulations.gov. Please call or
email the contact listed above if you
need alternative access to material
indexed but not provided in the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Texas Chapter 111—Control of Air
Pollution From Visible Emissions and
Particulate Matter
B. August 20, 2020 SIP Submittal
II. Applicability of Opacity and PM
Limitations in 30 TAC 111
III. Evaluation of Emission Limitations in the
SIP Revision
A. SIP Requirements for Emissions
Limitations
B. Environ. Comm. Fl. Elec. Power v. EPA,
94 F.4th 77 (D.C. Cir. 2024)
IV. Evaluation of Alternative Emission Limits
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71237
A. EPA Recommendations for
Development of Alternative Emission
Limitations
B. EPA’s Evaluation
V. Proposed Action
VI. Environmental Justice Considerations
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A. Texas Chapter 111—Control of Air
Pollution From Visible Emissions and
Particulate Matter
Texas promulgated rules for the
control of visible emissions (opacity)
and particulate matter emissions for
inclusion in its SIP on January 28, 1972,
and EPA first approved those rules into
the SIP on May 31, 1972 (37 FR 10895)
at 40 CFR 52.2270(b). In the original
codification, Texas’ rules concerning
visible emissions and emission
restrictions for particulate matter
emissions were contained in TACB
Regulation I—Control of Smoke, Visible
Emissions and Particulate Matter, Rule
103.1 and 105.31. In developing these
original rules, the state has noted that it
relied in part on the findings of a study
conducted by the Radian Corporation
(Radian Report) 1 on behalf of the Texas
Air Control Board (TACB),2 a
predecessor state agency to the TCEQ.
The Radian Report provided
information on the steady-state
performance of electrostatic precipitator
(ESPs) that the state used as part of
establishing the Opacity and PM
restrictions in TACB Regulation I. The
control and performance efficiencies
documented in the Radian Report for
visible emissions and particulate matter
for coal fired EGUs equipped with ESPs
did not consider startup and shutdown
periods when the EGU boiler exhaust
gas is below the minimum temperature
required to ensure the effective and safe
operation of an ESP as a control device
for particulate matter emissions and
opacity.3
1 Radian Corporation, Technical Basis for Texas
Air Control Board Particulate Regulations, Delbert
Max Ottmers, Jr and Ben R. Breed, August 20, 1971
(included in TCEQ’s SIP submittal in the Docket for
this proposed rulemaking).
2 The Texas Air Control Board, abolished by
Texas S.B. 2, 72nd Leg., 1st C.S., effective
September 1, 1993, duties transferred to the Texas
Natural Resource Conservation Commission which
was formed from a merger with other state agencies
including the Texas Water Commission and which
was later renamed the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality, Agency 582.
3 TCEQ’s SIP submittal identifies additional
studies conducted by the EPA and predecessor
agencies as early as 1970 on ESP design and
operation (available in the docket for this action):
An Electrostatic Precipitator Systems Study: Final
Report to The National Air Pollution Control
Administration, Southern Research Institute,
Contract CPA 22–69–73, October 30, 1970; Effects
of Transient Operating Conditions on Steam-
E:\FR\FM\03SEP1.SGM
Continued
03SEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 3, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71230-71237]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-19599]
[[Page 71230]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R06-OAR-2020-0434; FRL-12215-01-R6]
Determination of Attainment by the Attainment Date for the 2010
1-Hour Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard;
Texas; Freestone-Anderson and Titus Counties
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to determine that
the sulfur dioxide (SO2) nonattainment area (NAA) in
Freestone and Anderson Counties and the SO2 NAA in Titus
County have each attained the 2010 1-hour primary SO2
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the applicable
attainment date of January 12, 2022. This determination is based on
primary source shutdowns, available ambient air quality monitoring data
from the 2019-2021 monitoring period, relevant modeling analysis, and
additional emissions inventory information. This action, if finalized,
will address the EPA's obligation under CAA section 179(c) to determine
whether the Freestone-Anderson and Titus SO2 NAAs attained
the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS by the statutory
attainment date of January 12, 2022, for each area.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 3, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2020-0434, at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to
[email protected]. 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
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 James E. Grady, (214)
665-6745, [email protected]. For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov. While all documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may not be publicly
available due to docket file size restrictions or content (e.g., CBI).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James E. Grady, EPA Region 6 Office,
Regional Haze and SO2 Section, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500,
Dallas, TX 72570, 214-665-6745; [email protected]. We encourage the
public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov. Please call
or email the contact listed above if you need alternative access to
material indexed but not provided in the docket.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' mean the EPA.
I. Background
A. The 2010 1-Hour Primary SO2 NAAQS
Under section 109 of the CAA, the EPA has established primary and
secondary NAAQS for certain pervasive air pollutants (referred to as
``criteria pollutants'') and conducts periodic reviews of the NAAQS to
determine whether they should be revised or whether new NAAQS should be
established. The primary NAAQS represent ambient air quality standards
that the EPA has determined are requisite to protect the public health,
while the secondary NAAQS represent ambient air quality standards that
the EPA has determined are requisite to protect the public welfare from
any known or anticipated adverse effects associated with the presence
of such an air pollutant in the ambient air.
Under the CAA, the EPA must establish a NAAQS for SO2,
which is primarily released to the atmosphere through the burning of
fossil fuels by power plants and other industrial facilities.
SO2 is also emitted from industrial processes including
metal extraction from ore and heavy equipment that burns fuel with a
high sulfur content. Short-term exposure to SO2 can damage
the human respiratory system and increase breathing difficulties. Small
children and people with respiratory conditions, such as asthma, are
more sensitive to the effects of SO2. Sulfur oxides at high
concentrations in ambient air can also react with compounds to form
small particulates (fine particulate matter or PM2.5) that
can penetrate deeply into the lungs and cause acute health problems
and/or chronic diseases. The EPA first established primary
SO2 standards in 1971 at 140 parts per billion (ppb) over a
24-hour averaging period and at 30 ppb over an annual averaging
period.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 22, 2010, the EPA published in the Federal Register a
strengthened, primary 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, establishing a new
standard at a level of 75 ppb, based on the 3-year average of the
annual 99th percentile of daily maximum 1-hour average concentrations
of SO2.\2\ The revised SO2 NAAQS provides
increased protection of public health. Along with revision of the
SO2 NAAQS, EPA revoked the 1971 primary annual and 24-hour
SO2 standards for most areas of the country following area
designations under the new NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 75 FR 35520.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Designations, Classifications, and Attainment Dates for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is
required to designate all areas of the country as either
``attainment,'' ``nonattainment,'' or ``unclassifiable,'' pursuant to
CAA section 107(d)(1). On August 5, 2013, the EPA finalized its first
round of designations for the 2010 1-hour primary SO2
NAAQS.\3\ In that 2013 action, the EPA designated 29 areas in 16 states
as nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS based
on air quality monitoring data. Following the first round of
designations, EPA entered into a March 2, 2015, Consent Decree \4\
which required the EPA to complete the remaining area designations by
three specific deadlines according to a court-ordered schedule. On July
12, 2016, the EPA finalized its second round of initial designations
under the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS, designating an
additional four areas as nonattainment, effective September 12,
2016.\5\ On December 13, 2016 (effective January 12, 2017), EPA
finalized a supplement to the July 12, 2016, second round final action,
designating three more areas in Texas as nonattainment for the 2010 1-
hour primary SO2 NAAQS.\6\ Included in that
[[Page 71231]]
supplement to the second round of designations was one area in
Freestone and Anderson Counties and one area in Titus County. These
designations were based on consideration of the data available at the
time of designations, including air quality modeling. Pursuant to
section 192(a) of the CAA, the attainment dates for the Freestone-
Anderson and Titus NAAs were both no later than 5 years after the
effective date of initial designation, or January 12, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 78 FR 47191 (August 5, 2013).
\4\ Mar. 02, 2015, Consent Decree; Sierra Club and Natural
Resources Defense Council v. EPA, Case No. 3:13-cv-3953-SI (N.D.
Cal.).
\5\ 81 FR 45039 (July 12, 2016).
\6\ 81 FR 89870 (December 13, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAA section 191(a) requires states that contain an area designated
nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS to
develop and submit a nonattainment area (NAA) State Implementation Plan
(SIP) to the EPA within 18 months of the effective date of an area's
designation as nonattainment (i.e., by July 12, 2018). For
SO2, a NAA SIP (also referred to as an attainment plan) must
meet the requirements of CAA sections 110 and 172(c), and 191-192, and
provide for attainment of the NAAQS by the applicable statutory
attainment date, or no later than 5 years from the effective date of
designation (i.e., by January 12, 2022).
When a NAA is attaining the 2010 1-hour primary SO2
NAAQS based on the most recent available data, the EPA may issue a
Clean Data Determination (CDD), suspending certain NAA planning
requirements. The EPA issued a CDD for the Freestone-Anderson and Titus
NAAs based on available monitoring data, emissions data, and air
quality modeling via a final rule published on May 14, 2021 (effective
June 14, 2021).\7\ A CDD does not alter the nonattainment designations
for these areas. For the EPA to redesignate these areas to attainment,
the state must submit, and the EPA must approve, a redesignation
request for these NAAs that meets the requirements of CAA section
107(d)(3). On March 3, 2022, Texas submitted a request to EPA to
redesignate the Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAAs to attainment for the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, and accompanying maintenance plans
for the two areas. EPA is currently reviewing Texas' redesignation
submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 86 FR 26401 (May 14, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. EPA Determination of Attainment by the Attainment Date
Section 179(c)(1) of the CAA requires the EPA to determine whether
a NAA attained an applicable standard by the applicable statutory
attainment date based on the area's air quality as of the attainment
date. The EPA is to issue this determination within 6 months of the
attainment date. Thus, the EPA had a mandatory duty under CAA section
179(c) to determine by July 12, 2022, whether the NAAs attained the
NAAQS by the statutory attainment date. With this action, the EPA
proposes to determine, in accordance with CAA section 179(c), that the
Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAAs attained the 2010 1-hour primary
SO2 NAAQS by the January 12, 2022, statutory attainment
date.
A determination of whether an area's air quality meets applicable
standards is generally based upon the most recent 3 years of complete,
quality-assured data gathered at established state and local air
monitoring stations (SLAMS) in a NAA and entered into the EPA's Air
Quality System (AQS) database, along with other available
information.\8\ Data from ambient air monitors operated by state and
local agencies in compliance with the EPA monitoring requirements must
be submitted to AQS. Monitoring agencies annually certify that these
data are accurate to the best of their knowledge. All data are reviewed
to determine the area's air quality status in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50, appendix T (for SO2). In general, for
SO2 the EPA does not rely exclusively on monitoring data to
determine whether the NAAQS is met unless it has been demonstrated that
the monitors were appropriately sited to record expected maximum
ambient concentrations of SO2 in an area. As such,
monitoring data can be supplemented with other relevant information,
including dispersion modeling and emissions inventories, for
determining attainment.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Under EPA regulations in 40 CFR 50.17 and in accordance with
40 CFR part 50, appendix T, the 2010 1-hour annual SO2
standard is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the
design value is less than or equal to 75 ppb. Design values are
calculated by computing the 3-year average of the annual 99th
percentile daily maximum 1-hour average concentrations. An
SO2 1-hour primary standard design value is valid if it
encompasses 3 consecutive calendar years of complete data. A year is
considered complete when all four quarters are complete, and a
quarter is complete when at least 75 percent of the sampling days
are complete. A sampling day is considered complete if 75 percent of
the hourly concentration values are reported; this includes data
affected by exceptional events that have been approved for exclusion
by the Administrator.
\9\ The memorandum dated April 23, 2014, from Steve Page,
Director, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to the
EPA Air Division Directors and titled ``Guidance for 1-hour
SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions'' provides
guidance for determining attainment for the 2010 1-hour primary
SO2 NAAQS. This document is available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_nonattainment_sip.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The attainment date for the Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAAs was
January 12, 2022. For an area where monitoring data alone is used in
the determination of attainment, the 3-year design value for the
calendar years preceding the attainment date is typically used (e.g.,
the design value for January 2019-December 2021 is the appropriate
design value for an attainment date of January 12, 2022). In this case
for the Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAAs, however, to demonstrate
attainment EPA is relying on a combination of monitoring data, past
modeling from the designation action and discussed in the May 2021
CDD,\10\ primary source shutdowns, and recent emissions data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 86 FR 26401 (May 14, 2021). The background for this action
is discussed in detail in our September 24, 2020, proposal (85 FR
60407).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. The EPA's Proposed Determination
A. Area Characterization
The Freestone-Anderson NAA in Texas is bound by the following
Universal Traverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates encompassed by the
following rectangular area vertices in UTM zone 14 with datum NAD83:
(1) vertices--UTM Easting (m) 766752.69, UTM Northing (m)
3536333.0,
(2) vertices--UTM Easting (m) 784752.69, UTM Northing (m)
3536333.0,
(3) vertices--UTM Easting (m) 784752.69, UTM Northing (m)
3512333.0,
(4) vertices--UTM Easting (m) 766752.69, UTM Northing (m)
3512333.0.
The Titus NAA in Texas is bound by the following UTM coordinates
encompassed by the following rectangular area vertices in UTM zone 15
with datum NAD83:
(1) vertices--UTM Easting (m) 304329.030, UTM Northing (m)
3666971.0,
(2) vertices--UTM Easting (m) 311629.030, UTM Northing (m)
3666971.0,
(3) vertices--UTM Easting (m) 311629.03, UTM Northing (m)
3661870.5,
(4) vertices--UTM Easting (m) 304329.03, UTM Northing (m)
3661870.5.
At the time of these area designations, EPA relied on modeling that
indicated that the Big Brown Steam Electric Station in Freestone County
and the Monticello Steam Electric Station in Titus County were the key
contributors to the modeled 2010 SO2 NAAQS violations in
these rural areas. These two coal-fired power plants were responsible
for contributing almost, if not equal to, 100 percent of the
SO2
[[Page 71232]]
impacts on the maximum modeled concentrations in each respective area.
Therefore, EPA only included these two principal sources within these
area boundaries when designating these areas.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See final round two technical support document (TSD) titled
``Final TSD for Supplemental SO2 NAAQS Designations for
Four Areas in Texas.pdf'' (pages 16 and 38). Available in the docket
for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shortly after EPA published these nonattainment designation
boundaries, Luminant announced plans to retire the Monticello Steam
Electric Station (October 6, 2017) and the Big Brown Steam Electric
Station (October 13, 2017), and to close both facilities at the
beginning of 2018. Luminant permanently retired the Big Brown electric
generating units 1 and 2 on February 12, 2018, and the TCEQ voided the
operating permit for these units on August 3, 2018. The TCEQ voided
most individual NSR permits for Big Brown units 1 and 2 on March 28,
2018, and the remaining NSR authorizations were voided on June 30,
2020. On April 18, 2021, the Big Brown facility was permanently
demolished. Luminant permanently retired the Monticello electric
generating units 1, 2, and 3 on December 31, 2017, and the TCEQ voided
the operating permit for these units on August 29, 2018. The TCEQ
voided most individual NSR permits for Monticello units 1, 2, and 3 on
February 14, 2018, and the remaining NSR authorizations were voided on
July 14, 2020. On July 1, 2021, the Monticello facility was permanently
demolished. Thus, a key factor in our determination that these two
areas attained the 2010 SO2 standard is the retirement of
these two facilities since they were the only principal sources within
these area boundaries when these areas were designated as
nonattainment.
B. Evaluation of SO2 Monitoring Data
On October 30, 2017, Texas deployed a special purpose
SO2 monitor in Freestone County, Texas near the Big Brown
Steam Electric facility at the Fairfield Farm to Market (FM) 2570 Ward
Ranch site. This special purpose monitor (Air Quality System (AQS) ID
48-161-1084) was specifically established to collect information about
the SO2 ambient air concentrations impacted by emissions
from the Big Brown Electric Station. Though the Big Brown Steam
Electric Station shut down in February 2018, Texas continues to operate
the monitor. In review of the available data at the time of the CDD
request, data from the Big Brown monitor demonstrated a marked
improvement in air quality in the NAA due to the permanent retirement
of the source.\12\ CAA section 179(c) requires EPA's determination of
whether the area attained by the attainment date to be based on the
area's air quality as of the attainment date. Therefore, for the
attainment date of January 12, 2022, the 3-year period of 2019 through
2021 is the relevant time period for evaluation in fulfilling the
Agency's obligation under CAA section 179(c). The 2019-2021 design
value for the Big Brown monitor was 5 ppb (7 percent of the standard),
compared to the standard of 75 ppb. The more recent 2020-2022 design
value for the Big Brown monitor was 7 ppb (9 percent of the standard).
The Freestone County monitor's 1-hour SO2 design values have
never violated the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS for the
periods following the source shutdown. The EPA is proposing to find
that this monitoring data supports the determination that the
Freestone-Anderson NAA has been in attainment since the Big Brown Steam
Electric Station retired in 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ During the initial 107-day period from the start of
monitoring on October 31, 2017, to the shutdown of Big Brown on
February 14, 2018, the 99th percentile concentration (the 1st high
value for this shorter-than-1-year period) was 77.5 ppb, slightly
above the standard. Post-shutdown, 321 days were measured during
2018; during this period the 99th percentile concentration (the 3rd
high value) was 14 ppb, 19 percent of the standard. The 99th
percentile concentration for 2019 (the 4th high value) was 5.8 ppb,
8 percent of the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Titus County NAA, Texas did not install a monitor that had
been planned near the Monticello Steam Electric Station once the
retirement of the facility was announced for 2017. However, monitoring
data from the Welsh monitor (AQS ID 48-449-1078), (the Cookville FM
4855 monitor) also located in Titus County, Texas approximately 16 km
to the east of the NAA surrounding the Monticello Steam Electric
Station, was evaluated to provide corroborating evidence that the
source shutdowns have resulted in attainment. The Welsh Monitor began
operating in January 2017. The Welsh monitor was located at the
Cookville FM 4855 site by Texas to characterize the SO2
concentrations from the Welsh Power Plant. The Welsh plant was not
included in the Titus NAA because it was not identified as a
contributing source to the modeled SO2 NAAQS violation in
the Titus NAA. Although the Welsh plant was not identified as a
contributing source to the Titus NAA, it is the only other major
SO2 producing plant in Titus County now that the Monticello
Steam Electric Station has retired, and its SO2 emissions
and resulting SO2 concentrations are accounted for with this
monitor. And, moreover, the Welsh monitor which was sited to capture
the impacts of this lone remaining source is recording SO2
concentrations well below the level of the NAAQS. The 2019-2021 design
value at the Welsh monitor is 19 ppb, 25 percent of the 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS standard. The 2020-2022 design value is 14 ppb, 19
percent of the standard. As explained in the CDD final action, these
values represent an upper limit for the estimated design value for the
Titus County NAA since the Welsh monitor includes the impacts from the
nearby Welsh Power Plant. Concentrations within the Titus NAA, farther
from the Welsh plant, would be expected to be lower since there are no
other large sources nearby. The EPA is proposing to find that the
monitoring data from the Welsh monitor in Titus County support the
conclusion that the Titus NAA attained the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS by the January 12, 2022, statutory attainment date.
C. Evaluation of SO2 Modeling Data
In 2016, Sierra Club and Vistra Energy submitted modeling data for
the most recent 3 years (2013-2015) at that time. This modeling
provided the basis for the two nonattainment designations as discussed
earlier. In our CDD,\13\ we evaluated this modeling to determine if
there was any possibility these areas would still be in nonattainment
after the plant shutdowns. Our analysis of the maximum impacts around
Big Brown and around Monticello found that these plants were
responsible for almost 100 percent of the impacts on the maximum
ambient SO2 concentration. EPA's boundaries for the NAAs
encompassed the areas shown to be in violation of the standard based on
the 2013-2015 emissions and the principal sources that contributed to
the violation in each area (i.e., Big Brown and Monticello). Both
facilities no longer emit any SO2 due to permanent
shutdowns. Big Brown has emitted zero emissions since the second
quarter of 2018 and Monticello has emitted zero emissions since the
first quarter of 2018. The only emissions explicitly modeled were those
from Big Brown and Monticello; the contributions from all other sources
were represented in the model by an estimate of the background
concentration. This is a technique in modeling to address smaller or
more distant source contributions by examining monitoring data thought
to be representative. In the modeling evaluated for designations, these
contributions were estimated to be
[[Page 71233]]
small, 2 ppb for both areas (much less than the 75 ppb standard).
Consistent with our analysis in the CDD, we do not believe that new
modeling is required to determine attainment of the standard by the
attainment date. Because the emissions from the Big Brown and
Monticello facilities for the 2019-2021 period are zero and their
modeled concentrations would also be zero, the total concentration
within the nonattainment area would be modeled as equal to the
contribution from all other sources, or background. In other words, the
modeled design value, if remodeled, would be small and equal to the
concentrations from all other sources as represented by the background
concentration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 85 FR 60407, 60411 (September 25, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Evaluation of SO2 Emissions Data
Although the initial designation modeling showed that Big Brown and
Monticello Steam Electric Stations contributed nearly 100 percent of
the point source emissions in their nonattainment areas, and those
sources have shutdown, the EPA also evaluated total County-wide
emissions to consider any point sources that are within the Counties.
The EPA evaluated annual SO2 point source emission trends
for sources within each County for 2012, and 2017 through 2022.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See spreadsheet titled, ``2010 to 2022 Texas Point Source
Data.xlsx'' included in the docket of this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 shows that Big Brown emitted nearly 100 percent of the
total point source emissions within Freestone and Anderson Counties
until after its retirement in 2018. The total SO2 point
source emissions have been 100 tons per year (tpy) or less each year
from 2019 to 2022. A flare from Mosbacher Energy Company is responsible
for the majority of those remaining annual SO2 emissions
(ranging from 28 to 86 tpy) with the rest coming from Freestone Energy
Center (ranging from 12 to 16 tpy) and other various combined sources
emitting less than 1 tpy each.
Table 1--Freestone and Anderson Counties Combined SO2 Point Source Emissions From Texas *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 emissions (tpy)
Facility Description ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big Brown Steam Electric Station.... Boilers 10 and 11...... 60,681 47,632 6,659 0 0 0 0
Freestone Energy Center............. Turbines 1 to 4........ 11.5 11.7 14 16 14.6 12.3 13.6
Mosbacher Energy Company............ Flare 3................ 130 62.4 73 45.2 28 86 67
Teague Gas Plant.................... Incinerator 5 and 243.8 0 0 0 0 0 0
unclassified unit 4.
Other............................... Various (1 tpy or less 3.4 3.1 2.5 2.5 2.5 2 1.8
each) **.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................... ....................... 61,070 47,709 6,748 63.7 45.1 100.7 82.4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Point source data obtained from the State of Texas Air Reporting System (STARS) reported on January 16, 2024.
** The Bethel Gas Plant Incinerator unit 32 was the only unit to exceed 1 tpy with 1.6 tpy in 2012.
In Table 2, EPA provided categorized County-wide emissions,
including point, non-point and mobile source emissions from 2017 and
2020 National Emission Inventory (NEI) \15\ data to compare Big Brown's
impact against the rest of the emissions inventory in Freestone and
Anderson Counties. The total SO2 emissions in Freestone and
Anderson Counties were significantly lower in 2020 after Big Brown's
retirement, with 171 tpy total. The non-point source category made up
the majority of these County-wide emissions at 122 tpy (71 percent)
with fires (prescribed/agricultural burning, and wildfires)
contributing the most at 108.5 tpy. Oil and gas, waste disposal, and
combustion made up the remaining non-point emissions but were small at
5.4, 4.1, and 3.5 tpy, respectively. On-road sources also contributed
lightly with 3.6 tpy. These categorized County-wide emissions show that
other source categories in and outside of the Freestone-Anderson NAA
are very low. The NAA makes up a very small portion of the total areas
in Freestone and Anderson Counties, so these County-wide non-point and
mobile emissions, which are few, would make up an even smaller piece of
the overall emissions in or near the Freestone-Anderson NAA. The
retirement of the Big Brown Steam Electric Station in 2018 reduced the
emissions in the Freestone-Anderson NAA by nearly 100 percent from 2012
to 2020 and there are no other significant emission sources present.
Therefore, this information supports a determination that the
Freestone-Anderson NAA has attained the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS by the statutory attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See spreadsheets titled ``NEI emissions by sector 2012,
2017, 2020.xlsx'' and ``NEI emissions by unit 2012, 2017,
2020.xlsx'' included in the docket of this action.
Table 2--Freestone and Anderson Counties Combined 2017 and 2020
Categorized NEI SO2 Total Emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 emissions (tpy)
Category -------------------------------
2017 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point................................... 47,710 45.1
Non-Point............................... 179 122
Fires (prescribed/agricultural 171.1 108.5
burning, and wildfires)............
Oil and gas production.............. 3.03 5.4
Waste Disposal...................... 2.9 4.1
Combustion (residential and 2.4 3.5
industrial)........................
On-Road Mobile.......................... 12.2 3.6
Non-Road Mobile......................... 1.5 0.1
-------------------------------
[[Page 71234]]
Total........................... 47,903 171
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3 shows the SO2 total point source emissions
within Titus County in 2012, and from 2017 to 2022. In 2018, after
Monticello Steam Electric Station retired, the Welsh Power Plant
emitted nearly 100 percent of the remaining SO2 emissions
within Titus County. These results show that up until 2017 the
Monticello and Welsh plants were the only primary SO2 point
sources emitting in Titus County. During designations, EPA's
nonattainment boundary did not include the Welsh Power Plant and was
limited to the immediate area surrounding Monticello Steam Electric
Station as the Welsh Power Plant was not identified as a contributing
source to the modeled SO2 NAAQS violation. Therefore, since
the Welsh Power Plant did not contribute to the NAAQS violation in the
Titus NAA, and since there are no other point sources within Titus
County, these County-wide emission results show that Monticello is the
only point source that could contribute to nonattainment within the
Titus NAA.
Table 3--Titus County SO2 Point Source Emissions From Texas *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 emissions (tpy)
Facility Description ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monticello Steam Electric Station... Boilers 7, 9, 10, 11, 31,450 29,412 0 0 0 0 0
66.
Welsh Power Plant................... Boilers 10, 11, and 12. 23,212 14,075 14,226 11,177 8,168.8 9,880 10,916
Other............................... Flares and Fugitive 0 0.02 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
Emissions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................... ....................... 54,662 43,487 14,226.3 11,177.4 8,169.2 9,880.4 10,916.4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Point source data obtained from the State of Texas Air Reporting System (STARS) reported on January 16, 2024.
In Table 4, EPA provided categorized County-wide emissions from
2017 and 2020 NEI data to further compare Monticello's impact against
the rest of the emission inventory in Titus County. The 2017 and 2020
NEI data showed that the SO2 emissions from other categories
in Titus County were small when compared to the point source emissions
showing 44 tpy (0.1 percent) in 2017 and 51.7 tpy (0.6 percent) in
2020. The non-point source category made up the majority of these low
emissions with 38 tpy in 2017 and 50 tpy in 2020 coming mostly from
fires (19 and 16.3 tpy, respectively, in 2017 and 2020) and combustion
(18 and 29.6 tpy, respectively, in 2017 and 2020). Oil and gas and
waste disposal made up the remaining of these low emissions with oil
and gas showing 2.6 tpy or less and waste disposal 1.5 tpy or less for
both years. On-road mobile sources also contributed very lightly as
well (5.5 and 1.9 tpy for both years). These categorized County-wide
emissions show that other source categories in and outside of the Titus
NAA are very low. The Titus NAA makes up a very small portion of the
total area in Titus County, so these County-wide non-point and mobile
emissions, which are few, would make up an even smaller piece of those
overall emissions in or near the Titus NAA. The retirement of
Monticello Steam Electric Station reduced the emissions in the Titus
NAA by nearly 100 percent from 2012 to 2020, and no other sources are
contributing to that area from Titus County. This information supports
a determination that the Titus NAA attained the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS by the statutory attainment date.
Table 4--Titus County 2017 and 2020 Categorized NEI SO2 Total Emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 emissions (tpy)
Category -------------------------------
2017 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point (including the Welsh Power Plant). 43,487 8,169.3
Non-Point............................... 38 50
Fires (prescribed/agricultural 19 16.3
burning, and wildfires)............
Oil and gas production.............. 0.01 2.6
Waste Disposal...................... 1.3 1.5
Combustion (residential and 18 29.6
industrial)........................
On-Road Mobile.......................... 5.5 1.9
Non-Road Mobile......................... 0.8 0.09
-------------------------------
Total........................... 43,531 8,221
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 71235]]
E. Conclusion
We propose to determine that the Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAAs
attained the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS by the statutory
attainment date of January 12, 2022. The supporting justification for
our proposed determination of attainment by the attainment date
includes the following: EPA's previous CDD; the permanent and
enforceable shutdowns of the primary sources of SO2
emissions in these areas; the available modeling analysis demonstrating
that the Big Brown Steam Electric Station in Freestone County and the
Monticello Steam Electric Station in Titus County were responsible for
almost 100 percent of the SO2 impacts on the maximum modeled
concentrations in each respective area; review of emissions data
showing emissions within the Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAA's have
been reduced by nearly 100 percent with the retirements of Big Brown
and Monticello Steam Electric Stations in 2018 and that no other
sources remain that are contributing to a violation of the
SO2 NAAQS in those NAAs; and the Freestone County and Welsh
monitors' reported 2019-2021 design values of 5 ppb (7 percent of the
standard) and 19 ppb (25 percent of the standard) providing additional
evidence that these areas are in attainment. The EPA's proposed
determination that the area attained the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS by the attainment date is supported by all of the available
aforementioned evidence.
III. Proposed Action
Based on the EPA's review of all available evidence described in
this notice, the EPA is proposing to determine that the Freestone-
Anderson and Titus NAA's attained the 2010 1-hour primary
SO2 NAAQS by the statutory attainment date of January 12,
2022.
Finalizing this action would not constitute a redesignation of the
Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAA's to attainment of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS under section 107(d)(3) of the CAA. If this action
is finalized, the Freestone-Anderson and Titus NAA's will remain
designated nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS until
EPA revises the area's designation under CAA section 107(d)(3).
If finalized, this action will address the EPA's obligation under
CAA section 179(c) to determine if the Freestone-Anderson and Titus
NAAs attained the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS by the statutory
attainment date of January 12, 2022.
The EPA is soliciting public comments on this notice. These
comments will be considered before taking final action.
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
Information on Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) and how EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) can be found in the section, below, titled
``V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.'' EPA is providing
additional analysis of environmental justice associated with this
action. We are doing so for the purpose of providing information to the
public, not as a basis of our action.
The EPA conducted screening analyses utilizing EJSCREEN, an
environmental justice mapping and screening tool that combines various
environmental and demographic indicators within the area.\16\ The
EJSCREEN tool presents these indicators at a Census block group (CBG)
level or a larger user-specified ``buffer'' area that covers multiple
CBGs.\17\ An individual CBG is a cluster of contiguous blocks within
the same census tract and generally contains between 600 and 3,000
people. EJSCREEN is not a tool for performing in-depth risk analysis,
but is instead a screening tool that provides an initial representation
of indicators related to environmental justice and is subject to
uncertainty in some underlying data (e.g., some environmental
indicators are based on monitoring data which are not uniformly
available; others are based on self-reported data).\18\ We present
EJSCREEN environmental indicators to help screen for locations where
residents may experience a higher overall pollution burden than would
be expected for a block group with the same total population. These
indicators of overall pollution burden include estimates of ambient
PM2.5 and O3 concentration, air toxics cancer
risk, air toxics respiratory health index, a score for traffic
proximity and volume, percentage of pre-1960 housing units (lead paint
indicator), and scores for proximity to Superfund sites, risk
management plan (RMP) sites, and hazardous waste facilities.\19\ We
note that the cancer risk and respiratory health indexes are based on
2017 emissions data, when the sources in these areas were still
operating. The EPA's EJSCREEN tool also provides information on
demographic indicators for vulnerable populations in the area,
including communities of color, percent low-income, linguistic
isolation, and less than high school-level education. This action
proposes a determination of NAAQS attainment by the attainment date for
the Freestone-Anderson Counties and Titus County, Texas NAAs. The EPA
prepared EJSCREEN reports covering buffer areas containing the
designated boundaries for each nonattainment area. We selected a 15 km
radius around the Big Brown Steam Electric Station in Freestone-
Anderson Counties and a 10 km radius around the Monticello Steam
Electric Station in Titus County. These sources were responsible for
almost 100 percent of the SO2 impacts on the maximum modeled
concentrations in each respective area. Table 6 presents a summary of
results from the EPA's screening-level analysis for the areas
surrounding each nonattainment area compared to the U.S. as a whole
(the detailed EJSCREEN reports are provided in the docket for this
rulemaking).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The EJSCREEN tool is available at https://www.epa.gov/ejscreen.
\17\ See https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/about/glossary.html.
\18\ In addition, EJSCREEN relies on the 5-year block group
estimates from the U.S. Census American Community Survey. The
advantage of using 5-year over 1-year estimates is increased
statistical reliability of the data (i.e., lower sampling error),
particularly for small geographic areas and population groups. For
more information, see https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/acs/acs_general_handbook_2020.pdf.
\19\ For additional information on environmental indicators and
proximity scores in EJSCREEN, see ``EJSCREEN Environmental Justice
Mapping and Screening Tool: EJSCREEN Technical Documentation,''
Chapter 3 and Appendix C (September 2019) at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-04/documents/ejscreen_technical_document.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This action is proposing our determination of attainment by the
attainment date for the 2010 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS for
the Freestone-Anderson and Titus County NAAs by January 12, 2022.
Information on SO2 and its relationship to negative health
impacts can be found at final Federal Register notice titled ``Primary
National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide'' (75 FR
35520, June 22, 2010). We expect that this particular action will not
have a detrimental effect on the populations in the NAAs, including
people of color and low-income populations in the NAAs, as this action
identifies that the areas attained the NAAQS by the attainment date.
[[Page 71236]]
Table 6--EJSCREEN Analysis Summary for Freestone-Anderson and Titus SO2 NAAs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Values for buffer areas for each NAA and the U.S. (percentile within
U.S. where indicated)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Selected variables Big Brown Plant in
Freestone-Anderson SO2 Monticello Plant in Titus
NAA (15 km radius) SO2 NAA (10 km radius) U.S. (avg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollution Burden Indicators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter (PM2.5), annual 9.12 (64th %ile)......... 9.34 (70th %ile)......... 8.74 (-)
average ([micro]g/m\3\).
Cancer Risk (lifetime risk per million) 30 (80-90th %ile)........ 38 (95-100th %tile)...... 29 (-)
**.
Respiratory Health Index **............ 0.31 (<50th %tile)....... 0.4 (80-90th %tile)...... 0.36 (-)
Ozone (O3), summer seasonal average of 40.7 (36th %ile)......... 40.7 (36th %ile)......... 42.6 (-)
daily 8-hour max (ppb).
Traffic proximity and volume score *... 11 (8th %ile)............ 190 (46th %ile).......... 710 (-)
Lead paint (percent pre-1960 housing).. 0.11 (41st %ile)......... 0.14 (45th %ile)......... 0.28 (-)
Superfund proximity score *............ 0.009 (3rd %ile)......... 0.013 (9th %ile)......... 0.13 (-)
RMP proximity score *.................. 0.065 (7th %ile)......... 2.8 (95th %ile).......... 0.75 (-)
Hazardous waste proximity score *...... 0.022 (1st %ile)......... 0.028 (3rd %ile)......... 2.2 (-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Demographic Indicators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People of color population............. 43% (60th %ile).......... 61% (72nd %ile).......... 40% (-)
Low-income population.................. 30% (53rd %ile).......... 51% (81st %ile).......... 31% (-)
Linguistically isolated population..... 1% (50th %ile)........... 8% (80th %ile)........... 5% (-)
Population with less than high school 23% (84th %ile).......... 22% (82nd %ile).......... 12% (-)
education.
Population under 5 years of age........ 3% (23rd %ile)........... 7% (64th %ile)........... 6% (-)
Population over 64 years of age........ 12% (38th %ile).......... 14% (48th %ile).......... 16% (-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The traffic proximity and volume indicator is a score calculated by daily traffic count divided by distance in
meters to the road. The Superfund proximity, RMP proximity, and hazardous waste proximity indicators are all
scores calculated by site or facility counts divided by distance in kilometers.
** Air toxics cancer risk, and air toxics respiratory hazard index are from the EPA's 2017 Air Toxics Data
Update, which is the Agency's ongoing, comprehensive evaluation of air toxics in the United States.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action proposes to find that areas attained the NAAQS by the
relevant statutory attainment date and does not impose additional or
modify existing requirements. 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 an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act.
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.'' As noted in Section
IV, the EPA performed an EJ analysis, but we did not consider EJ as a
basis for this action. Due to the nature of the action being taken
here, this action is expected to have no impact on the air quality of
the affected area. Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this
action, which finds that NAAs attained the 2010 SO2 NAAQS by
the applicable attainment date, and there is no information in the
record inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for people of color, low-income populations, and
Indigenous peoples.
In addition, this proposed rulemaking, the finding of attainment by
the attainment date for the Freestone-Anderson and Titus SO2
NAAs, does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because this action is not
intended to apply in Indian country located in the State, and the EPA
notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
[[Page 71237]]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 27, 2024.
Earthea Nance,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2024-19599 Filed 8-30-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
