Air Plan Approval; Michigan and Minnesota; Revision to Taconite Federal Implementation Plan, 96152-96166 [2024-27635]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
96152
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
and expertise in the conservation of
cultural or natural heritage, as those
terms are defined in Articles 1 and 2 of
the Convention, may be requested to
participate in the Panel from time to
time.
(3) The Assistant Secretary chairs
meetings of the Panel, and sets its
agenda and schedule. The NPS provides
staff support to the Panel.
■ 8. Amend § 73.13 by:
■ a. Revising paragraphs (a) and (c); and
■ b. Removing the undesignated
paragraph at the end of the section.
The revisions read as follows:
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
§ 73.13 Protection of U.S. World Heritage
properties.
(a) Requirements. (1) Article 5 of the
Convention, as required in more detail
in the Operational Guidelines, mandates
that each participating nation shall take,
insofar as possible, the appropriate
legal, scientific, technical,
administrative, and financial measures
necessary for the identification,
protection, conservation, preservation,
and rehabilitation of properties of
outstanding universal value. This is a
government-wide obligation.
(2) The nomination document for a
property must include evidence of such
legal protections as may be necessary to
ensure preservation of the property and
its environment, including, for example,
restrictive covenants, easements, or
other forms of protection (54 U.S.C.
307101(c)).
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Protection Measures for Private
Properties. For properties owned by
private organizations or individuals, the
protection measures for each property
being considered for possible
nomination to the World Heritage List
will be reviewed by the Assistant
Secretary on a case-by-case basis to
ensure that they fulfill the mandate of
54 U.S.C. 307101(c), giving
consideration to what would constitute
effective protection that is appropriate
to the circumstances of the particular
property. Such considerations may
include the current and potential use of
the property, the nature of its
ownership, and the effectiveness of the
applicable legal protection measures.
(1) One or more of the following items
may satisfy the protection requirements
outlined in paragraph (a) of this section,
if the Assistant Secretary determines
that they sufficiently prohibit any use or
physical alteration that is not consistent
with, or which threatens or damages the
property’s universally significant value:
(i) Written covenant executed by the
owner(s); or
(ii) Other trust or legal arrangement,
such as an easement or substantive
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
protection under a local historic
preservation ordinance.
(2) [Reserved]
§ 73.17
[Amended]
9. Amend § 73.17, in paragraph (c), by
removing the text ‘‘slideshows,’’.
■
Shannon A. Estenoz,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2024–27373 Filed 12–3–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–52–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
available at the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at www.regulations.gov/
document/PTO-P-2024-0003-0001. Of
the comments received on the proposed
rule, 256 comments were unique.
In light of resource constraints, the
USPTO has decided not to move
forward with the proposed rule at this
time and to withdraw the proposed rule.
Despite the decision not to move
forward with the proposed rule at this
time, the USPTO appreciates and takes
seriously the thoughtful perspectives
raised by commenters. The USPTO will
continue engaging with its stakeholders
as it works to foster a balanced, robust,
and reliable intellectual property
system.
Terminal Disclaimer Practice To
Obviate Nonstatutory Double
Patenting; Withdrawal
Conclusion
The proposed rule to add a new
requirement for an acceptable terminal
disclaimer that is filed to obviate
nonstatutory double patenting,
published in the Federal Register on
May 10, 2024 (89 FR 40439), is hereby
withdrawn.
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
Katherine K. Vidal,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
37 CFR Part 1
[Docket No. PTO–P–2024–0003]
RIN 0651–AD76
AGENCY:
The USPTO is withdrawing
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM) published in the Federal
Register on May 10, 2024, that proposes
to add a new requirement for an
acceptable terminal disclaimer filed to
obviate (that is, overcome) nonstatutory
double patenting.
DATES: The proposed rule published at
89 FR 40439 on May 10, 2024, is
withdrawn as of December 4, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susy Tsang-Foster, Senior Legal
Advisor, Office of Patent Legal
Administration, at 571–272–7711; or
Nicholas Hill, Legal Advisor, Office of
Patent Legal Administration, at 571–
270–1485.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
action withdraws a proposed rule
published in the Federal Register on
May 10, 2024 (89 FR 40439), to add a
new requirement for an acceptable
terminal disclaimer that is filed to
obviate (that is, overcome) nonstatutory
double patenting. The proposed rule’s
comment period was open from May 10,
2024, to July 9, 2024.
SUMMARY:
Reason for Withdrawal
During the proposed rule’s 60-day
comment period, the USPTO received
more than 300 comments from a variety
of stakeholders, including commenters
both supporting and opposing the
proposal. The comments are publicly
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
[FR Doc. 2024–28263 Filed 12–3–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–16–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2024–0215; FRL–12351–
01–R5]
Air Plan Approval; Michigan and
Minnesota; Revision to Taconite
Federal Implementation Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to finalize
nitrogen oxide (NOX) and/or sulfur
dioxide (SO2) limits for the indurating
furnaces at five taconite facilities in
accordance with the procedures set
forth in the Federal implementation
plan (FIP) addressing the requirement
for best available retrofit technology
(BART) at taconite facilities. EPA is also
proposing to modify the Upper
Predictive Limit (UPL) equations used
to establish NOX and SO2 emission
limits under the FIP. Finally, EPA is
proposing to revise reporting provisions
to require reports to be submitted to
EPA electronically. EPA is proposing
these actions pursuant to sections 110
and 169A of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Comments must be received on
or before January 21, 2025.
Virtual Public Hearing. EPA will hold
a virtual public hearing to solicit
comments on December 19, 2024. The
last day to pre-register to present at the
hearing will be December 16, 2024. On
December 16, 2024, EPA will post a
general agenda for the hearing that will
list pre-registered presenters in
approximate order at https://
www.epa.gov/mn/revision-taconiteregional-haze-federal-implementationplan-mi-and-mn. If you require the
services of a translator or a special
accommodation such as audio
description/closed captioning, please
pre-register for the hearing and describe
your needs by December 11, 2024.
For more information on the virtual
public hearing, see SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2024–0215 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
arra.sarah@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from the
docket. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit to EPA’s docket at https://
www.regulations.gov any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI), Proprietary
Business Information (PBI), or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI, PBI, or
multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental
Scientist, Air and Radiation Division
(AR18J), Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,
(312) 886–0266, dagostino.kathleen@
epa.gov. The EPA Region 5 office is
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
Virtual Public Hearing
EPA is holding a virtual public
hearing to provide interested parties the
opportunity to present data, views, or
arguments concerning the proposal.
EPA will hold a virtual public hearing
to solicit comments on December 19,
2024. The hearing will convene at 9:00
a.m. Central Standard Time (CST) and
will conclude at 1:00 p.m. CST, or 15
minutes after the last pre-registered
presenter in attendance has presented if
there are no additional presenters. EPA
will announce further details, including
information on how to register for the
virtual public hearing, on the virtual
public hearing website at https://
www.epa.gov/mn/revision-taconiteregional-haze-federal-implementationplan-mi-and-mn.
EPA will begin pre-registering
presenters and attendees for the hearing
upon publication of this document in
the Federal Register. To pre-register to
attend or present at the virtual public
hearing, please use the online
registration form available at https://
www.epa.gov/mn/revision-taconiteregional-haze-federal-implementationplan-mi-and-mn or contact Mayesha
Choudhury at 312–886–5909 or by
email at choudhury.mayesha@epa.gov.
The last day to pre-register to present at
the hearing will be December 16, 2024.
On December 16, 2024, EPA will post a
general agenda for the hearing that will
list pre-registered presenters in
approximate order at https://
www.epa.gov/mn/revision-taconiteregional-haze-federal-implementationplan-mi-and-mn. Additionally, requests
to present will be taken on the day of
the hearing as time allows.
EPA will make every effort to follow
the schedule as closely as possible on
the day of the hearing; however, please
plan for the hearing to run either ahead
of schedule or behind schedule. Each
commenter will have 5 minutes to
provide oral testimony. EPA encourages
commenters to provide EPA with a copy
of their oral testimony electronically by
including it in the registration form or
emailing it to choudhury.mayesha@
epa.gov. EPA may ask clarifying
questions during the oral presentations
but will not respond to the
presentations at that time. Written
statements and supporting information
submitted during the comment period
will be considered with the same weight
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
96153
as oral comments and supporting
information presented at the virtual
public hearing.
EPA is asking all hearing attendees to
pre-register, even those who do not
intend to present. This will help EPA
prepare for the virtual hearing.
Please note that any updates made to
any aspect of the hearing will be posted
online at https://www.epa.gov/mn/
revision-taconite-regional-haze-federalimplementation-plan-mi-and-mn. While
EPA expects the hearing to go forward
as set forth above, please monitor our
website or contact Mayesha Choudhury
at 312–886–5909 or
choudhury.mayesha@epa.gov to
determine if there are any updates. EPA
does not intend to publish a document
in the Federal Register announcing
updates.
If you require the services of a
translator or a special accommodation
such as audio description/closed
captioning, please pre-register for the
hearing with Mayesha Choudhury at
312–886–5909 or choudhury.mayesha@
epa.gov and describe your needs by
December 11, 2024. EPA may not be
able to arrange accommodations without
advance notice.
I. Background
A. Requirements of the Clean Air Act
and EPA’s Regional Haze Rule
In section 169A of the 1977
Amendments to the CAA, Congress
created a program for protecting
visibility in the nation’s national parks
and wilderness areas. This section of the
CAA establishes as a national goal the
‘‘prevention of any future, and the
remedying of any existing, impairment
of visibility in mandatory Class I
Federal areas 1 which impairment
results from manmade air pollution.’’
Congress added section 169B to the
CAA in 1990 to address regional haze
issues. EPA promulgated a rule to
address regional haze on July 1, 1999
1 Areas designated as mandatory Class I Federal
areas consist of national parks exceeding 6000
acres, wilderness areas and national memorial parks
exceeding 5000 acres, and all international parks
that were in existence on August 7, 1977. 42 U.S.C.
7472(a). In accordance with section 169A of the
CAA, EPA, in consultation with the Department of
Interior, promulgated a list of 156 areas where
visibility is identified as an important value. 44 FR
69122 (November 30, 1979). The extent of a
mandatory Class I area includes subsequent changes
in boundaries, such as park expansions. 42 U.S.C.
7472(a). Although states and Tribes may designate
as Class I additional areas which they consider to
have visibility as an important value, the
requirements of the visibility program set forth in
section 169A of the CAA apply only to ‘‘mandatory
Class I Federal areas.’’ Each mandatory Class I
Federal area is the responsibility of a ‘‘Federal Land
Manager.’’ 42 U.S.C. 7602(i). When we use the term
‘‘Class I area’’ in this action, we mean a ‘‘mandatory
Class I Federal area.’’
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
96154
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
(64 FR 35714), codified at 40 CFR part
51, subpart P (herein after referred to as
the ‘‘Regional Haze Rule’’). The
Regional Haze Rule codified and
clarified the BART provisions in the
CAA and revised the existing visibility
regulations to add provisions addressing
regional haze impairment and to
establish a comprehensive visibility
protection program for Class I areas. The
requirements for regional haze, found at
40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309, are included
in EPA’s visibility protection
regulations at 40 CFR part 51, subpart P.
Section 169A of the CAA directs
states, or EPA if developing a FIP, to
evaluate the use of retrofit controls at
certain larger, often uncontrolled, older
stationary sources to address visibility
impacts from these sources.
Specifically, section 169A(b)(2)(A) of
the CAA requires that implementation
plans contain such measures as may be
necessary to make reasonable progress
toward the natural visibility goal,
including a requirement that certain
categories of existing major stationary
sources 2 built between 1962 and 1977
procure, install, and operate BART as
determined by EPA.
Under the Regional Haze Rule, states
(or in the case of a FIP, EPA) are
directed to conduct BART
determinations for such ‘‘BARTeligible’’ sources that may reasonably be
anticipated to cause or contribute to any
visibility impairment in a Class I area.
On July 6, 2005, 70 FR 39104, EPA
published the Guidelines for BART
Determinations Under the Regional
Haze Rule at appendix Y to 40 CFR part
51 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘BART
Guidelines’’) to assist states and EPA in
determining which sources should be
subject to the BART requirements and
in determining appropriate emission
limits for each source subject to BART.
The process of establishing BART
emission limitations follows three steps.
First, states, or EPA if developing a FIP,
must identify and list ‘‘BART-eligible
sources.’’ 3 Once the state or EPA has
identified the BART-eligible sources,
the second step is to identify those
sources that may ‘‘emit any air pollutant
which may reasonably be anticipated to
cause or contribute to any impairment
of visibility’’ in a Class I area. (Under
the Regional Haze Rule, a source which
2 The set of ‘‘major stationary sources’’ potentially
subject to BART is listed in CAA section 169A(g)(7)
and includes ‘‘taconite ore processing facilities.’’
3 ‘‘BART-eligible sources’’ are those sources that
have the potential to emit 250 tons or more of a
visibility-impairing air pollutant, were not in
operation prior to August 7, 1962, but were in
existence on August 7, 1977, and whose operations
fall within one or more of 26 specifically listed
source categories. 40 CFR 51.301.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
fits this description is ‘‘subject to
BART.’’). Third, for each source subject
to BART, the state or EPA must identify
the level of control representing BART
after considering the five factors set
forth in CAA section 169A(g). The
BART Guidelines provide a process for
making BART determinations that states
can use in implementing the BART
requirements on a source-by-source
basis. See 40 CFR part 51, appendix Y,
at IV.D.
States, or EPA if developing a FIP,
must address all visibility-impairing
pollutants emitted by a source in the
BART determination process. The most
significant visibility impairing
pollutants are SO2, NOX, and particulate
matter (PM).
A state implementation plan (SIP) or
FIP addressing regional haze must
include source-specific BART emission
limits and compliance schedules for
each source subject to BART. Once a
state or EPA has made a BART
determination, the BART controls must
be installed and operated as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later
than five years after the date of the final
SIP or FIP. See CAA section 169A(g)(4)
and 40 CFR 51.308(e)(1)(iv). In addition
to what is required by the Regional Haze
Rule, general SIP requirements mandate
that the SIP or FIP include all regulatory
requirements related to monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting for the
BART controls on the source. See CAA
section 110(a).
B. BART FIP for Taconite Facilities in
Michigan and Minnesota
EPA is proposing to finalize NOX and/
or SO2 limits for the indurating furnaces
at five taconite facilities in accordance
with the procedures set forth in the FIP
addressing the requirement for BART at
taconite facilities. These facilities
include Tilden Mining Company
(Tilden) located at 101 Cci Mine Road,
Ishpeming, Michigan; Hibbing Taconite
Company (Hibbing) located at 4950
Highway 5 North, Hibbing, Minnesota;
Minorca Mine (Minorca) located at 5950
Old Highway 53, Virginia, Minnesota;
Northshore Mining Company—Silver
Bay (Northshore) located at 10 Outer
Drive, Silver Bay, Minnesota, and
United Taconite (UTAC) located at 8470
Townline Road, Forbes, Minnesota.
Tilden, Minorca, Northshore, and UTAC
are owned by Cleveland-Cliffs, Inc.
(Cliffs), formerly known as Cliffs
Natural Resources, and Hibbing is
jointly owned by Cliffs and United
States Steel. The primary units
identified as being subject to BART at
Tilden, Hibbing, Minorca, UTAC, and
Northshore include the following
pelletizing, or indurating, furnaces:
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Tilden Grate Kiln Line 1, Hibbing
Straight-Grate Lines 1–3, Minorca
Straight-Grate Line 1, UTAC Grate Kiln
Lines 1 and 2, and Northshore StraightGrate Furnaces 11 and 12.4 The U.S.
taconite iron ore industry uses two
types of pelletizing machines or
processes: straight-grate kilns and grate
kilns. In a straight-grate kiln, a
continuous bed of agglomerated green
pellets is carried through different
temperature zones with upward draft or
downward draft blown through the
pellets on the metal grate. The grate kiln
system consists of a traveling grate, a
rotary kiln, and an annular cooler. A
significant difference between these
designs is that straight-grate kilns do not
burn coal and therefore have a much
lower potential for emitting SO2.
Further, even within the same kiln type
or process, individual furnaces (referred
to as indurating or pelletizing) or
processes have distinct equipment and
process characteristics that may affect
the compatibility and performance of
certain types of burners.
On February 6, 2013 (78 FR 8706),
EPA promulgated a FIP that set BART
limits for NOX and SO2 emissions from
furnaces at seven taconite facilities in
Michigan and Minnesota (‘‘Original
FIP’’). EPA took this action because
Michigan and Minnesota had failed to
meet a statutory deadline to submit their
Regional Haze SIPs and subsequently
failed to require BART at the taconite
facilities within their borders. BART
limits for NOX were based upon the
performance of high stoichiometric
(high-stoich) low-NOX burners (LNBs) 5
at two of the taconite furnaces at U.S.
Steel’s Minntac facility, while BART for
SO2 was established as no additional
controls, apart from a limit on the sulfur
content of coal used in co-firing
furnaces.
In a related action, EPA published a
final partial disapproval of Michigan’s
and Minnesota’s Regional Haze SIPs on
September 30, 2013 (78 FR 59825), due
to the states’ failure to require BART for
taconite facilities within these states.
ArcelorMittal USA LLC
(‘‘ArcelorMittal’’) 6 and Cliffs, owners of
several taconite facilities affected by the
FIP, along with the State of Michigan,
4 Fuel sulfur content BART limits were also set
for two process boilers and a line dryer at Tilden.
Those limits are not impacted by this action.
5 Stoichiometry refers to the relationship between
the actual quantity of combustion air to the
theoretical minimum quantity of air needed for 100
percent combustion of the fuel.
6 Cliffs acquired ArcelorMittal Steel Production
Company in 2020. Previously, Minorca was owned
by ArcelorMittal and Hibbing was jointly owned by
ArcelorMittal, Cliffs and United States Steel.
Currently, Minorca is owned by Cliffs and Hibbing
is jointly owned by Cliffs and United States Steel.
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
filed timely petitions for review of the
Original FIP. ArcelorMittal and Cliffs
also filed a joint motion seeking a stay
of the Original FIP, which was granted
by the Eighth Circuit on June 14, 2013.7
ArcelorMittal, Cliffs, the State of
Michigan, and others also submitted
petitions for reconsideration of the
Original FIP, pursuant to CAA section
307(d)(7)(B). 42 U.S.C. 7607(d)(7)(B).
On October 22, 2015 (80 FR 64160),
in response to the petitions for
reconsideration and due to new
information submitted to EPA after
promulgation of the Original FIP, EPA
proposed to revise the Original FIP to
revise NOX and SO2 emission limits for
certain taconite facilities. On April 16,
2016 (81 FR 21672), EPA promulgated
the final 2016 revised FIP (‘‘2016 FIP’’).
With respect to NOX, the emission
limits in the 2016 FIP were based on
information submitted to EPA by Cliffs
and ArcelorMittal that suggested highstoich LNBs, which formed the basis for
the NOX limits in the Original FIP,
posed serious technical hurdles. In the
2016 FIP, EPA revised the NOX
emission limits for Tilden, Hibbing,
Minorca, and UTAC, and set forth a
process to confirm or modify those
emission limits using continuous
emissions monitoring system (CEMS)
data that was to be collected after the
installation of the selected low-NOX
technology. Under the 2016 FIP, the
NOX emission limits do not become
enforceable until EPA confirms or
modifies the emission limits in
accordance with procedures set forth in
the FIP. The NOX emission limits in the
2016 FIP were based upon low-stoich
LNBs (for grate kilns) and LNBs that
utilize a combination of water and
steam injection and pre-combustion
technologies (for straight-grate kilns).
With respect to SO2, EPA granted
reconsideration of the SO2 limit for
Tilden’s grate kiln due to information
that became available after the close of
the public comment period on the 2013
FIP regarding Tilden’s intent to burn
mixed fuels. Cliffs’ intent to burn mixed
fuels at Tilden was not considered in
the Original FIP and would have led to
an inability to meet the established
BART limit. The 2016 FIP limits the
sulfur content of the coal combusted on
Tilden Line 1 and sets an SO2 emission
limit for the furnace.
Cliffs and ArcelorMittal filed petitions
for review of the 2016 FIP due to a
dispute over the UPL equation in the
final rule. The 2016 FIP requirements
for each facility are set forth in 40 CFR
52.1183 for Michigan and 40 CFR
52.1235 for Minnesota and discussed
further in the remainder of this action.
II. Basis for NOX Limits
The 2016 FIP set emission limits in
pounds (lbs) of NOX per million British
96155
Thermal Unit (MMBtu), based on a 30day (720-hour) rolling average, and
established a process to either confirm
or modify the NOX emission limits
within established ranges based on
CEMS data that Tilden, Hibbing,
Minorca, and UTAC were required to
submit to EPA by dates specified in the
2016 FIP.8 The FIP also specified that
the NOX emission limits for these
facilities would become enforceable
only after EPA’s confirmation or
modification of the NOX emission limits
reflecting EPA’s expectation that the
owner or operator of each facility would
provide the requisite data to EPA by the
dates specified in the FIP. EPA’s efforts
to finalize NOX emission limits for these
facilities by the deadlines established in
the FIP were complicated by several
implementation issues, including
challenges with installation of control
technology, delays in receipt of requisite
data, and emission limit modification
requests not conforming to the
requirements set forth in the FIP.
The NOX emission limits established
for each furnace and the ranges of limits
allowable under the limit modification
process are set forth in Table 1. As
indicated in Table 1, the emission limits
for certain furnaces vary by the type of
fuel being used (natural gas or ‘‘co-fire,’’
which is a combination of natural gas
and coal).
TABLE 1—NOX LIMITS AND LIMIT MODIFICATION RANGES ESTABLISHED IN THE 2016 FIP
Emission limit
(lbs NOX/MMBtu)
Furnace
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Tilden Line 1:
Natural Gas ..............................................................................................................................
Co-fire .......................................................................................................................................
Hibbing Line 1 ..................................................................................................................................
Hibbing Line 2 ..................................................................................................................................
Hibbing Line 3 ..................................................................................................................................
Minorca .....................................................................................................................................
UTAC Line 1:
Natural Gas ..............................................................................................................................
Co-fire .......................................................................................................................................
UTAC Line 2:
Natural Gas ..............................................................................................................................
Co-fire .......................................................................................................................................
Emission limit
modification range
(lbs NOX/MMBtu)
2.8
1.5
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
2.8–3.0
1.5–2.5
1.2–1.8
1.2–1.8
1.2–1.8
1.2–1.8
2.8
1.5
2.8–3.0
1.5–2.5
2.8
1.5
2.8–3.0
1.5–2.5
For Tilden, Hibbing, Minorca, and
UTAC, the process specified in the 2016
FIP to either confirm or modify the NOX
emission limits within the established
ranges included the installation of a
CEMS, submission of an engineering
report to EPA, installation of NOX
reduction control technology,
submission of pellet quality analyses to
EPA, and submission to EPA of a report
to either confirm or modify the limit.
For any furnace without CEMS already
installed, CEMS installation was
required for each furnace by 6 months
after May 12, 2016, and the owner or
operator was required to submit
quarterly CEMS data to EPA after May
12, 2016, for the time periods specified
7 On November 15, 2016, the 8th Circuit Court of
Appeals terminated the June 14, 2013, stay and
extended the deadlines in the Original FIP by one
day for each day the court’s stay was in place. From
the day the 2013 FIP was effective to the day it was
stayed, 98 days elapsed (March 8, 2013, to June 14,
2013). See Order dated November 15, 2016, in
response to U.S. EPA’s Petition to reconsider the
Original FIP, EPA–R05OAR–2017–0066–0009 (8th
Cir. 2016). As a result, the deadlines contained in
the Original FIP still apply (e.g., 6 months after
March 8, 2013), only now from the date the stay
was terminated, minus the number of days that
elapsed prior to the stay being issued.
8 Taconite facilities typically operate 24 hours per
day and 720 is the number of hours in a 30-day
period; therefore, a 720-hour average is essentially
equivalent to a 30-day average.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
96156
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
below in Table 2. Engineering reports
containing detailed engineering
analyses and modeling of the selected
NOX reduction technology for each
furnace demonstrating that the
technology was designed to meet an
emission limit equal to the lower bound
of the established range were required to
be submitted to EPA by the deadlines
specified in Table 2. NOX reduction
technology was required to be installed
two months after the engineering report
submission deadline. Beginning on the
earlier of six months after the
installation of NOX reduction
technology or the deadline for
installation of the NOX reduction
technology, the owner or operator was
required to submit quarterly pellet
quality analyses to EPA, including an
explanation of causes for pellet samples
that failed to meet the acceptable range
for any pellet quality analysis factor, for
the time periods specified in Table 2. At
the end of the CEMS and pellet quality
data collection periods, the owner or
operator of each furnace may submit a
report to EPA to either confirm or
modify the NOX limits within the
bounds described in the 2016 FIP (and
above in this section). The 2016 FIP also
allows the owner or operator to submit
a report proposing a single NOX limit for
all fuels. The process for confirming or
modifying limits detailed in the 2016
FIP specifies that EPA’s determinations
shall be based on the appropriate UPL
equation, using CEMS data that meet
pellet quality specifications and proper
furnace/burner operation. For a more
detailed description of the process set
forth in the 2016 FIP to confirm or
modify the emission limits, see 40 CFR
52.1183 and 40 CFR 52.1235.
TABLE 2—TIMELINES OF PROCESSES TO CONFIRM OR MODIFY LIMITS
Period of
CEMS data
required for
submission
to EPA
Furnace
Engineering
report
deadline
NOX reduction
technology
installation
deadline
Period of
pellet
quality data
required for
submission
to EPA *
Report to
confirm or
modify limit
deadline
Months after May 12, 2016
Tilden Line 1 ........................................................................
Hibbing Line 1 ......................................................................
Hibbing Line 2 ......................................................................
Hibbing Line 3 ......................................................................
Minorca’s Indurating Furnace ..............................................
UTAC Line 1 ........................................................................
UTAC Line 2 ........................................................................
0–57
6–34
6–52
6–57
6–52
0–34
0–52
48
24
42
48
42
24
42
50
26
44
50
44
26
44
50–57
26–34
44–52
50–57
44–52
26–34
44–52
57
34
52
57
52
34
52
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
* If the owner or operator installed NOX reduction technology more than six months before the required date, pellet quality analyses were required to be submitted to EPA beginning six months after installation.
The 2016 FIP incorporates two UPL
equations to calculate emission limits.
The appropriate equation is determined
by the statistical distribution of the
hourly CEMS data. If the data are
normally distributed and statistically
independent, the equation in 40 CFR
52.1183(p)(1) and 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(1)
is used. If the data are not normally
distributed or are normally distributed
but not statistically independent, the
non-parametric equation in 40 CFR
52.1183(p)(2) and 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(2)
is used. None of the CEMS data
submitted are normally distributed and
statistically independent, therefore the
non-parametric equation is the
applicable equation for all limit setting
in this action.9
The non-parametric equation in the
2016 FIP calculates a 95th percentile
UPL by ranking 720-hour averages of
NOX emissions in lbs/MMBtu from
lowest to highest and identifying the
value at the 95th percentile of the data
set as the UPL and emission limit.10
9 Data distribution analyses are available in the
docket for this action.
10 Taconite facilities typically operate 24 hours
per day and 720 is the number of hours in a 30day period; therefore, a 720-hour average is
essentially equivalent to a 30-day average. For
facilities that both burn natural gas exclusively and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
While a 95th percentile UPL establishes
an emission rate that a source is
predicted to be below during at least 95
out of 100 averaging periods, it was not
EPA’s intent to set a limit that a source
would be expected to exceed five
percent of the time once the limit was
in place. Rather, EPA used the 95th
percentile UPL to ensure that the final
emission limits would be consistent
with the actual emission reduction
capabilities of the BART controls, as
required by 40 CFR 51.301, which
co-fire with coal, i.e., Tilden and UTAC, a 30-day
period may involve operation with only natural gas
as well as operation with co-firing of coal.
Therefore, the 2016 FIP established UPL equations
based on 720-hour averages to allow for the
separation of hours when burning only natural gas
from hours when co-firing with coal. When
calculating an emission limit that applies only
when burning natural gas, emissions are averaged
over 720 successive hours in which the unit burns
only natural gas. When calculating a co-firing
emission limit, emissions are averaged over 720
successive hours in which the unit burns a gas/coal
mix. All emission limit modifications were
calculated based on 720-hour averages, consistent
with the equations at 40 CFR 52.1183(p) and 40
CFR 52.1235(f). However, EPA is proposing
modified emission limits in the form of a 30-day
average if the facility burns only one fuel or if the
modified limit applies to all fuels. In those
circumstances, there is no need to be able to
separate the hourly data to determine compliance
with the emission limit.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
defines BART as ‘‘the degree of
reduction achievable.’’ 11 EPA expected
that during the eight-month CEMS data
collection period, furnace operators
would be adjusting numerous variables
to optimize control technology
performance, which would result in
higher emissions at times during the
initial ‘‘shakedown’’ period. Once the
eight-month data collection period was
over, EPA expected that the operators
would have gained sufficient experience
to run the furnaces and control
technologies with fewer adjustments,
meaning less emission variations and
lower emissions overall. EPA selected
the 95th percentile UPL to ensure the
elevated emissions expected during the
initial shakedown period would not
become the basis for final emission
limits.
However, once continuous data
collection began, the CEMS data did not
show the expected elevated emissions
levels during the shakedown period and
emissions were not consistently lower
toward the end of the data collection
period as compared to the beginning of
the period.12 Therefore, EPA has
11 April
16, 2016, 81 FR 21672, 21680.
emission limit calculation files in the
docket for this action.
12 See
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
determined that using the UPL equation
at the 99th percentile is more
appropriate to establish an emission
limit consistent with the actual
emission reduction capabilities of the
BART controls and is proposing to
modify the UPL equations used to
calculate both the NOX and SO2
emission limits to reflect use of the 99th
percentile. The emission limits EPA is
proposing in this action were calculated
using the UPL equations at 40 CFR
52.1183(p) and 40 CFR 52.1235(f) at the
99th percentile.13
A. Tilden
For Tilden’s indurating furnace,
Tilden Line 1 (EUKILN1), the 2016 FIP
established a specific NOX BART
emission limit of 2.8 pounds of NOX/
MMBtu when burning natural gas, while
allowing for potential modification of
the limit within the range of 2.8–3.0 lbs
NOX/MMBtu. Similarly, the 2016 FIP
established a specific NOX BART
emission limit of 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu
when co-firing coal and natural gas,
with an allowance for potential
modification of the limit within the
range of 1.5–2.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu.14 The
2016 FIP also allowed for the
establishment of a single NOX limit for
all fuels.15
Tilden submitted a partially complete
engineering report on May 21, 2020, and
submitted the final engineering report
on July 30, 2020. Tilden implemented
low-stoichiometry LNBs designed to
achieve an emission rate of 2.8 lbs NOX/
MMBtu when firing exclusively natural
gas and 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu when cofiring with coal, as described in the
engineering report submitted to EPA.
On February 12, 2021, Tilden
submitted a report requesting
modification of the NOX limits for Line
1 pursuant to 40 CFR 52.1183 (k)(1)(vi).
Tilden requested an emission limit of
3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu for all fuels.
Tilden’s limit modification request was
accompanied by CEMS data (in 30-day
rolling averages) from September 12,
2020, to February 2, 2021. On May 21,
2021, Tilden provided hourly emission
data for July 1, 2020, to February 11,
2021. Approximately half of these data
were collected when Tilden was cofiring with coal and half were collected
when Tilden was burning exclusively
natural gas. Tilden demonstrated that
when burning natural gas, NOX
emission rates recorded were higher
than the modeling results presented in
the engineering report, and above the
13 Data
analyses and emissions calculations are
available in the docket for this action.
14 40 CFR 52.1183(k)(1).
15 40 CFR 52.1183(k)(1)(viii).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
high end of the limit range established
in the 2016 FIP (2.8–3.0 lbs/MMBtu).
The CEMS data submitted to EPA when
burning coal recorded emission rates
within the range specified in the 2016
FIP (1.5–2.5 lbs/MMBtu). Tilden
explained that the furnace is unable to
achieve 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu when
burning exclusively natural gas and
would need to burn a minimum of 80%
coal when co-firing to meet a limit of 2.0
lbs NOX/MMBtu. Tilden stated a
preference to maximize natural gas
usage and supplement with solid fuel as
needed to meet NOX limits.16
The 2016 FIP provides Tilden the
option to propose, for EPA’s
consideration and approval, a single
NOX emission limit for all fuels based
on a 30-day rolling average. Citing the
CEMS data, Tilden requested a revised
NOX BART limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu
for all fuels that would apply on a
rolling 30-day average, contending that
this emission limit is the most stringent
limit that can be met without substantial
increases in coal usage, while
maintaining pellet quality standards.
Based on the equation set forth at 40
CFR 52.1183(p)(2), EPA calculated a
720-hour average NOX emission limit of
3.8 lbs NOX/MMBtu when burning
exclusively natural gas, and separately,
an emission limit of 1.9 lbs NOX/
MMBtu when burning mixed fuel.17
While CEMS data show the installed
emission control measures reduced NOX
emissions, the selected technology
failed to achieve emission rates within
the specified FIP ranges when burning
only natural gas (2.8–3.0 lbs NOX/
MMBtu). Using the non-parametric
equation with the full data set,
unseparated by fuel type, EPA
calculated a 720-hour average UPL of
3.7 lbs NOX/MMBtu. EPA evaluated
these CEMS data and considered
Tilden’s requested single NOX emission
limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu for all fuels
based on a 30-day rolling average, as
allowed at 40 CFR 52.1183(k)(1)(viii).
EPA has concluded that Tilden’s
requested emission limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/
MMBtu for all fuels based on a 30-day
rolling average is appropriate and
reflects BART. It allows Tilden to select
a fuel mix that maximizes natural gas
usage and minimizes coal usage if the
facility so chooses without exceeding
the natural gas emission limit range
established in the 2016 FIP. This has the
duel environmental (visibility) benefit
of minimizing NOX emissions by setting
16 See ‘‘Tilden NO limit modification report
X
(Feb. 12, 2021)_Redacted.pdf,’’ available in the
docket for this action.
17 See Tilden Emission Limit Calculations,
available in the docket for this action.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
96157
an emissions limit that is below the
calculated natural gas-only rate, and
also potentially minimizing the use of
coal and the associated SO2 emissions
from coal burning. Therefore, based on
these data and as provided at 40 CFR
52.1183(k)(1)(viii), EPA is proposing
that a modified limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/
MMBtu for all fuels, with compliance to
be determined on a rolling 30-day
average basis, reflects BART for the
Tilden Line 1 indurating furnace.
B. Hibbing
For Hibbing Lines 1, 2, and 3, the
2016 FIP established NOX BART
emission limits of 1.2 lbs NOX/MMBtu
that applied to each furnace
individually, with provisions allowing
for potential modification of the limits
within the range of 1.2–1.8 lbs NOX/
MMBtu.18
Hibbing implemented the NOX
reduction measures described in its
engineering report, submitted to EPA on
May 11, 2018, identified as LNBs in
conjunction with water injection, at
Hibbing Lines 1, 2, and 3. Hibbing
installed CEMS on Lines 1, 2, and 3 and
provided EPA with hourly NOX
emissions data on March 12, 2019,
September 11, 2020, and February 12,
2021, for Lines 1, 2 and 3, respectively,
documenting actual emissions after
installation of LNB technology.
Hibbing’s submittals included CEMS
data from July 12, 2018, to March 11,
2019, for Line 1; January 12, 2020,
through September 1, 2020, for Line 2;
and August 3, 2020, to February 11,
2021, for Line 3. The hourly CEMS data
identified hours excluded from the
limit-setting calculations because pellets
failed to meet pellet quality
specifications. Although the limitsetting period for Line 3 established in
the 2016 FIP began August 3, 2020, Line
3 did not operate during the period
between July 12 to August 3, 2020, due
to COVID-related reasons. Line 2 did not
operate from May 1, 2020, to July 31,
2020, during the limit setting period for
similar reasons. On November 25, 2020,
Hibbing provided additional
information requested by EPA,
including hourly CEMS data for Lines 1,
2, and 3 in Excel format to facilitate
independent calculation of emission
limits and identification of hours when
the burner was not operated within the
parameters modeled in the engineering
report.
The requirements at 40 CFR
52.1235((b)(1)(ii)(A)(6), (B)(6), and (C)(6)
set forth the process for submitting data
to support limit modifications under the
2016 FIP. At the time of the initial
18 See
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
40 CFR 52.1235((b)(1)(ii).
04DEP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
96158
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
CEMS data submissions, Hibbing
requested NOX emission limits of 1.7,
1.5, and 1.6 lbs NOX/MMBtu on Lines
1, 2, and 3, respectively. The facility
cited sub-zero temperatures and other
factors that may have affected the
calculated emission rates and restricted
production. Further, Hibbing provided
regression analyses assessing the
relationship between furnace feed rates
and NOX emission rates during the
limit-setting periods to support the
requested limit increases.
On October 22, 2021, Hibbing
submitted a request to EPA to establish
a crossline average emission limit for
Lines 1, 2, and 3 of 1.6 lbs NOX/MMBtu,
with compliance to be determined on a
30-day rolling average basis. The
submittal included hourly CEMS data
for the same time periods as Hibbing’s
initial limit modification submittals and
a regression analysis assessing the
relationship between furnace feed rates
and NOX emission rates during the
limit-setting periods to support the
requested limit increases. The hourly
CEMS data submitted to EPA included
a description of the failure analyses
identifying potential reasons for pellets
failing to meet pellet quality
specifications for hours excluded in the
limit-setting calculation.
There is no basis in the FIP for
adjusting emission limits to account for
possible future production levels based
upon an assumed correlation between
feed rates and emissions. Therefore, in
accordance with 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(2),
EPA calculated 720-hour average NOX
emission limits of 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu
for Line 1, 1.4 lbs NOX/MMBtu for Line
2, and 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu for Line 3.19
Under the BART Guidelines, a source
may be permitted to ‘‘ ‘average’
emissions across any set of BARTeligible emission units within a
fenceline, so long as the emission
reductions from each pollutant being
controlled for BART would be equal to
those reductions that would be obtained
by simply controlling each of the BARTeligible units that constitute BARTeligible sources.’’ 20 EPA averaged the
single line limits described above and
calculated a crossline 720-hour average
emission limit of 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu.
The NOX controls have been installed
and are being operated on all three
lines. Based on EPA’s analysis, this
crossline average emission limit is equal
to the reductions that would be obtained
by controlling each line separately.
Therefore, based on these data and as
provided at 40 CFR
19 See Hibbing Emission Limit Calculations,
available in the docket for this action.
20 40 CFR part 51, appendix Y, at V.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
52.12335(b)(1)(ii)(A)(7), (B)(7), and
(C)(7), and consistent with 40 CFR
51.308(e) and 40 CFR part 51, appendix
Y, at V, EPA is proposing that a
crossline average emission limit of 1.5
lbs NOX/MMBtu for Hibbing Lines 1, 2,
and 3, with compliance to be
determined on a 30-day rolling average
basis, reflects NOX BART for Hibbing
Lines 1, 2, and 3.
C. Minorca
For Minorca’s indurating furnace, the
2016 FIP established a NOX BART
emission limit of 1.2 lbs NOX/MMBtu,
while allowing for potential
modification of the limit within the
range of 1.2–1.8 lbs NOX/MMBtu.21
On November 12, 2019, Minorca
submitted an engineering report to EPA
which identified the low NOX
technology to be installed on Line 1 as
an LNB, water injection, and utilization
of specific operating parameters. The
combined use of these measures was
projected to meet an emission limit of
1.2 lbs NOX/MMBtu based on a 30-day
average. On September 11, 2020,
Minorca submitted CEMS data for the
period January 12, 2020, to September
10, 2020, excluding the CEMS values
that did not meet pellet quality
specifications, consistent with the 2016
FIP.22
On October 22, 2021, Minorca
submitted supplemental information
consisting of 720-hour averages of
CEMS data from January 12, 2020,
through September 30, 2021. Adding the
data from September 10, 2020, through
September 30, 2021, to the original data
set, Minorca calculated an emission
limit of 1.6 lbs NOX/MMBtu using the
equation at 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(2).
Minorca then performed a regression
analysis assessing the relationship
between furnace pellet production rates
and NOX emission rates during the
limit-setting period to support the
requested limit increase. Minorca cited
the climate in Minnesota and other
factors that may have affected
production rates in its explanation of
why the emission limit should be
adjusted to 1.7 lbs NOX/MMBtu.
Based on the non-parametric equation
at 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(2), EPA evaluated
the 720-hour average NOX emission data
for the full data set submitted and
calculated an emission limit of 1.6 lbs
21 See
40 CFR 52.1235((b)(1)(v).
data in the September 11, 2020,
submittal was presented as 720-hour rolling
averages. On November 25, 2020, Minorca provided
the hourly CEMS data for the same January 12,
2020, to September 10, 2020, time period to allow
for independent calculation of 720-hour averages.
22 CEMS
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NOX/MMBtu.23 There is no basis in the
FIP for adjusting emission limits to
account for possible future production
levels based upon an assumed
correlation between feed rates and
emissions. Therefore, based on these
data and as provided at 40 CFR
52.1235(b)(1)(v)(7), EPA is proposing
that a modified limit of 1.6 lbs NOX/
MMBtu, with compliance to be
determined on a rolling 30-day average
basis, reflects BART for the Minorca
Line 1 indurating furnace.
D. UTAC
For UTAC’s indurating furnaces,
Grate Kiln Line 1 (EU040) and Grate
Kiln Line 2 (EU042), the 2016 FIP
established specific NOX BART limits of
2.8 pounds of NOX/MMBtu when
burning natural gas, while allowing for
potential modification of the limits
within the range of 2.8–3.0 lbs NOX/
MMBtu. Similarly, the 2016 FIP
established specific NOX BART limits of
1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu when co-firing coal
and natural gas, while allowing for
potential modification of the limits
within the range of 1.5–2.5 lbs NOX/
MMBtu.24 The 2016 FIP also allowed for
the establishment of a single NOX limit
for all fuels.
UTAC submitted an engineering
report for Line 1 on May 11, 2018.
UTAC installed and began operating the
sub-stoichiometric staged combustion
LNB designed to achieve an emission
rate of 2.8 lbs NOX/MMBtu when firing
exclusively natural gas and 1.5 lbs NOX/
MMBtu when co-firing with coal, as
described in the engineering report
submitted to EPA. UTAC subsequently
made modifications to the Line 1 LNB
in September 2018. On March 12, 2019,
UTAC submitted a report requesting
modification of the co-firing NOX limit
for Line 1 to 2.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu, based
upon 720-hour averages from February
2019.
On November 12, 2019, UTAC
submitted a report to EPA to address the
requirement for an engineering report
for Line 2. On November 12, 2021,
UTAC submitted information on the
LNB selected for Line 2, a modified
version of the LNB installed on Line 1.
This submittal included a report on
computational fluid dynamics modeling
demonstrating the burner was designed
to achieve an emission rate of 2.8 lbs
NOX/MMBtu when firing exclusively
natural gas and 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu
when co-firing with coal. On April 11,
2023, UTAC submitted an analysis of
Line 1 and Line 2 NOX performance
23 See Minorca Emission Limit Calculations,
available in the docket for this action.
24 40 CFR 52.1235(b)(1)(iv).
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
post LNB installations and requested a
crossline average limit of 3.0 lb NOX/
MMBtu for all fuels, based on a 30-day
rolling average. Along with the analysis,
UTAC submitted 720-hour averages of
total lbs NOX/MMBtu for Lines 1 and 2
combined for the time period of January
25, 2022, to March 26, 2023. UTAC also
submitted hourly CEMS and process
information for this time period, which
UTAC claimed as confidential business
information, so that EPA could verify
the calculations.
Based on the equation set forth at 40
CFR 52.1235(f)(2), EPA calculated 720hour average NOX emission limits of 2.3
lbs NOX/MMBtu and 3.6 lbs NOX/
MMBtu when burning exclusively
natural gas for Lines 1 and 2,
respectively. Separately, EPA calculated
an emission limit of 3.1 lbs NOX/
MMBtu when burning mixed fuel on
Line 2. There were 475 hours of cofiring data for Line 1, which is not
sufficient to calculate a 720-hour
average NOX emission limit. EPA also
calculated an emission limit of 3.1 lbs
NOX/MMBtu when combining hourly
emissions data for both lines and all
fuels.25 While CEMS data show the
installed emission control measures
reduced NOX emissions, the selected
technology failed to achieve emission
rates within the specified FIP ranges,
particularly when evaluating separate
limits for each fuel type.
As discussed in II.B., under the BART
Guidelines, a source may be permitted
to ‘‘ ‘average’ emissions across any set of
BART-eligible emission units within a
fenceline, so long as the emission
reductions from each pollutant being
controlled for BART would be equal to
those reductions that would be obtained
by simply controlling each of the BARTeligible units that constitute BARTeligible sources.’’ 26 EPA evaluated the
CEMS data and considered UTAC’s
requested crossline average NOX
emission limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu
for all fuels, for Lines 1 and 2, with
compliance to be determined on a 30day rolling average basis. Based on
EPA’s analysis, this crossline average
emission limit is equal to the reductions
that would be obtained by controlling
each line separately and is within the
natural gas NOX emission limit range
established in the 2016 FIP. A single
fuel-neutral emission limit allows
UTAC to select a fuel mix that
maximizes natural gas usage and
minimizes coal usage without exceeding
the natural gas emission limit range
established in the 2016 FIP. This has the
25 See United Taconite Emission Limit
Calculations, available in the docket for this action.
26 40 CFR part 51, appendix Y, at V.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
dual environmental (visibility) benefit
of minimizing NOX emissions by setting
an emissions limit that is below the
calculated natural gas-only rate, and
also potentially minimizing the use of
coal and the associated SO2 emissions
from burning coal. Therefore, based on
these data and as provided at 40 CFR
52.1235(b)(1)(iv)(A)(8) and (B)(8), and
consistent with 40 CFR 51.308(e) and 40
CFR part 51, appendix Y, at V, EPA is
proposing that a crossline emission
limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu for all fuels
for UTAC Lines 1 and 2, based on a
rolling 30-day average, reflects BART for
UTAC Lines 1 and 2.
III. Basis for SO2 Limits
As previously described, the Original
FIP determined that existing controls
reflected SO2 BART for Minorca,
Hibbing, and Northshore, and
established SO2 emission limits for each
furnace, with the option or requirement,
depending on the facility, that the
owner or operator submit one year of
CEMS data to EPA to set a revised SO2
emission limit calculated using the
appropriate UPL equation. The 2016 FIP
limited the sulfur content of the coal
burned at Tilden, set an SO2 emission
limit, and required Tilden to submit one
year of CEMS data to EPA to set a
revised SO2 emission limit calculated
using the appropriate UPL equation. For
a more detailed description of the
existing SO2 emission limits and the
process set forth to modify the emission
limits, see 40 CFR 52.1235 (Hibbing,
Minorca, and Northshore) and 40 CFR
52.1183 (Tilden). As discussed above in
II., EPA has calculated the emission
limits using the appropriate UPL
equation at the 99th percentile.
A. Tilden
For Tilden, the 2016 FIP established
a specific SO2 BART emission limit of
500 pounds of SO2 per hour (lbs/hr) for
Grate Kiln Line 1, with no more than
0.60 percent sulfur by weight based on
a monthly block average for any coal
usage. The 2016 FIP also required that
the owner or operator of Tilden
calculate an SO2 emission limit based
on one year of hourly CEMS emissions
data using the appropriate UPL equation
provided in 40 CFR 52.1183(p) and
submit such calculations and data to
EPA by 36 months after May 12, 2016.
The 2016 FIP provides that EPA may
revise the emission limit downward to
reflect the calculated SO2 emission rate;
however, EPA may not increase the SO2
limit above 500 lbs SO2/hr.
On October 1, 2018, Tilden submitted
SO2 emissions data to EPA reflecting
Tilden burning exclusively natural gas
during the period March 28, 2017,
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
96159
through March 27, 2018. Citing various
production-related concerns, Tilden
adjusted its calculated limit to account
for expected higher production capacity
and higher ore sulfur content, which
resulted in an adjusted expected
emission rate of 568 lbs SO2/hr. Tilden
requested an SO2 emission limit of 500
lbs/hour for all fuels, regardless of
natural gas or coal fuel usage, as
established in the 2016 FIP. On
November 10, 2022, Tilden submitted
hourly SO2 data for Line 1 from the
same time period of March 28, 2017,
through March 27, 2018, during which
time Tilden was exclusively burning
natural gas. On March 1, 2023, Tilden
provided hourly co-firing CEMS data for
July 12, 2018, through July 11, 2019. On
March 30, 2023, Tilden provided hourly
CEMS data for the time period March
27, 2018, through March 26, 2019,
which included both co-firing and
natural gas-only operation.
The 2016 FIP established a single SO2
emission limit to apply regardless of
natural gas or coal fuel usage, which
Tilden must meet at all times.
Consistent with this approach, and
because SO2 emissions are higher when
Tilden is co-firing and the emission
limit must be met at all times, EPA is
proposing to base the emission limit
modification calculations on all cofiring data included in Tilden’s March
1, 2023, and March 30, 2023, CEMS data
submissions. Based on the equation set
forth at 40 CFR 52.1183(p)(2), EPA
calculated an emission limit of 189 lbs
SO2/hour consistent with this
approach.27 There is no basis in the FIP
for adjusting emission limits to account
for possible future production levels or
possible higher ore sulfur content.
Therefore, based on these data and as
provided at 40 CFR 52.1183(k)(3), EPA
is proposing that an SO2 limit of 189 lbs
SO2/hr for the Tilden Line 1 indurating
furnace, with compliance to be
determined on a 30-day rolling average
basis, reflects SO2 BART for Tilden Line
1.
B. Hibbing
For Hibbing Lines 1, 2, and 3, the
Original FIP set an aggregate emission
limit of 247.8 lbs SO2/hr, based on a 30day rolling average and excluding
emissions resulting from the
combustion of fuel oil, and provided
Hibbing the option of calculating a
revised SO2 emission limit by 20
months after March 8, 2013, based on
one year of hourly CEMS emissions data
and the non-parametric UPL equation. If
any fuel oil is burned after the first day
27 See Tilden Emission Limit Calculations,
available in the docket for this action.
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
96160
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
that SO2 CEMS were required to be
operational, the 2016 FIP requires
Hibbing to submit the gallons of fuel oil
burned per hour, the sulfur content of
the fuel oil, and the SO2 emissions in
pounds per hour, so that EPA can
establish an SO2 emissions limit for fuel
oil. Hibbing chose not to calculate a
revised SO2 emission limit.28
C. Minorca
For Minorca, the Original FIP set an
emission limit of 38.16 lbs SO2/hour,
based on a 30-day rolling average and
excluding emissions when Minorca is
combusting fuel oil, with an allowance
for potential modification of the limit
based on one year of hourly CEMS data
submitted to EPA by 20 months after
March 8, 2013. If any fuel oil is burned
after the first day that SO2 CEMS were
required to be operational, the 2016 FIP
requires Minorca to submit the gallons
of fuel oil burned per hour, the sulfur
content of the fuel oil, and the SO2
emissions in pounds per hour so that
EPA can establish an SO2 emissions
limit for fuel oil.
On April 6, 2018, Minorca submitted
a request to modify the SO2 limit
established in the 2016 FIP. Minorca
ranked hourly data from the period
March 1, 2017, through March 31, 2018,
adjusted the calculated limit based on
potential increased production rates,
and requested an emission limit of 73.79
lbs SO2/hour. On October 14, 2019,
Minorca submitted additional hourly
SO2 CEMS emission data for the time
period of September 8, 2018, through
September 7, 2019, revising their
request to an emission limit of 208.66
lbs SO2/hr. Minorca adjusted the
calculated limit based on potential
increased production rates, maximum
ore sulfur content based on a ratio of
maximum percent sulfur, and pellet
type.
Using the equation set forth at 40 CFR
52.1235(f)(2) and the most recent CEMS
data from September 8, 2018, through
September 7, 2019, EPA calculated an
SO2 emission limit of 68.2 lbs SO2/
hour.29 There is no basis in the FIP for
adjusting emission limits to account for
possible future production levels or
possible higher ore sulfur content.
Therefore, based on these data and as
provided at 40 CFR 52.1235(b)(2)(v) and
40 CFR 51.308(e), EPA is proposing that
an emission limit of 68.2 lbs SO2/hr,
based on a 30-day rolling average,
28 While Hibbing’s SO BART limit is not being
2
modified, the regulatory text at 40 CFR
52.1235(b)(2)(ii) is being revised to remove the
original limit modification provisions and clarify
that Hibbing’s SO2 BART limit is final.
29 See Minorca Emission Limit Calculations,
available in the docket for this action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
reflects SO2 BART for the Minorca
indurating furnace.
D. Northshore
For Northshore, the Original FIP set
an aggregate emission limit of 39.0 lbs
SO2/hour for Furnace 11 (EU100/
EU104) and Furnace 12 (EU110/EU114),
based on a 30-day rolling average and
excluding emissions resulting from the
combustion of fuel oil, with a
requirement that the owner or operator
calculate a revised limit based on one
year of hourly CEMS data and submit
such data and calculations to EPA by 20
months after March 8, 2013.
On April 11, 2018, Northshore
submitted an SO2 emission limit
modification request which included
CEMS data from January 16, 2017,
through January 15, 2018. Northshore
adjusted the calculated emission limit
based on potential increased production
rates and requested a limit of 22.1 lbs
SO2/hour.
On November 21, 2018, Northshore
submitted a revised limit modification
request of 49 lbs SO2/hr. This limit
modification request included data for
the time period of January 16, 2017,
through January 15, 2018, and adjusted
the calculated limit based on potential
increased production rates and potential
increases in ore sulfur content. On
November 10, 2022, Northshore
submitted hourly SO2 CEMS data for the
period of January 16, 2017, through
January 15, 2018, as requested by EPA,
to allow for EPA’s independent
calculation of emission limits.
Using the equation set forth at
52.1235(f)(2) and the hourly SO2 CEMS
data from January 16, 2017 through
January 15, 2018, EPA calculated an
aggregate SO2 emission limit of 17.0 lbs
SO2/hour for Furnaces 11 and 12.30
There is no basis in the FIP for adjusting
emission limits to account for possible
future production levels or possible
higher ore sulfur content. Therefore,
based on these data and as provided at
40 CFR 52.1235(b)(2)(vi), EPA is
proposing that an aggregate SO2
emission limit of 17.0 lbs SO2/hr for
Northshore Furnaces 11 and 12, based
on a 30-day rolling average, reflects SO2
BART for Northshore.
7501 of this title), or any other
applicable requirement of this chapter.’’
Based on the following analysis, we find
that our revisions to the 2016 FIP are
consistent with CAA section 110(l)
because they will not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment or reasonable further
progress or any other applicable
requirements of the CAA.
IV. CAA Section 110(l)
Under CAA section 110(l) (sometimes
referred to as an ‘‘anti-backsliding’’
provision), EPA cannot approve a plan
revision ‘‘if the revision would interfere
with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (as defined in section
A. NOX Emission Limits
When the 2016 FIP was promulgated,
NOX control technology had not yet
been installed on the furnaces at Tilden,
Hibbing, Minorca, and UTAC.
Therefore, EPA established initial
emission limitations based on the
modeled (estimated) performance of the
proposed technology along with a
procedure to refine and modify the
emission limits within a specified range
based upon CEMS data collected after
installation of the NOX control
technology. The 2016 FIP also allowed
for the establishment of a single NOX
limit for all fuels. However, the NOX
emission limits in the 2016 FIP are not
enforceable and final until EPA takes
action to confirm or modify the initial
emission limits established in the 2016
FIP. Because the NOX limits established
in the 2016 FIP have not been confirmed
and made enforceable through the
procedures set forth in the 2016 FIP,
and are not currently enforceable, the
proposed NOX emission limits do not
alter any existing enforceable limits,
since there are no current enforceable
limits. Therefore, approval of the
proposed NOX limits would not
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment or
reasonable further progress, or any other
applicable requirement of the CAA.
Additionally, even if EPA were to
evaluate the proposed NOX emission
limits in relation to the relevant
provisions of the 2016 FIP, we believe
the FIP will not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment or reasonable further
progress, or any other applicable
requirements of the CAA.31 EPA’s
proposed action will complete the
process set forth in the 2016 FIP to
finalize enforceable NOX emission
limits for Tilden, Hibbing, UTAC, and
Minorca within ranges previously
established. The NOX emission limits
EPA is proposing reflect BART because
they were calculated using the corrected
UPL equation and actual emission data
recorded by CEMS, after installation of
the required low-NOX technology,
pursuant to the procedures set forth in
30 See Northshore Emission Limit Calculations,
available in the docket for this action.
31 40 CFR 52.1183(k)(1)(viii),
52.1235(b)(1)(iv)(A)(8) and 52.1235(b)(1)(iv)(B)(8).
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
the 2016 FIP. While crossline averaging
was not addressed in the 2016 FIP,
under the BART Guidelines, a source
may be permitted to ‘‘ ‘average’
emissions across any set of BARTeligible emission units within a
fenceline, as long as the emission
reductions from each pollutant being
controlled for BART would be equal to
those reductions that would be obtained
by simply controlling each of the BARTeligible units that constitute BARTeligible sources.’’ 32 Based on EPA’s
analysis, the crossline average emission
limits proposed for Hibbing and UTAC
are equal to the reductions that would
be obtained by controlling each line
separately.
The proposed NOX emission limits do
not reflect a change in EPA’s BART
determination. Rather, the proposed
limits were calculated using CEMS data
and the corrected UPL equation,
following the procedure set forth in the
2016 FIP, to more accurately reflect an
emission limit consistent with the
actual emission reduction capabilities of
the BART controls and within the
natural gas ranges established in the
2016 FIP. Therefore, there are no
expected increases in NOX emissions
compared to the ranges set in the 2016
FIP.
B. SO2 Emission Limits
EPA is proposing to revise the SO2
emission limits applicable to Minorca,
Northshore, and Tilden. Minorca and
Northshore are straight-grate furnaces
that do not co-fire with coal; SO2
emissions from these sources result
from sulfur in the ore processed in the
furnaces. As discussed previously,
when the Original FIP was promulgated,
SO2 BART for Minorca and Northshore
was established as no further controls.
EPA set initial SO2 emission limits
based on limited stack test data and
established a procedure to refine those
limits when CEMS data became
available. EPA is proposing to modify
the Minorca emission limit from 38.16
lbs SO2/hour to 68.2 lbs SO2/hour and
the Northshore emission limit from 39.0
lbs SO2/hour to 17.0 lbs SO2/hour.
These proposed revised emission limits
do not reflect a change in EPA’s BART
determination or in operations at the
facilities that would lead to an increase
or decrease in SO2 emissions. Rather,
the emission limits EPA is proposing
establish emission limits that more
accurately reflect BART because they
were calculated using the corrected UPL
equation and actual emission data
recorded by CEMS, pursuant to the
procedures set forth in the Original FIP.
32 40
CFR part 51, appendix Y, at V.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
Similarly, the 2016 FIP established
SO2 BART for Tilden as a limit on the
sulfur content of the coal and no further
controls, and set an SO2 emission limit
for Tilden along with a process to
modify that limit when CEMS data
became available. EPA is not proposing
to revise any limits on the sulfur content
of coal at Tilden. EPA is only proposing
to modify Tilden’s emissions limit from
500 lbs SO2/hour to 189 lbs SO2/hour.
The revised emission limit was
calculated using the corrected UPL
equation and actual emission data
recorded by CEMS, pursuant to the
procedures set forth in the 2016 FIP.
In sum, as a result of the revised SO2
emissions limits described above, EPA
does not expect changes in SO2
emissions from these sources. The limits
do not reflect a change in EPA’s BART
determination or in operations at the
facilities. Rather, the proposed limits
more accurately reflect actual emissions
that were calculated using newly
available CEMS data and the corrected
UPL equation.
C. Regional Haze SIPs
On June 12, 2012 (77 FR 34801), EPA
approved Minnesota’s regional haze
plan for the first implementation
planning period as satisfying the
applicable requirements in 40 CFR
51.308, except for BART emission limits
for the taconite facilities. Among the
regional haze plan elements approved
were Minnesota’s long-term strategy for
making reasonable progress toward
visibility goals. Minnesota’s long-term
strategy did not rely on the achievement
of any particular degree of emission
control from the taconite plants to
achieve reasonable progress goals.
On December 3, 2012 (77 FR 71533),
EPA approved Michigan’s regional haze
plan for the first implementation
planning period as satisfying the
applicable requirements in 40 CFR
51.308, except for BART emission limits
for Tilden, St. Mary’s Cement, and
Escanaba Paper Company. Among the
regional haze plan elements approved
was Michigan’s long-term strategy for
making reasonable progress toward
visibility goals. Michigan’s long-term
strategy did not rely on the achievement
of any particular degree of emission
control from the taconite plants to
achieve reasonable progress goals.
On August 23, 2021, Michigan
submitted a revision to their regional
haze SIP for the second implementation
planning period. Michigan’s submittal
provided a long-term strategy and
reasonable progress goals that included
2028 emission projections for Tilden
based on a 2016 modeling platform
developed by LADCO that did not rely
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
96161
on emission limits or ranges in the 2016
FIP.
On December 20, 2022, Minnesota
submitted a revision to its regional haze
SIP for the second implementation
period. Minnesota’s long-term strategy
included implementation of the current
applicable limits and ranges in the
Original FIP and 2016 FIP for Hibbing,
Minorca, UTAC, and Northshore.
However, in applying the long-term
strategy to develop its reasonable
progress goals, Minnesota used 2028
projected emissions modeling that
relied on the 2016 FIP limits only for
UTAC and not for Hibbing, Minorca, or
Northshore. For Hibbing and Minorca,
Minnesota’s modeling utilized 2028
projected emissions provided by
LADCO using the 2016 emissions
modeling platform since CEMS data was
not available at the time. For
Northshore, Minnesota accounted for
the facility being idled until 2031,
which was incorporated into an
enforceable agreement as an
Administrative Order by Consent issued
by the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency to Northshore and ClevelandCliffs, Inc. To project 2028 emissions for
UTAC, Minnesota used 2017 CEMS data
to convert NOX and SO2 emissions and
associated heat input into emission rates
that allowed for a comparison to the
limits and ranges in the 2016 FIP.
Minnesota kept heat input rates the
same and assumed compliance at the
least stringent end of the emission limit
ranges (e.g., for an emission limit range
of 2.8–3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu, Minnesota
assumed 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu in the
emission calculations), resulting in
conservative emission projections for
2028. Using a photochemical model
based on the 2028 emission projections
for all selected sources in their regional
haze plan, including the taconite
facilities, Minnesota estimated future
visibility and established their
reasonable progress goals.
Although EPA has not yet taken final
action on the regional haze SIP revisions
submitted by Michigan and Minnesota
for the second implementation period,
the assumptions used in the long-term
strategies and reasonable progress goals
were no more stringent than the
currently applicable Original FIP and
2016 FIP emission limits and ranges or
the revised limits we are proposing in
this action. Therefore, the revised NOX
emission limits for Tilden, Hibbing,
UTAC, Minorca, and Northshore
represent greater control overall than
was assumed in Michigan’s and
Minnesota’s long-term strategy and
would not result in a degradation of the
reasonable progress goals required by 40
CFR 51.308(d)(1).
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
96162
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
D. National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) and Reasonable
Further Progress
With respect to requirements
concerning attainment of the NAAQS
and reasonable further progress, EPA is
proposing to finalize NOX BART
emission limits for seven subject-toBART units at four facilities within the
ranges established in the 2016 FIP. EPA
is also proposing to finalize SO2
emission limits for three facilities which
will not result in an increase in SO2
emissions. Thus, the proposed FIP
revision will not interfere with
attainment and reasonable further
progress requirements.
E. Conclusion
We find that these revisions are
consistent with CAA section 110(l). The
previous sections of the notice explain
how the proposed FIP revision will
comply with applicable regional haze
requirements and general
implementation plan requirements and
demonstrate that it will not interfere
with any regional haze program
requirements, attainment and
reasonable further progress, or any other
requirement of the CAA.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
V. Environmental Justice
Considerations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal
agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice (EJ) part of
their mission by identifying and
addressing, as appropriate,
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
of their programs, policies, and
activities on communities with EJ
concerns.
EPA believes that the human health
and environmental conditions that exist
prior to this action do not result in
disproportionate and adverse effects on
communities with EJ concerns. To
identify environmental burdens and
susceptible populations in communities
nearby the Tilden, Hibbing, Minorca,
Northshore, and UTAC facilities, and to
examine the implications of the
proposed NOX and SO2 emission limits,
EPA utilized the EJScreen tool to
evaluate environmental and
demographic indicators within a 3-mile
buffer, a 10-mile buffer, and the county
that each facility is located in
(Marquette County, Michigan for Tilden;
St. Louis County, Minnesota for
Hibbing, Minorca, and UTAC; and Lake
County, Minnesota for Northshore).
EPA’s screening-level analysis
indicates that communities near the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
facilities affected by this action score
below the national average for the
EJScreen ‘‘Demographic Index’’, which
is the average of an area’s percent
minority and percent low-income
populations, i.e., the two demographic
indicators explicitly named in Executive
Order 12898. Additionally, the results
indicate that these areas score below the
80th percentile (in comparison to the
nation as a whole) in the 13 EJ Indexes
established by EPA, which include a
combination of environmental and
demographic information. EPA has
provided that if any of the EJ indexes for
the areas under consideration are at or
above the 80th percentile nationally,
then further review may be appropriate.
As discussed in the EPA’s EJ technical
guidance, communities with EJ
concerns often experience greater
exposure and disease burdens than the
general population, which can increase
their susceptibility to adverse health
effects from environmental stressors.
EPA believes that this action is not
likely to result in new disproportionate
and adverse effects on communities
with EJ concerns. This action proposes
to set final NOX and SO2 emission limits
which are not expected to result in new
or increased burdens on residents,
including those in communities of EJ
concern, as specified in Executive Order
12898.
EPA invited the identification of EJ
and other concerns during its Tribal
consultations which occurred prior to
proposing emission limits for all five
taconite facilities. No EJ concerns were
raised in the context of this action. We
have determined that this rulemaking
will not have disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects on communities
with EJ concerns. The information
supporting this Executive Order review
is contained in the docket for this
action, including the EJSCREEN reports
considering a 3-mile buffer, a 10-mile
buffer, and the county that each taconite
facility is in.
VI. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to modify the UPL
equations used to establish NOX and
SO2 emission limits and to finalize NOX
and/or SO2 limits for the indurating
furnaces at five taconite facilities in
accordance with the procedure set forth
in the 2016 FIP. Specifically, EPA is
proposing to approve the following NOX
limits, with compliance to be
determined on a rolling 30-day average:
3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu for all fuels for
Tilden Line 1; a crossline average limit
of 1.5 lb NOX/MMBtu for Hibbing Lines
1, 2, and 3; a crossline average emission
limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu for all fuels
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
for UTAC Lines 1 and 2; and 1.6 lbs
NOX/MMBtu for Minorca’s indurating
furnace. EPA is proposing to approve
the following SO2 limits, with
compliance to be determined on a
rolling 30-day average: 189 lbs SO2/hr
for all fuels for Tilden Line 1; an
aggregate emission limit of 247.8 lbs
SO2/hr for Hibbing Lines 1, 2, and 3;
68.2 lbs SO2/hr for Minorca’s indurating
furnace; and an aggregate limit of 17.0
lbs SO2/hr for Northshore Furnaces 11
and 12.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory
Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866, as amended by
Executive Order 14094, and was
therefore not subject to a requirement
for Executive Order 12866 review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed action does not impose
an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Because the FIP applies to just the
taconite facilities in Michigan and
Minnesota, the Paperwork Reduction
Act does not apply. See 5 CFR 1320.3(c).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this proposed action will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. This proposed action
will not impose any requirements on
small entities. This action, if finalized,
will add additional controls to certain
sources. None of these sources are
owned by small entities, and therefore
are not small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This proposed action does not contain
any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The proposed action
imposes no enforceable duty on any
state, local or Tribal governments or the
private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This proposed action does not have
federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states,
on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This proposed action does not have
Tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will not have
substantial direct effects on Tribal
governments. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this action.
Consistent with the EPA Policy on
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribes, EPA did discuss this
action in conference calls with the
Michigan and Minnesota Tribes.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it is not 3(f)(1)
significant as defined in Executive
Order 12866, and because EPA does not
believe the environmental health or
safety risks addressed by this action
present a disproportionate risk to
children. To the extent this action, if
finalized, will limit emissions of NOX
and SO2 emissions, the rule will have a
beneficial effect on children’s health by
reducing air pollution.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22,
2001), because it is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations and Executive
Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation’s
Commitment to Environmental Justice
for All
EPA believes that the human health
and environmental conditions that exist
prior to this action do not result in
disproportionate and adverse effects on
communities with Environmental
Justice concerns. This proposed FIP
limits emissions of NOX and SO2 from
five taconite facilities in Michigan and
Minnesota. EPA believes that this action
is not likely to result in new
disproportionate and adverse effects on
communities with environmental justice
concerns.
EPA performed an EJ analysis, as is
described above in the section titled,
‘‘Environmental Justice
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
Considerations.’’ The analysis was done
for the purpose of providing additional
context and information about this
rulemaking to the public, not as a basis
of the action. Due to the nature of the
action being taken here, this action is
expected to have a neutral to positive
impact on the air quality of the affected
area. In addition, there is no information
in the record upon which this decision
is based inconsistent with the stated
goal of E.O. 12898 of achieving EJ for
communities with EJ concerns.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Regional haze,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Michael S. Regan,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, EPA proposes to amend title
40 CFR part 52 as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. Section 52.1183 is amended by:
a. in paragraph (k) revising (1), (3), (4)
and (5);
■ b. in paragraph (l) revising (3), (4)(v)
and (4)(xii);
■ c. in paragraph (n) revising (1) and (2);
and
■ d. removing and reserving paragraph
(p).
The revisions read as follows:
■
■
§ 52.1183
Visibility protection.
*
*
*
*
*
(k) Tilden Mining Company, or any
subsequent owner/operator of the
Tilden Mining Company facility in
Ishpeming, Michigan, shall meet the
following requirements:
(1) NOX Emission Limits.
(i) An emission limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/
MMBTU, based on a 30-day rolling
average, shall apply to Tilden Grate Kiln
Line 1 (EUKILN1) beginning January 3,
2025.
(ii) Compliance with this emission
limit shall be demonstrated with data
collected by a continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) for NOX.
(2) SO2 Emission Limits. * * *
(3) The owner or operator of the
Tilden Grate Kiln Line 1 (EUKILN1)
furnace shall meet an emission limit of
189.0 lbs SO2/hr, based on a 30-day
rolling average, beginning on January 3,
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
96163
2025. Compliance with this emission
limit shall be demonstrated with data
collected by a continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) for SO2.
Beginning November 12, 2016, any coal
burned on Tilden Grate Kiln Line 1
shall have no more than 0.60 percent
sulfur by weight based on a monthly
block average. The sampling and
calculation methodology for
determining the sulfur content of coal
must be described in the monitoring
plan required for this furnace.
(4) Emissions resulting from the
combustion of fuel oil are not included
in the calculation of the 30-day rolling
average. However, if any fuel oil is
burned after the first day that SO2 CEMS
are required to be operational, then the
information specified in (k)(5) must be
submitted, for each calendar year, to the
Regional Administrator at
R5ARDReporting@epa.gov no later than
30 days after the end of each calendar
year so that a limit can be set.
(5) Records shall be kept for any day
during which fuel oil is burned as fuel
(either alone or blended with other
fuels) in Grate Kiln Line 1. These
records must include, at a minimum,
the gallons of fuel oil burned per hour,
the sulfur content of the fuel oil, and the
SO2 emissions in pounds per hour. If
any fuel oil is burned after the first day
that SO2 CEMS are required to be
operational, then the records must be
submitted, for each calendar year, to the
Regional Administrator at
R5ARDReporting@epa.gov no later than
30 days after the end of each calendar
year.
(l) Testing and monitoring.
* * *
(3) The owner or operator shall
install, certify, calibrate, maintain, and
operate one or more continuous diluent
monitor(s) (O2 or CO2) and continuous
stack gas flow rate monitor(s) on Tilden
Grate Kiln Line 1 to allow conversion of
the NOX and SO2 concentrations to
units of the standard (lbs/MMBTU and
lbs/hr, respectively) unless a
demonstration is made that a diluent
monitor and/or continuous flow rate
monitor are not needed for the owner or
operator to demonstrate compliance
with applicable emission limits in units
of the standard.
(4) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(v) The owner or operator of each
CEMS must furnish the Regional
Administrator a written report of the
results of each quarterly performance
evaluation and a data accuracy
assessment pursuant to 40 CFR part 60
appendix F within 60 days after the
calendar quarter in which the
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
96164
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
performance evaluation was completed.
These reports shall be submitted to the
Regional Administrator at
R5AirEnforcement@epa.gov.
*
*
*
*
*
(xii) Data substitution must not be
used for purposes of determining
compliance under this regulation. If
CEMS data is measuring only a portion
of the NOX or SO2 emitted during
startup, shutdown, or malfunction
conditions, the CEMS data may be
supplemented, but not modified, by the
addition of calculated emission rates
using procedures set forth in the site
specific monitoring plan.
*
*
*
*
*
(n) Reporting requirements.
(1) Unless instructed otherwise, all
requests, reports, submittals,
notifications, and other communications
required by this section shall be
submitted to the Regional Administrator
at R5AirEnforcement@epa.gov.
References in this section to the
Regional Administrator shall mean the
EPA Regional Administrator for Region
5.
(2) The owner or operator of each
BART affected unit identified in this
section and CEMS required by this
section must provide to the Regional
Administrator the written notifications,
reports, and plans identified at
paragraphs (n)(2)(i) through (viii) of this
section.
* * *
*
*
*
*
*
(p) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Section 52.1235 is amended by:
■ a. in paragraph (b) revising (1)(ii),
(1)(iv), (1)(v), (1)(vi), (2)(ii), (2)(v) and
(2)(vi);
■ b. in paragraph (c) revising (1), (2), (3),
(4)(ii), (4)(v), and (4)(xii); and
■ c. in paragraph (e) revising (1) and (2);
and
■ d. revising paragraph (f).
The revisions read as follows:
§ 52.1235
Regional haze.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) NOX emission limits.
(i) * * *
(ii) Hibbing Taconite Company
(A) An aggregate emission limit of 1.5
lbs NOX/MMBtu, based on a 30-day
rolling average, shall apply to the
combined NOX emissions from the three
indurating furnaces, Line 1 (EU020),
Line 2 (EU021), and Line 3 (EU022),
beginning on January 3, 2025. To
determine the aggregate emission rate,
the combined NOX emissions from
Lines 1, 2, and 3 shall be divided by the
total heat input to the three lines (in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
MMBtu) during every rolling 30-day
period.
(B) Compliance with this emission
limit shall be demonstrated with data
collected by a continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) for NOX.
(iii) * * *
(iv) United Taconite
(A) An aggregate emission limit of 3.0
lbs NOX/MMBtu, based on a 30-day
rolling average, shall apply to the
combined NOX emissions from the two
indurating furnaces, Grate Kiln Line 1
(EU040) and Grate Kiln Line 2 (EU042),
beginning on January 3, 2025. To
determine the aggregate emission rate,
the combined NOX emissions from Grate
Kiln Line 1 and Grate Kiln Line 2 shall
be divided by the total heat input to the
two lines (in MMBtu) during every
rolling 30-day period.
(B) Compliance with this emission
limit shall be demonstrated with data
collected by a continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) for NOX.
(v) Minorca Mine
(A) An emission limit of 1.6 lbs NOX/
MMBtu, based on a 30-day rolling
average, shall apply to the Minorca
Mine indurating furnace (EU026). This
emission limit will become enforceable
on January 3, 2025.
(B) Compliance with this emission
limit will be demonstrated with data
collected by a continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) for NOX.
(vi) Northshore Mining Company—
Silver Bay: An emission limit of 1.5 lbs
NOX/MMBtu, based on a 30-day rolling
average, shall apply to Furnace 11
(EU100/EU104) beginning October 10,
2018. An emission limit of 1.5 lbs NOX/
MMBtu, based on a 30-day rolling
average, shall apply to Furnace 12
(EU110/114) beginning October 11,
2019. However, for any 30, or more,
consecutive days when only natural gas
is used at either Northshore Mining
Furnace 11 or Furnace 12, a limit of 1.2
lbs NOX/MMBtu, based on a 30-day
rolling average, shall apply. An
emission limit of 0.085 lbs NOX/
MMBtu, based on a 30-day rolling
average, shall apply to Process Boiler #1
(EU003) and Process Boiler #2 (EU004)
beginning October 10, 2021. The 0.085
lbs NOX/MMBtu emission limit for each
process boiler applies at all times a unit
is operating, including periods of startup, shut-down and malfunction.
(2) SO2 Emission Limits.
(i) * * *
(ii) Hibbing Taconite Company
(A) An aggregate emission limit of
247.8 lbs SO2/hour, based on a 30-day
rolling average, shall apply to the
combined SO2 emissions from the three
indurating furnaces, Line 1 (EU020),
Line 2 (EU0021), and Line 3 (EU022),
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
beginning on February 10, 2017. To
determine the aggregate emission rate,
the combined SO2 emissions from Lines
1, 2, and 3 shall be divided by the total
hours of operation of the three lines
during every rolling 30-day period.
(B) Compliance with this emission
limit shall be demonstrated with data
collected by a continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) for SO2.
(C) Emissions resulting from the
combustion of fuel oil are not included
in the calculation of the 30-day rolling
average. However, if any fuel oil is
burned after the first day that SO2 CEMS
are required to be operational, then the
information specified in (b)(2)(vii) must
be submitted, for each calendar year, to
the Regional Administrator at
R5ARDReporting@epa.gov no later than
30 days after the end of each calendar
year so that a limit can be set.
(iii) * * *
(iv) * * *
(v) Minorca Mine
(A) An emission limit of 68.2 lbs SO2/
hr, based on a 30-day rolling average,
shall apply to the indurating furnace
(EU026) beginning January 3, 2025.
(B) Compliance with this emission
limit shall be demonstrated with data
collected by a continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) for SO2.
(C) Emissions resulting from the
combustion of fuel oil are not included
in the calculation of the 30-day rolling
average. However, if any fuel oil is
burned after the first day that SO2 CEMS
are required to be operational, then the
information specified in (b)(2)(vii) must
be submitted, for each calendar year, to
the Regional Administrator at
R5ARDReporting@epa.gov no later than
30 days after the end of each calendar
year so that a limit can be set.
(vi) Northshore Mining Company—
Silver Bay
(A) An aggregate emission limit of
17.0 lbs SO2/hr, based on a 30-day
rolling average, shall apply to Furnace
11 (EU100/EU104) and Furnace 12
(EU110/EU114) beginning January 3,
2025. To determine the aggregate
emission rate, the combined SO2
emissions from Furnace 11 and Furnace
12 shall be divided by the total hours of
operation of the two furnaces during
every rolling 30-day period.
(B) Compliance with these emission
limits shall be demonstrated with data
collected by a continuous emissions
monitoring system (CEMS) for SO2.
(C) Emissions resulting from the
combustion of fuel oil are not included
in the calculation of the 30-day rolling
average. However, if any fuel oil is
burned after the first day that SO2 CEMS
are required to be operational, then the
information specified in (b)(2)(vii) must
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
96165
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
lbs/hr, respectively) unless a
demonstration is made that a diluent
monitor and/or continuous flow rate
monitor are not needed for the owner or
operator to demonstrate compliance
with applicable emission limits in units
of the standards.
(4) * * *
(i) * * *
(ii) CEMS must be installed and
operational such that the operational
status of the CEMS identified in
paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section
shall be verified by, as a minimum,
completion of the manufacturer’s
written requirements or
recommendations for installation,
operation, and calibration of the
devices.
*
*
*
*
*
(v) The owner or operator of each
CEMS must furnish the Regional
Administrator a written report of the
results of each quarterly performance
evaluation and a data accuracy
assessment pursuant to 40 CFR part 60
appendix F within 60 days after the
calendar quarter in which the
performance evaluation was completed.
These reports shall be submitted to the
Regional Administrator at
R5AirEnforcement@epa.gov.
*
*
*
*
*
(xii) Data substitution must not be
used for purposes of determining
compliance under this section. If CEMS
data is measuring only a portion of the
NOX or SO2 emitted during startup,
shutdown, or malfunction conditions,
the CEMS data may be supplemented,
but not modified, by the addition of
calculated emission rates using
procedures set forth in the site specific
monitoring plan.
* * *
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Reporting Requirements
(1) Unless instructed otherwise, all
requests, reports, submittals,
notifications, and other communications
required by this section shall be
submitted to the Regional Administrator
at R5AirEnforcement@epa.gov.
References in this section to the
Regional Administrator shall mean the
EPA Regional Administrator for Region
5.
(2) The owner or operator of each
BART affected unit identified in this
section and CEMS required by this
section must provide to the Regional
Administrator the written notifications,
reports and plans identified at
paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (viii) of this
section.
* * *
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(f) Equations for establishing the
upper predictive limit—
(1) Equation for normal distribution
and statistically independent data.
UP L
=X +
t[(n-1),(0.99)]
✓5 2 (.!.n +
2.)
m
Where:
x = average or mean of hourly test run data;
t[(n¥1),(0.99)] = t score, the one-tailed t value of
the Student’s t distribution for a specific
degree of freedom (n¥1) and a
confidence level (0.99, to reflect the 99th
percentile)
s2 = variance of the hourly data set;
n = number of values (e.g., 5,760 if 8 months
of valid lbs NOX/MMBTU hourly values)
m = number of values used to calculate the
test average (m = 720 as per averaging
time)
(i) To determine if statistically
independent, use the Rank von
Neumann Test on p. 137 of data Quality
Assessment: Statistical Methods for
Practitioners EPA QA/G–9S.
(ii) Alternative to Rank von Neumann
test to determine if data are dependent,
data are dependent if t test value is
greater than t critical value, where:
p
t test
=
ji-p 2
n-2
ρ = correlation between data points
t critical = t[(n¥2),(0.95)] = t score, the twotailed t value of the Student’s t
distribution for a specific degree of
freedom (n¥2) and a confidence level
(0.95)
(iii) The Anderson-Darling normality
test is used to establish whether the data
are normally distributed. That is, a
distribution is considered to be
normally distributed when p > 0.05.
(2) Non-parametric equation for data
not normally distributed and normally
distributed but not statistically
independent.
m = (n+1) * a
m = the rank of the ordered data point, when
data are sorted smallest to largest. The
data points are 720-hour averages for
establishing NOX limits.
n = number of data points (e.g., 5040 720hourly averages for eight months of valid
NOX lbs/MMBTU values)
a = 0.99, to reflect the 99th percentile
If m is a whole number, then the
limit, UPL, shall be computed as:
UPL = Xm
Where:
Xm = value of the mth data point in terms of
lbs SO2/hr or lbs NOX/MMBtu, when the
data are sorted smallest to largest.
If m is not a whole number, the limit
shall be computed by linear
interpolation according to the following
equation.
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
EP04DE24.036</GPH>
be submitted, for each calendar year, to
the Regional Administrator at
R5ARDReporting@epa.gov no later than
30 days after the end of each calendar
year so that a limit can be set.
(D) The owner or operator may submit
to EPA for approval an alternative
monitoring procedure request. The
request shall include at least one year of
CEMS data demonstrating consistent
values at or below 5 lbs SO2/hr. The
alternative monitoring procedure
request shall not remove the obligation
to maintain and operate a flow rate
monitor in the stack. If approved, the
owner or operator would not be
required to operate the SO2 CEMS and
may demonstrate continuous
compliance using an emission factor
derived from the average of at least one
year of existing SO2 data using the
procedure set forth in the site specific
monitoring plan, and verified by annual
stack tests using EPA approved test
methods, multiplied by the daily
measured flow rate as recorded by the
flow rate monitor and recorded as the
daily lb/hr SO2 emission rate.
(vii) * * *
(c) Testing and monitoring.
(1) The owner or operator of the
respective facility shall install, certify,
calibrate, maintain and operate
continuous emissions monitoring
systems (CEMS) for NOX on United
States Steel Corporation, Keetac unit
EU030; Hibbing Taconite Company
units EU020, EU021, and EU022; United
States Steel Corporation, Minntac units
EU225, EU261, EU282, EU315, and
EU334; United Taconite units EU040
and EU042; Minorca Mine unit EU026;
and Northshore Mining Company-Silver
Bay units Furnace 11 (EU100/EU104)
and Furnace 12 (EU110/EU114).
Compliance with the emission limits for
NOX shall be determined using data
from the CEMS.
(2) The owner or operator shall
install, certify, calibrate, maintain, and
operate CEMS for SO2 on United States
Steel Corporation, Keetac unit EU030;
Hibbing Taconite Company units
EU020, EU021, and EU022; United
States Steel Corporation, Minntac units
EU225, EU261, EU282, EU315, and
EU334; United Taconite units EU040
and EU042; Minorca Mine unit EU026;
and Northshore Mining Company-Silver
Bay units Furnace 11 (EU100/EU104)
and Furnace 12 (EU110/EU114).
(3) The owner or operator shall
install, certify, calibrate, maintain, and
operate one or more continuous diluent
monitor(s) (O2 or CO2) and continuous
stack gas flow rate monitor(s) on the
BART affected units to allow conversion
of the NOX and SO2 concentrations to
units of the standard (lbs/MMBTU and
EP04DE24.035</GPH>
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
96166
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 233 / Wednesday, December 4, 2024 / Proposed Rules
UPL = xm = xmi·md= xmi + 0.md(xm(i+1) ¥
xmi)
Where:
mi = the integer portion of m, i.e., m
truncated at zero decimal places, and
md = the decimal portion of m
[FR Doc. 2024–27635 Filed 12–3–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[WC Docket Nos. 10–90, 23–328, 16–271,
14–58, 09–197; WT Docket No. 10–208; FCC
24–116; FR ID 264716]
Connect America Fund, Alaska
Connect Fund, Connect America
Fund—Alaska Plan, ETC Annual
Reports and Certifications,
Telecommunications Carriers Eligible
To Receive Universal Service Support,
Universal Service Reform—Mobility
Fund
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC or
Commission) adopted a Further Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) that
seeks comment on the implementation
of the Alaska Connect Fund (ACF) for
mobile service from the period January
1, 2030 through December 31, 2034 for
areas where more than one mobile
provider had been receiving support for
overlapping service areas, or duplicatesupport areas (ACF Mobile Phase II).
This includes comment on the
methodology to determine support
amounts in duplicate-support areas and
the competitive or alternative
mechanism to distribute support, which
would result in support to a single
mobile provider in duplicate-support
areas after ACF Mobile Phase I (mobile
support provided from January 1, 2027
to December 31, 2029) ends. The
Commission also seeks comment on
how to distribute support in unserved
areas, Tribal consent requirements for
the ACF, and other additional issues
that would impact the ACF.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
February 3, 2025, and reply comments
are due on or before March 4, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by WC Docket Nos. 10–90,
23–328, 16–271, 14–58, 09–197 or WT
Docket No. 10–208 by any of the
following methods:
• Electronic Filers: Comments may be
filed electronically using the internet by
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Dec 03, 2024
Jkt 265001
accessing the Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS): https://
www.fcc.gov/ecfs/.
• Paper Filers: Parties who choose to
file by paper must file an original and
one copy of each filing.
• Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
courier, or by the U.S. Postal Service.
All filings must be addressed to the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
• Hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the
Commission’s Secretary are accepted
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. by the
FCC’s mailing contractor at 9050
Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD
20701. All hand deliveries must be held
together with rubber bands or fasteners.
Any envelopes and boxes must be
disposed of before entering the building.
• Commercial courier deliveries (any
deliveries not by the U.S. Postal Service)
must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive,
Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
• Filings sent by U.S. Postal Service
First-Class Mail, Priority Mail, and
Priority Mail Express must be sent to 45
L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.
People with Disabilities. To request
materials in accessible formats for
people with disabilities (braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format),
send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call
the Consumer & Governmental Affairs
Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202–
418–0432 (tty).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information, please contact, Matt
Warner, Competition and Infrastructure
Policy Division, Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau, at
Matthew.Warner@fcc.gov or (202) 418–
2419.
This is a
summary of the Commission’s FNPRM
in WC Docket Nos. 10–90, 23–328, 16–
271, 14–58, 09–197 and WT Docket No.
10–208; FCC 24–116, adopted on
November 1, 2024 and released on
November 4, 2024. The full text of this
document is available at the following
internet address: https://www.fcc.gov/
document/fcc-adopts-alaska-connectfund-further-address-broadband-needs.
The Commission also concurrently
adopted a Report and Order (Order) that
takes important and necessary steps to
ensure continued support for the
advancement of modern mobile and
fixed broadband service in Alaska.
Filing Requirements. Pursuant to
§§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission’s
rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested
parties may file comments and reply
comments on or before the dates
indicated in this document. Comments
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
may be filed using the Commission’s
ECFS or by paper. All filings must be
addressed to the Commission’s
Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission.
Ex Parte Rules. This proceeding shall
be treated as a ‘‘permit-but-disclose’’
proceeding in accordance with the
Commission’s ex parte rules. Persons
making ex parte presentations must file
a copy of any written presentation or a
memorandum summarizing any oral
presentation within two business days
after the presentation (unless a different
deadline applicable to the Sunshine
period applies). Persons making oral ex
parte presentations are reminded that
memoranda summarizing the
presentation must: (1) list all persons
attending or otherwise participating in
the meeting at which the ex parte
presentation was made, and (2)
summarize all data presented and
arguments made during the
presentation. If the presentation
consisted in whole or in part of the
presentation of data or arguments
already reflected in the presenter’s
written comments, memoranda, or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter
may provide citations to such data or
arguments in his or her prior comments,
memoranda, or other filings (specifying
the relevant page and/or paragraph
numbers where such data or arguments
can be found) in lieu of summarizing
them in the memorandum. Documents
shown or given to Commission staff
during ex parte meetings are deemed to
be written ex parte presentations and
must be filed consistent with Rule
1.1206(b), 47 CFR 1.1206(b).
Participants in this proceeding should
familiarize themselves with the
Commission’s ex parte rules.
Providing Accountability Through
Transparency Act. Consistent with the
Providing Accountability Through
Transparency Act, Public Law 118–9, a
summary of the FNPRM is available on
https://www.fcc.gov/proposedrulemakings.
Synopsis
I. Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
In this FNPRM, the Commission seeks
comment on a number of issues related
to the implementation of the ACF.
As an initial matter, for ACF Mobile
Phase II, the Commission seeks
comment on a methodology to
determine a support amount for areas
where more than one mobile provider
had been receiving support for
overlapping service areas. This
mechanism may also be used to
determine support amounts to claw
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 233 (Wednesday, December 4, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 96152-96166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-27635]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2024-0215; FRL-12351-01-R5]
Air Plan Approval; Michigan and Minnesota; Revision to Taconite
Federal Implementation Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
finalize nitrogen oxide (NOX) and/or sulfur dioxide
(SO2) limits for the indurating furnaces at five taconite
facilities in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Federal
implementation plan (FIP) addressing the requirement for best available
retrofit technology (BART) at taconite facilities. EPA is also
proposing to modify the Upper Predictive Limit (UPL) equations used to
establish NOX and SO2 emission limits under the
FIP. Finally, EPA is proposing to revise reporting provisions to
require reports to be submitted to EPA electronically. EPA is proposing
these actions pursuant to sections 110 and 169A of the Clean Air Act
(CAA).
[[Page 96153]]
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 21, 2025.
Virtual Public Hearing. EPA will hold a virtual public hearing to
solicit comments on December 19, 2024. The last day to pre-register to
present at the hearing will be December 16, 2024. On December 16, 2024,
EPA will post a general agenda for the hearing that will list pre-
registered presenters in approximate order at https://www.epa.gov/mn/revision-taconite-regional-haze-federal-implementation-plan-mi-and-mn.
If you require the services of a translator or a special accommodation
such as audio description/closed captioning, please pre-register for
the hearing and describe your needs by December 11, 2024.
For more information on the virtual public hearing, see
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2024-0215 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from the docket. EPA may publish
any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit to EPA's
docket at https://www.regulations.gov any information you consider to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI), Proprietary Business
Information (PBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish
to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents
located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI,
PBI, or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making
effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental
Scientist, Air and Radiation Division (AR18J), Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,
(312) 886-0266, [email protected]. The EPA Region 5 office is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
Virtual Public Hearing
EPA is holding a virtual public hearing to provide interested
parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning
the proposal. EPA will hold a virtual public hearing to solicit
comments on December 19, 2024. The hearing will convene at 9:00 a.m.
Central Standard Time (CST) and will conclude at 1:00 p.m. CST, or 15
minutes after the last pre-registered presenter in attendance has
presented if there are no additional presenters. EPA will announce
further details, including information on how to register for the
virtual public hearing, on the virtual public hearing website at
https://www.epa.gov/mn/revision-taconite-regional-haze-federal-implementation-plan-mi-and-mn.
EPA will begin pre-registering presenters and attendees for the
hearing upon publication of this document in the Federal Register. To
pre-register to attend or present at the virtual public hearing, please
use the online registration form available at https://www.epa.gov/mn/revision-taconite-regional-haze-federal-implementation-plan-mi-and-mn
or contact Mayesha Choudhury at 312-886-5909 or by email at
[email protected]. The last day to pre-register to present at
the hearing will be December 16, 2024. On December 16, 2024, EPA will
post a general agenda for the hearing that will list pre-registered
presenters in approximate order at https://www.epa.gov/mn/revision-taconite-regional-haze-federal-implementation-plan-mi-and-mn.
Additionally, requests to present will be taken on the day of the
hearing as time allows.
EPA will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as
possible on the day of the hearing; however, please plan for the
hearing to run either ahead of schedule or behind schedule. Each
commenter will have 5 minutes to provide oral testimony. EPA encourages
commenters to provide EPA with a copy of their oral testimony
electronically by including it in the registration form or emailing it
to [email protected]. EPA may ask clarifying questions during
the oral presentations but will not respond to the presentations at
that time. Written statements and supporting information submitted
during the comment period will be considered with the same weight as
oral comments and supporting information presented at the virtual
public hearing.
EPA is asking all hearing attendees to pre-register, even those who
do not intend to present. This will help EPA prepare for the virtual
hearing.
Please note that any updates made to any aspect of the hearing will
be posted online at https://www.epa.gov/mn/revision-taconite-regional-haze-federal-implementation-plan-mi-and-mn. While EPA expects the
hearing to go forward as set forth above, please monitor our website or
contact Mayesha Choudhury at 312-886-5909 or [email protected]
to determine if there are any updates. EPA does not intend to publish a
document in the Federal Register announcing updates.
If you require the services of a translator or a special
accommodation such as audio description/closed captioning, please pre-
register for the hearing with Mayesha Choudhury at 312-886-5909 or
[email protected] and describe your needs by December 11, 2024.
EPA may not be able to arrange accommodations without advance notice.
I. Background
A. Requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA's Regional Haze Rule
In section 169A of the 1977 Amendments to the CAA, Congress created
a program for protecting visibility in the nation's national parks and
wilderness areas. This section of the CAA establishes as a national
goal the ``prevention of any future, and the remedying of any existing,
impairment of visibility in mandatory Class I Federal areas \1\ which
impairment results from manmade air pollution.'' Congress added section
169B to the CAA in 1990 to address regional haze issues. EPA
promulgated a rule to address regional haze on July 1, 1999
[[Page 96154]]
(64 FR 35714), codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart P (herein after
referred to as the ``Regional Haze Rule''). The Regional Haze Rule
codified and clarified the BART provisions in the CAA and revised the
existing visibility regulations to add provisions addressing regional
haze impairment and to establish a comprehensive visibility protection
program for Class I areas. The requirements for regional haze, found at
40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309, are included in EPA's visibility protection
regulations at 40 CFR part 51, subpart P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Areas designated as mandatory Class I Federal areas consist
of national parks exceeding 6000 acres, wilderness areas and
national memorial parks exceeding 5000 acres, and all international
parks that were in existence on August 7, 1977. 42 U.S.C. 7472(a).
In accordance with section 169A of the CAA, EPA, in consultation
with the Department of Interior, promulgated a list of 156 areas
where visibility is identified as an important value. 44 FR 69122
(November 30, 1979). The extent of a mandatory Class I area includes
subsequent changes in boundaries, such as park expansions. 42 U.S.C.
7472(a). Although states and Tribes may designate as Class I
additional areas which they consider to have visibility as an
important value, the requirements of the visibility program set
forth in section 169A of the CAA apply only to ``mandatory Class I
Federal areas.'' Each mandatory Class I Federal area is the
responsibility of a ``Federal Land Manager.'' 42 U.S.C. 7602(i).
When we use the term ``Class I area'' in this action, we mean a
``mandatory Class I Federal area.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 169A of the CAA directs states, or EPA if developing a FIP,
to evaluate the use of retrofit controls at certain larger, often
uncontrolled, older stationary sources to address visibility impacts
from these sources. Specifically, section 169A(b)(2)(A) of the CAA
requires that implementation plans contain such measures as may be
necessary to make reasonable progress toward the natural visibility
goal, including a requirement that certain categories of existing major
stationary sources \2\ built between 1962 and 1977 procure, install,
and operate BART as determined by EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The set of ``major stationary sources'' potentially subject
to BART is listed in CAA section 169A(g)(7) and includes ``taconite
ore processing facilities.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the Regional Haze Rule, states (or in the case of a FIP, EPA)
are directed to conduct BART determinations for such ``BART-eligible''
sources that may reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to
any visibility impairment in a Class I area.
On July 6, 2005, 70 FR 39104, EPA published the Guidelines for BART
Determinations Under the Regional Haze Rule at appendix Y to 40 CFR
part 51 (hereinafter referred to as the ``BART Guidelines'') to assist
states and EPA in determining which sources should be subject to the
BART requirements and in determining appropriate emission limits for
each source subject to BART.
The process of establishing BART emission limitations follows three
steps. First, states, or EPA if developing a FIP, must identify and
list ``BART-eligible sources.'' \3\ Once the state or EPA has
identified the BART-eligible sources, the second step is to identify
those sources that may ``emit any air pollutant which may reasonably be
anticipated to cause or contribute to any impairment of visibility'' in
a Class I area. (Under the Regional Haze Rule, a source which fits this
description is ``subject to BART.''). Third, for each source subject to
BART, the state or EPA must identify the level of control representing
BART after considering the five factors set forth in CAA section
169A(g). The BART Guidelines provide a process for making BART
determinations that states can use in implementing the BART
requirements on a source-by-source basis. See 40 CFR part 51, appendix
Y, at IV.D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``BART-eligible sources'' are those sources that have the
potential to emit 250 tons or more of a visibility-impairing air
pollutant, were not in operation prior to August 7, 1962, but were
in existence on August 7, 1977, and whose operations fall within one
or more of 26 specifically listed source categories. 40 CFR 51.301.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
States, or EPA if developing a FIP, must address all visibility-
impairing pollutants emitted by a source in the BART determination
process. The most significant visibility impairing pollutants are
SO2, NOX, and particulate matter (PM).
A state implementation plan (SIP) or FIP addressing regional haze
must include source-specific BART emission limits and compliance
schedules for each source subject to BART. Once a state or EPA has made
a BART determination, the BART controls must be installed and operated
as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than five years after the
date of the final SIP or FIP. See CAA section 169A(g)(4) and 40 CFR
51.308(e)(1)(iv). In addition to what is required by the Regional Haze
Rule, general SIP requirements mandate that the SIP or FIP include all
regulatory requirements related to monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting for the BART controls on the source. See CAA section 110(a).
B. BART FIP for Taconite Facilities in Michigan and Minnesota
EPA is proposing to finalize NOX and/or SO2
limits for the indurating furnaces at five taconite facilities in
accordance with the procedures set forth in the FIP addressing the
requirement for BART at taconite facilities. These facilities include
Tilden Mining Company (Tilden) located at 101 Cci Mine Road, Ishpeming,
Michigan; Hibbing Taconite Company (Hibbing) located at 4950 Highway 5
North, Hibbing, Minnesota; Minorca Mine (Minorca) located at 5950 Old
Highway 53, Virginia, Minnesota; Northshore Mining Company--Silver Bay
(Northshore) located at 10 Outer Drive, Silver Bay, Minnesota, and
United Taconite (UTAC) located at 8470 Townline Road, Forbes,
Minnesota. Tilden, Minorca, Northshore, and UTAC are owned by
Cleveland-Cliffs, Inc. (Cliffs), formerly known as Cliffs Natural
Resources, and Hibbing is jointly owned by Cliffs and United States
Steel. The primary units identified as being subject to BART at Tilden,
Hibbing, Minorca, UTAC, and Northshore include the following
pelletizing, or indurating, furnaces: Tilden Grate Kiln Line 1, Hibbing
Straight-Grate Lines 1-3, Minorca Straight-Grate Line 1, UTAC Grate
Kiln Lines 1 and 2, and Northshore Straight-Grate Furnaces 11 and
12.\4\ The U.S. taconite iron ore industry uses two types of
pelletizing machines or processes: straight-grate kilns and grate
kilns. In a straight-grate kiln, a continuous bed of agglomerated green
pellets is carried through different temperature zones with upward
draft or downward draft blown through the pellets on the metal grate.
The grate kiln system consists of a traveling grate, a rotary kiln, and
an annular cooler. A significant difference between these designs is
that straight-grate kilns do not burn coal and therefore have a much
lower potential for emitting SO2. Further, even within the
same kiln type or process, individual furnaces (referred to as
indurating or pelletizing) or processes have distinct equipment and
process characteristics that may affect the compatibility and
performance of certain types of burners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Fuel sulfur content BART limits were also set for two
process boilers and a line dryer at Tilden. Those limits are not
impacted by this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 6, 2013 (78 FR 8706), EPA promulgated a FIP that set
BART limits for NOX and SO2 emissions from
furnaces at seven taconite facilities in Michigan and Minnesota
(``Original FIP''). EPA took this action because Michigan and Minnesota
had failed to meet a statutory deadline to submit their Regional Haze
SIPs and subsequently failed to require BART at the taconite facilities
within their borders. BART limits for NOX were based upon
the performance of high stoichiometric (high-stoich) low-NOX
burners (LNBs) \5\ at two of the taconite furnaces at U.S. Steel's
Minntac facility, while BART for SO2 was established as no
additional controls, apart from a limit on the sulfur content of coal
used in co-firing furnaces.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Stoichiometry refers to the relationship between the actual
quantity of combustion air to the theoretical minimum quantity of
air needed for 100 percent combustion of the fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a related action, EPA published a final partial disapproval of
Michigan's and Minnesota's Regional Haze SIPs on September 30, 2013 (78
FR 59825), due to the states' failure to require BART for taconite
facilities within these states.
ArcelorMittal USA LLC (``ArcelorMittal'') \6\ and Cliffs, owners of
several taconite facilities affected by the FIP, along with the State
of Michigan,
[[Page 96155]]
filed timely petitions for review of the Original FIP. ArcelorMittal
and Cliffs also filed a joint motion seeking a stay of the Original
FIP, which was granted by the Eighth Circuit on June 14, 2013.\7\
ArcelorMittal, Cliffs, the State of Michigan, and others also submitted
petitions for reconsideration of the Original FIP, pursuant to CAA
section 307(d)(7)(B). 42 U.S.C. 7607(d)(7)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Cliffs acquired ArcelorMittal Steel Production Company in
2020. Previously, Minorca was owned by ArcelorMittal and Hibbing was
jointly owned by ArcelorMittal, Cliffs and United States Steel.
Currently, Minorca is owned by Cliffs and Hibbing is jointly owned
by Cliffs and United States Steel.
\7\ On November 15, 2016, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals
terminated the June 14, 2013, stay and extended the deadlines in the
Original FIP by one day for each day the court's stay was in place.
From the day the 2013 FIP was effective to the day it was stayed, 98
days elapsed (March 8, 2013, to June 14, 2013). See Order dated
November 15, 2016, in response to U.S. EPA's Petition to reconsider
the Original FIP, EPA-R05OAR-2017-0066-0009 (8th Cir. 2016). As a
result, the deadlines contained in the Original FIP still apply
(e.g., 6 months after March 8, 2013), only now from the date the
stay was terminated, minus the number of days that elapsed prior to
the stay being issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 22, 2015 (80 FR 64160), in response to the petitions for
reconsideration and due to new information submitted to EPA after
promulgation of the Original FIP, EPA proposed to revise the Original
FIP to revise NOX and SO2 emission limits for
certain taconite facilities. On April 16, 2016 (81 FR 21672), EPA
promulgated the final 2016 revised FIP (``2016 FIP''). With respect to
NOX, the emission limits in the 2016 FIP were based on
information submitted to EPA by Cliffs and ArcelorMittal that suggested
high-stoich LNBs, which formed the basis for the NOX limits
in the Original FIP, posed serious technical hurdles. In the 2016 FIP,
EPA revised the NOX emission limits for Tilden, Hibbing,
Minorca, and UTAC, and set forth a process to confirm or modify those
emission limits using continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS)
data that was to be collected after the installation of the selected
low-NOX technology. Under the 2016 FIP, the NOX
emission limits do not become enforceable until EPA confirms or
modifies the emission limits in accordance with procedures set forth in
the FIP. The NOX emission limits in the 2016 FIP were based
upon low-stoich LNBs (for grate kilns) and LNBs that utilize a
combination of water and steam injection and pre-combustion
technologies (for straight-grate kilns).
With respect to SO2, EPA granted reconsideration of the
SO2 limit for Tilden's grate kiln due to information that
became available after the close of the public comment period on the
2013 FIP regarding Tilden's intent to burn mixed fuels. Cliffs' intent
to burn mixed fuels at Tilden was not considered in the Original FIP
and would have led to an inability to meet the established BART limit.
The 2016 FIP limits the sulfur content of the coal combusted on Tilden
Line 1 and sets an SO2 emission limit for the furnace.
Cliffs and ArcelorMittal filed petitions for review of the 2016 FIP
due to a dispute over the UPL equation in the final rule. The 2016 FIP
requirements for each facility are set forth in 40 CFR 52.1183 for
Michigan and 40 CFR 52.1235 for Minnesota and discussed further in the
remainder of this action.
II. Basis for NOX Limits
The 2016 FIP set emission limits in pounds (lbs) of NOX
per million British Thermal Unit (MMBtu), based on a 30-day (720-hour)
rolling average, and established a process to either confirm or modify
the NOX emission limits within established ranges based on
CEMS data that Tilden, Hibbing, Minorca, and UTAC were required to
submit to EPA by dates specified in the 2016 FIP.\8\ The FIP also
specified that the NOX emission limits for these facilities
would become enforceable only after EPA's confirmation or modification
of the NOX emission limits reflecting EPA's expectation that
the owner or operator of each facility would provide the requisite data
to EPA by the dates specified in the FIP. EPA's efforts to finalize
NOX emission limits for these facilities by the deadlines
established in the FIP were complicated by several implementation
issues, including challenges with installation of control technology,
delays in receipt of requisite data, and emission limit modification
requests not conforming to the requirements set forth in the FIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Taconite facilities typically operate 24 hours per day and
720 is the number of hours in a 30-day period; therefore, a 720-hour
average is essentially equivalent to a 30-day average.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NOX emission limits established for each furnace and
the ranges of limits allowable under the limit modification process are
set forth in Table 1. As indicated in Table 1, the emission limits for
certain furnaces vary by the type of fuel being used (natural gas or
``co-fire,'' which is a combination of natural gas and coal).
Table 1--NOX Limits and Limit Modification Ranges Established in the
2016 FIP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission limit
Furnace Emission limit (lbs modification range
NOX/MMBtu) (lbs NOX/MMBtu)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tilden Line 1:
Natural Gas............. 2.8 2.8-3.0
Co-fire................. 1.5 1.5-2.5
Hibbing Line 1.............. 1.2 1.2-1.8
Hibbing Line 2.............. 1.2 1.2-1.8
Hibbing Line 3.............. 1.2 1.2-1.8
Minorca................. 1.2 1.2-1.8
UTAC Line 1:
Natural Gas............. 2.8 2.8-3.0
Co-fire................. 1.5 1.5-2.5
UTAC Line 2:
Natural Gas............. 2.8 2.8-3.0
Co-fire................. 1.5 1.5-2.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Tilden, Hibbing, Minorca, and UTAC, the process specified in
the 2016 FIP to either confirm or modify the NOX emission
limits within the established ranges included the installation of a
CEMS, submission of an engineering report to EPA, installation of
NOX reduction control technology, submission of pellet
quality analyses to EPA, and submission to EPA of a report to either
confirm or modify the limit. For any furnace without CEMS already
installed, CEMS installation was required for each furnace by 6 months
after May 12, 2016, and the owner or operator was required to submit
quarterly CEMS data to EPA after May 12, 2016, for the time periods
specified
[[Page 96156]]
below in Table 2. Engineering reports containing detailed engineering
analyses and modeling of the selected NOX reduction
technology for each furnace demonstrating that the technology was
designed to meet an emission limit equal to the lower bound of the
established range were required to be submitted to EPA by the deadlines
specified in Table 2. NOX reduction technology was required
to be installed two months after the engineering report submission
deadline. Beginning on the earlier of six months after the installation
of NOX reduction technology or the deadline for installation
of the NOX reduction technology, the owner or operator was
required to submit quarterly pellet quality analyses to EPA, including
an explanation of causes for pellet samples that failed to meet the
acceptable range for any pellet quality analysis factor, for the time
periods specified in Table 2. At the end of the CEMS and pellet quality
data collection periods, the owner or operator of each furnace may
submit a report to EPA to either confirm or modify the NOX
limits within the bounds described in the 2016 FIP (and above in this
section). The 2016 FIP also allows the owner or operator to submit a
report proposing a single NOX limit for all fuels. The
process for confirming or modifying limits detailed in the 2016 FIP
specifies that EPA's determinations shall be based on the appropriate
UPL equation, using CEMS data that meet pellet quality specifications
and proper furnace/burner operation. For a more detailed description of
the process set forth in the 2016 FIP to confirm or modify the emission
limits, see 40 CFR 52.1183 and 40 CFR 52.1235.
Table 2--Timelines of Processes To Confirm or Modify Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of
Period of CEMS NOX reduction pellet Report to
data required Engineering technology quality data confirm or
Furnace for report installation required for modify limit
submission to deadline deadline submission to deadline
EPA EPA *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Months after May 12, 2016
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tilden Line 1................... 0-57 48 50 50-57 57
Hibbing Line 1.................. 6-34 24 26 26-34 34
Hibbing Line 2.................. 6-52 42 44 44-52 52
Hibbing Line 3.................. 6-57 48 50 50-57 57
Minorca's Indurating Furnace.... 6-52 42 44 44-52 52
UTAC Line 1..................... 0-34 24 26 26-34 34
UTAC Line 2..................... 0-52 42 44 44-52 52
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* If the owner or operator installed NOX reduction technology more than six months before the required date,
pellet quality analyses were required to be submitted to EPA beginning six months after installation.
The 2016 FIP incorporates two UPL equations to calculate emission
limits. The appropriate equation is determined by the statistical
distribution of the hourly CEMS data. If the data are normally
distributed and statistically independent, the equation in 40 CFR
52.1183(p)(1) and 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(1) is used. If the data are not
normally distributed or are normally distributed but not statistically
independent, the non-parametric equation in 40 CFR 52.1183(p)(2) and 40
CFR 52.1235(f)(2) is used. None of the CEMS data submitted are normally
distributed and statistically independent, therefore the non-parametric
equation is the applicable equation for all limit setting in this
action.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Data distribution analyses are available in the docket for
this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The non-parametric equation in the 2016 FIP calculates a 95th
percentile UPL by ranking 720-hour averages of NOX emissions
in lbs/MMBtu from lowest to highest and identifying the value at the
95th percentile of the data set as the UPL and emission limit.\10\
While a 95th percentile UPL establishes an emission rate that a source
is predicted to be below during at least 95 out of 100 averaging
periods, it was not EPA's intent to set a limit that a source would be
expected to exceed five percent of the time once the limit was in
place. Rather, EPA used the 95th percentile UPL to ensure that the
final emission limits would be consistent with the actual emission
reduction capabilities of the BART controls, as required by 40 CFR
51.301, which defines BART as ``the degree of reduction achievable.''
\11\ EPA expected that during the eight-month CEMS data collection
period, furnace operators would be adjusting numerous variables to
optimize control technology performance, which would result in higher
emissions at times during the initial ``shakedown'' period. Once the
eight-month data collection period was over, EPA expected that the
operators would have gained sufficient experience to run the furnaces
and control technologies with fewer adjustments, meaning less emission
variations and lower emissions overall. EPA selected the 95th
percentile UPL to ensure the elevated emissions expected during the
initial shakedown period would not become the basis for final emission
limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Taconite facilities typically operate 24 hours per day and
720 is the number of hours in a 30-day period; therefore, a 720-hour
average is essentially equivalent to a 30-day average. For
facilities that both burn natural gas exclusively and co-fire with
coal, i.e., Tilden and UTAC, a 30-day period may involve operation
with only natural gas as well as operation with co-firing of coal.
Therefore, the 2016 FIP established UPL equations based on 720-hour
averages to allow for the separation of hours when burning only
natural gas from hours when co-firing with coal. When calculating an
emission limit that applies only when burning natural gas, emissions
are averaged over 720 successive hours in which the unit burns only
natural gas. When calculating a co-firing emission limit, emissions
are averaged over 720 successive hours in which the unit burns a
gas/coal mix. All emission limit modifications were calculated based
on 720-hour averages, consistent with the equations at 40 CFR
52.1183(p) and 40 CFR 52.1235(f). However, EPA is proposing modified
emission limits in the form of a 30-day average if the facility
burns only one fuel or if the modified limit applies to all fuels.
In those circumstances, there is no need to be able to separate the
hourly data to determine compliance with the emission limit.
\11\ April 16, 2016, 81 FR 21672, 21680.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, once continuous data collection began, the CEMS data did
not show the expected elevated emissions levels during the shakedown
period and emissions were not consistently lower toward the end of the
data collection period as compared to the beginning of the period.\12\
Therefore, EPA has
[[Page 96157]]
determined that using the UPL equation at the 99th percentile is more
appropriate to establish an emission limit consistent with the actual
emission reduction capabilities of the BART controls and is proposing
to modify the UPL equations used to calculate both the NOX
and SO2 emission limits to reflect use of the 99th
percentile. The emission limits EPA is proposing in this action were
calculated using the UPL equations at 40 CFR 52.1183(p) and 40 CFR
52.1235(f) at the 99th percentile.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See emission limit calculation files in the docket for this
action.
\13\ Data analyses and emissions calculations are available in
the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Tilden
For Tilden's indurating furnace, Tilden Line 1 (EUKILN1), the 2016
FIP established a specific NOX BART emission limit of 2.8
pounds of NOX/MMBtu when burning natural gas, while allowing
for potential modification of the limit within the range of 2.8-3.0 lbs
NOX/MMBtu. Similarly, the 2016 FIP established a specific
NOX BART emission limit of 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu when
co-firing coal and natural gas, with an allowance for potential
modification of the limit within the range of 1.5-2.5 lbs
NOX/MMBtu.\14\ The 2016 FIP also allowed for the
establishment of a single NOX limit for all fuels.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 40 CFR 52.1183(k)(1).
\15\ 40 CFR 52.1183(k)(1)(viii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tilden submitted a partially complete engineering report on May 21,
2020, and submitted the final engineering report on July 30, 2020.
Tilden implemented low-stoichiometry LNBs designed to achieve an
emission rate of 2.8 lbs NOX/MMBtu when firing exclusively
natural gas and 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu when co-firing with coal,
as described in the engineering report submitted to EPA.
On February 12, 2021, Tilden submitted a report requesting
modification of the NOX limits for Line 1 pursuant to 40 CFR
52.1183 (k)(1)(vi). Tilden requested an emission limit of 3.0 lbs
NOX/MMBtu for all fuels. Tilden's limit modification request
was accompanied by CEMS data (in 30-day rolling averages) from
September 12, 2020, to February 2, 2021. On May 21, 2021, Tilden
provided hourly emission data for July 1, 2020, to February 11, 2021.
Approximately half of these data were collected when Tilden was co-
firing with coal and half were collected when Tilden was burning
exclusively natural gas. Tilden demonstrated that when burning natural
gas, NOX emission rates recorded were higher than the
modeling results presented in the engineering report, and above the
high end of the limit range established in the 2016 FIP (2.8-3.0 lbs/
MMBtu). The CEMS data submitted to EPA when burning coal recorded
emission rates within the range specified in the 2016 FIP (1.5-2.5 lbs/
MMBtu). Tilden explained that the furnace is unable to achieve 3.0 lbs
NOX/MMBtu when burning exclusively natural gas and would
need to burn a minimum of 80% coal when co-firing to meet a limit of
2.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu. Tilden stated a preference to maximize
natural gas usage and supplement with solid fuel as needed to meet
NOX limits.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See ``Tilden NOX limit modification report (Feb.
12, 2021)_Redacted.pdf,'' available in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2016 FIP provides Tilden the option to propose, for EPA's
consideration and approval, a single NOX emission limit for
all fuels based on a 30-day rolling average. Citing the CEMS data,
Tilden requested a revised NOX BART limit of 3.0 lbs
NOX/MMBtu for all fuels that would apply on a rolling 30-day
average, contending that this emission limit is the most stringent
limit that can be met without substantial increases in coal usage,
while maintaining pellet quality standards.
Based on the equation set forth at 40 CFR 52.1183(p)(2), EPA
calculated a 720-hour average NOX emission limit of 3.8 lbs
NOX/MMBtu when burning exclusively natural gas, and
separately, an emission limit of 1.9 lbs NOX/MMBtu when
burning mixed fuel.\17\ While CEMS data show the installed emission
control measures reduced NOX emissions, the selected
technology failed to achieve emission rates within the specified FIP
ranges when burning only natural gas (2.8-3.0 lbs NOX/
MMBtu). Using the non-parametric equation with the full data set,
unseparated by fuel type, EPA calculated a 720-hour average UPL of 3.7
lbs NOX/MMBtu. EPA evaluated these CEMS data and considered
Tilden's requested single NOX emission limit of 3.0 lbs
NOX/MMBtu for all fuels based on a 30-day rolling average,
as allowed at 40 CFR 52.1183(k)(1)(viii). EPA has concluded that
Tilden's requested emission limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu for
all fuels based on a 30-day rolling average is appropriate and reflects
BART. It allows Tilden to select a fuel mix that maximizes natural gas
usage and minimizes coal usage if the facility so chooses without
exceeding the natural gas emission limit range established in the 2016
FIP. This has the duel environmental (visibility) benefit of minimizing
NOX emissions by setting an emissions limit that is below
the calculated natural gas-only rate, and also potentially minimizing
the use of coal and the associated SO2 emissions from coal
burning. Therefore, based on these data and as provided at 40 CFR
52.1183(k)(1)(viii), EPA is proposing that a modified limit of 3.0 lbs
NOX/MMBtu for all fuels, with compliance to be determined on
a rolling 30-day average basis, reflects BART for the Tilden Line 1
indurating furnace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Tilden Emission Limit Calculations, available in the
docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Hibbing
For Hibbing Lines 1, 2, and 3, the 2016 FIP established
NOX BART emission limits of 1.2 lbs NOX/MMBtu
that applied to each furnace individually, with provisions allowing for
potential modification of the limits within the range of 1.2-1.8 lbs
NOX/MMBtu.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See 40 CFR 52.1235((b)(1)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hibbing implemented the NOX reduction measures described
in its engineering report, submitted to EPA on May 11, 2018, identified
as LNBs in conjunction with water injection, at Hibbing Lines 1, 2, and
3. Hibbing installed CEMS on Lines 1, 2, and 3 and provided EPA with
hourly NOX emissions data on March 12, 2019, September 11,
2020, and February 12, 2021, for Lines 1, 2 and 3, respectively,
documenting actual emissions after installation of LNB technology.
Hibbing's submittals included CEMS data from July 12, 2018, to March
11, 2019, for Line 1; January 12, 2020, through September 1, 2020, for
Line 2; and August 3, 2020, to February 11, 2021, for Line 3. The
hourly CEMS data identified hours excluded from the limit-setting
calculations because pellets failed to meet pellet quality
specifications. Although the limit-setting period for Line 3
established in the 2016 FIP began August 3, 2020, Line 3 did not
operate during the period between July 12 to August 3, 2020, due to
COVID-related reasons. Line 2 did not operate from May 1, 2020, to July
31, 2020, during the limit setting period for similar reasons. On
November 25, 2020, Hibbing provided additional information requested by
EPA, including hourly CEMS data for Lines 1, 2, and 3 in Excel format
to facilitate independent calculation of emission limits and
identification of hours when the burner was not operated within the
parameters modeled in the engineering report.
The requirements at 40 CFR 52.1235((b)(1)(ii)(A)(6), (B)(6), and
(C)(6) set forth the process for submitting data to support limit
modifications under the 2016 FIP. At the time of the initial
[[Page 96158]]
CEMS data submissions, Hibbing requested NOX emission limits
of 1.7, 1.5, and 1.6 lbs NOX/MMBtu on Lines 1, 2, and 3,
respectively. The facility cited sub-zero temperatures and other
factors that may have affected the calculated emission rates and
restricted production. Further, Hibbing provided regression analyses
assessing the relationship between furnace feed rates and
NOX emission rates during the limit-setting periods to
support the requested limit increases.
On October 22, 2021, Hibbing submitted a request to EPA to
establish a crossline average emission limit for Lines 1, 2, and 3 of
1.6 lbs NOX/MMBtu, with compliance to be determined on a 30-
day rolling average basis. The submittal included hourly CEMS data for
the same time periods as Hibbing's initial limit modification
submittals and a regression analysis assessing the relationship between
furnace feed rates and NOX emission rates during the limit-
setting periods to support the requested limit increases. The hourly
CEMS data submitted to EPA included a description of the failure
analyses identifying potential reasons for pellets failing to meet
pellet quality specifications for hours excluded in the limit-setting
calculation.
There is no basis in the FIP for adjusting emission limits to
account for possible future production levels based upon an assumed
correlation between feed rates and emissions. Therefore, in accordance
with 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(2), EPA calculated 720-hour average
NOX emission limits of 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu for Line
1, 1.4 lbs NOX/MMBtu for Line 2, and 1.5 lbs NOX/
MMBtu for Line 3.\19\ Under the BART Guidelines, a source may be
permitted to `` `average' emissions across any set of BART-eligible
emission units within a fenceline, so long as the emission reductions
from each pollutant being controlled for BART would be equal to those
reductions that would be obtained by simply controlling each of the
BART-eligible units that constitute BART-eligible sources.'' \20\ EPA
averaged the single line limits described above and calculated a
crossline 720-hour average emission limit of 1.5 lbs NOX/
MMBtu. The NOX controls have been installed and are being
operated on all three lines. Based on EPA's analysis, this crossline
average emission limit is equal to the reductions that would be
obtained by controlling each line separately. Therefore, based on these
data and as provided at 40 CFR 52.12335(b)(1)(ii)(A)(7), (B)(7), and
(C)(7), and consistent with 40 CFR 51.308(e) and 40 CFR part 51,
appendix Y, at V, EPA is proposing that a crossline average emission
limit of 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu for Hibbing Lines 1, 2, and 3,
with compliance to be determined on a 30-day rolling average basis,
reflects NOX BART for Hibbing Lines 1, 2, and 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Hibbing Emission Limit Calculations, available in the
docket for this action.
\20\ 40 CFR part 51, appendix Y, at V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Minorca
For Minorca's indurating furnace, the 2016 FIP established a
NOX BART emission limit of 1.2 lbs NOX/MMBtu,
while allowing for potential modification of the limit within the range
of 1.2-1.8 lbs NOX/MMBtu.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See 40 CFR 52.1235((b)(1)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 12, 2019, Minorca submitted an engineering report to
EPA which identified the low NOX technology to be installed
on Line 1 as an LNB, water injection, and utilization of specific
operating parameters. The combined use of these measures was projected
to meet an emission limit of 1.2 lbs NOX/MMBtu based on a
30-day average. On September 11, 2020, Minorca submitted CEMS data for
the period January 12, 2020, to September 10, 2020, excluding the CEMS
values that did not meet pellet quality specifications, consistent with
the 2016 FIP.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ CEMS data in the September 11, 2020, submittal was
presented as 720-hour rolling averages. On November 25, 2020,
Minorca provided the hourly CEMS data for the same January 12, 2020,
to September 10, 2020, time period to allow for independent
calculation of 720-hour averages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 22, 2021, Minorca submitted supplemental information
consisting of 720-hour averages of CEMS data from January 12, 2020,
through September 30, 2021. Adding the data from September 10, 2020,
through September 30, 2021, to the original data set, Minorca
calculated an emission limit of 1.6 lbs NOX/MMBtu using the
equation at 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(2). Minorca then performed a regression
analysis assessing the relationship between furnace pellet production
rates and NOX emission rates during the limit-setting period
to support the requested limit increase. Minorca cited the climate in
Minnesota and other factors that may have affected production rates in
its explanation of why the emission limit should be adjusted to 1.7 lbs
NOX/MMBtu.
Based on the non-parametric equation at 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(2), EPA
evaluated the 720-hour average NOX emission data for the
full data set submitted and calculated an emission limit of 1.6 lbs
NOX/MMBtu.\23\ There is no basis in the FIP for adjusting
emission limits to account for possible future production levels based
upon an assumed correlation between feed rates and emissions.
Therefore, based on these data and as provided at 40 CFR
52.1235(b)(1)(v)(7), EPA is proposing that a modified limit of 1.6 lbs
NOX/MMBtu, with compliance to be determined on a rolling 30-
day average basis, reflects BART for the Minorca Line 1 indurating
furnace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Minorca Emission Limit Calculations, available in the
docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. UTAC
For UTAC's indurating furnaces, Grate Kiln Line 1 (EU040) and Grate
Kiln Line 2 (EU042), the 2016 FIP established specific NOX
BART limits of 2.8 pounds of NOX/MMBtu when burning natural
gas, while allowing for potential modification of the limits within the
range of 2.8-3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu. Similarly, the 2016 FIP
established specific NOX BART limits of 1.5 lbs
NOX/MMBtu when co-firing coal and natural gas, while
allowing for potential modification of the limits within the range of
1.5-2.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu.\24\ The 2016 FIP also allowed for the
establishment of a single NOX limit for all fuels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ 40 CFR 52.1235(b)(1)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
UTAC submitted an engineering report for Line 1 on May 11, 2018.
UTAC installed and began operating the sub-stoichiometric staged
combustion LNB designed to achieve an emission rate of 2.8 lbs
NOX/MMBtu when firing exclusively natural gas and 1.5 lbs
NOX/MMBtu when co-firing with coal, as described in the
engineering report submitted to EPA. UTAC subsequently made
modifications to the Line 1 LNB in September 2018. On March 12, 2019,
UTAC submitted a report requesting modification of the co-firing
NOX limit for Line 1 to 2.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu, based
upon 720-hour averages from February 2019.
On November 12, 2019, UTAC submitted a report to EPA to address the
requirement for an engineering report for Line 2. On November 12, 2021,
UTAC submitted information on the LNB selected for Line 2, a modified
version of the LNB installed on Line 1. This submittal included a
report on computational fluid dynamics modeling demonstrating the
burner was designed to achieve an emission rate of 2.8 lbs
NOX/MMBtu when firing exclusively natural gas and 1.5 lbs
NOX/MMBtu when co-firing with coal. On April 11, 2023, UTAC
submitted an analysis of Line 1 and Line 2 NOX performance
[[Page 96159]]
post LNB installations and requested a crossline average limit of 3.0
lb NOX/MMBtu for all fuels, based on a 30-day rolling
average. Along with the analysis, UTAC submitted 720-hour averages of
total lbs NOX/MMBtu for Lines 1 and 2 combined for the time
period of January 25, 2022, to March 26, 2023. UTAC also submitted
hourly CEMS and process information for this time period, which UTAC
claimed as confidential business information, so that EPA could verify
the calculations.
Based on the equation set forth at 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(2), EPA
calculated 720-hour average NOX emission limits of 2.3 lbs
NOX/MMBtu and 3.6 lbs NOX/MMBtu when burning
exclusively natural gas for Lines 1 and 2, respectively. Separately,
EPA calculated an emission limit of 3.1 lbs NOX/MMBtu when
burning mixed fuel on Line 2. There were 475 hours of co-firing data
for Line 1, which is not sufficient to calculate a 720-hour average
NOX emission limit. EPA also calculated an emission limit of
3.1 lbs NOX/MMBtu when combining hourly emissions data for
both lines and all fuels.\25\ While CEMS data show the installed
emission control measures reduced NOX emissions, the
selected technology failed to achieve emission rates within the
specified FIP ranges, particularly when evaluating separate limits for
each fuel type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See United Taconite Emission Limit Calculations, available
in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in II.B., under the BART Guidelines, a source may be
permitted to `` `average' emissions across any set of BART-eligible
emission units within a fenceline, so long as the emission reductions
from each pollutant being controlled for BART would be equal to those
reductions that would be obtained by simply controlling each of the
BART-eligible units that constitute BART-eligible sources.'' \26\ EPA
evaluated the CEMS data and considered UTAC's requested crossline
average NOX emission limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu
for all fuels, for Lines 1 and 2, with compliance to be determined on a
30-day rolling average basis. Based on EPA's analysis, this crossline
average emission limit is equal to the reductions that would be
obtained by controlling each line separately and is within the natural
gas NOX emission limit range established in the 2016 FIP. A
single fuel-neutral emission limit allows UTAC to select a fuel mix
that maximizes natural gas usage and minimizes coal usage without
exceeding the natural gas emission limit range established in the 2016
FIP. This has the dual environmental (visibility) benefit of minimizing
NOX emissions by setting an emissions limit that is below
the calculated natural gas-only rate, and also potentially minimizing
the use of coal and the associated SO2 emissions from
burning coal. Therefore, based on these data and as provided at 40 CFR
52.1235(b)(1)(iv)(A)(8) and (B)(8), and consistent with 40 CFR
51.308(e) and 40 CFR part 51, appendix Y, at V, EPA is proposing that a
crossline emission limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu for all fuels
for UTAC Lines 1 and 2, based on a rolling 30-day average, reflects
BART for UTAC Lines 1 and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 40 CFR part 51, appendix Y, at V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Basis for SO2 Limits
As previously described, the Original FIP determined that existing
controls reflected SO2 BART for Minorca, Hibbing, and
Northshore, and established SO2 emission limits for each
furnace, with the option or requirement, depending on the facility,
that the owner or operator submit one year of CEMS data to EPA to set a
revised SO2 emission limit calculated using the appropriate
UPL equation. The 2016 FIP limited the sulfur content of the coal
burned at Tilden, set an SO2 emission limit, and required
Tilden to submit one year of CEMS data to EPA to set a revised
SO2 emission limit calculated using the appropriate UPL
equation. For a more detailed description of the existing
SO2 emission limits and the process set forth to modify the
emission limits, see 40 CFR 52.1235 (Hibbing, Minorca, and Northshore)
and 40 CFR 52.1183 (Tilden). As discussed above in II., EPA has
calculated the emission limits using the appropriate UPL equation at
the 99th percentile.
A. Tilden
For Tilden, the 2016 FIP established a specific SO2 BART
emission limit of 500 pounds of SO2 per hour (lbs/hr) for
Grate Kiln Line 1, with no more than 0.60 percent sulfur by weight
based on a monthly block average for any coal usage. The 2016 FIP also
required that the owner or operator of Tilden calculate an
SO2 emission limit based on one year of hourly CEMS
emissions data using the appropriate UPL equation provided in 40 CFR
52.1183(p) and submit such calculations and data to EPA by 36 months
after May 12, 2016. The 2016 FIP provides that EPA may revise the
emission limit downward to reflect the calculated SO2
emission rate; however, EPA may not increase the SO2 limit
above 500 lbs SO2/hr.
On October 1, 2018, Tilden submitted SO2 emissions data
to EPA reflecting Tilden burning exclusively natural gas during the
period March 28, 2017, through March 27, 2018. Citing various
production-related concerns, Tilden adjusted its calculated limit to
account for expected higher production capacity and higher ore sulfur
content, which resulted in an adjusted expected emission rate of 568
lbs SO2/hr. Tilden requested an SO2 emission
limit of 500 lbs/hour for all fuels, regardless of natural gas or coal
fuel usage, as established in the 2016 FIP. On November 10, 2022,
Tilden submitted hourly SO2 data for Line 1 from the same
time period of March 28, 2017, through March 27, 2018, during which
time Tilden was exclusively burning natural gas. On March 1, 2023,
Tilden provided hourly co-firing CEMS data for July 12, 2018, through
July 11, 2019. On March 30, 2023, Tilden provided hourly CEMS data for
the time period March 27, 2018, through March 26, 2019, which included
both co-firing and natural gas-only operation.
The 2016 FIP established a single SO2 emission limit to
apply regardless of natural gas or coal fuel usage, which Tilden must
meet at all times. Consistent with this approach, and because
SO2 emissions are higher when Tilden is co-firing and the
emission limit must be met at all times, EPA is proposing to base the
emission limit modification calculations on all co-firing data included
in Tilden's March 1, 2023, and March 30, 2023, CEMS data submissions.
Based on the equation set forth at 40 CFR 52.1183(p)(2), EPA calculated
an emission limit of 189 lbs SO2/hour consistent with this
approach.\27\ There is no basis in the FIP for adjusting emission
limits to account for possible future production levels or possible
higher ore sulfur content. Therefore, based on these data and as
provided at 40 CFR 52.1183(k)(3), EPA is proposing that an
SO2 limit of 189 lbs SO2/hr for the Tilden Line 1
indurating furnace, with compliance to be determined on a 30-day
rolling average basis, reflects SO2 BART for Tilden Line 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Tilden Emission Limit Calculations, available in the
docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Hibbing
For Hibbing Lines 1, 2, and 3, the Original FIP set an aggregate
emission limit of 247.8 lbs SO2/hr, based on a 30-day
rolling average and excluding emissions resulting from the combustion
of fuel oil, and provided Hibbing the option of calculating a revised
SO2 emission limit by 20 months after March 8, 2013, based
on one year of hourly CEMS emissions data and the non-parametric UPL
equation. If any fuel oil is burned after the first day
[[Page 96160]]
that SO2 CEMS were required to be operational, the 2016 FIP
requires Hibbing to submit the gallons of fuel oil burned per hour, the
sulfur content of the fuel oil, and the SO2 emissions in
pounds per hour, so that EPA can establish an SO2 emissions
limit for fuel oil. Hibbing chose not to calculate a revised
SO2 emission limit.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ While Hibbing's SO2 BART limit is not being
modified, the regulatory text at 40 CFR 52.1235(b)(2)(ii) is being
revised to remove the original limit modification provisions and
clarify that Hibbing's SO2 BART limit is final.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Minorca
For Minorca, the Original FIP set an emission limit of 38.16 lbs
SO2/hour, based on a 30-day rolling average and excluding
emissions when Minorca is combusting fuel oil, with an allowance for
potential modification of the limit based on one year of hourly CEMS
data submitted to EPA by 20 months after March 8, 2013. If any fuel oil
is burned after the first day that SO2 CEMS were required to
be operational, the 2016 FIP requires Minorca to submit the gallons of
fuel oil burned per hour, the sulfur content of the fuel oil, and the
SO2 emissions in pounds per hour so that EPA can establish
an SO2 emissions limit for fuel oil.
On April 6, 2018, Minorca submitted a request to modify the
SO2 limit established in the 2016 FIP. Minorca ranked hourly
data from the period March 1, 2017, through March 31, 2018, adjusted
the calculated limit based on potential increased production rates, and
requested an emission limit of 73.79 lbs SO2/hour. On
October 14, 2019, Minorca submitted additional hourly SO2
CEMS emission data for the time period of September 8, 2018, through
September 7, 2019, revising their request to an emission limit of
208.66 lbs SO2/hr. Minorca adjusted the calculated limit
based on potential increased production rates, maximum ore sulfur
content based on a ratio of maximum percent sulfur, and pellet type.
Using the equation set forth at 40 CFR 52.1235(f)(2) and the most
recent CEMS data from September 8, 2018, through September 7, 2019, EPA
calculated an SO2 emission limit of 68.2 lbs SO2/
hour.\29\ There is no basis in the FIP for adjusting emission limits to
account for possible future production levels or possible higher ore
sulfur content. Therefore, based on these data and as provided at 40
CFR 52.1235(b)(2)(v) and 40 CFR 51.308(e), EPA is proposing that an
emission limit of 68.2 lbs SO2/hr, based on a 30-day rolling
average, reflects SO2 BART for the Minorca indurating
furnace.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Minorca Emission Limit Calculations, available in the
docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Northshore
For Northshore, the Original FIP set an aggregate emission limit of
39.0 lbs SO2/hour for Furnace 11 (EU100/EU104) and Furnace
12 (EU110/EU114), based on a 30-day rolling average and excluding
emissions resulting from the combustion of fuel oil, with a requirement
that the owner or operator calculate a revised limit based on one year
of hourly CEMS data and submit such data and calculations to EPA by 20
months after March 8, 2013.
On April 11, 2018, Northshore submitted an SO2 emission
limit modification request which included CEMS data from January 16,
2017, through January 15, 2018. Northshore adjusted the calculated
emission limit based on potential increased production rates and
requested a limit of 22.1 lbs SO2/hour.
On November 21, 2018, Northshore submitted a revised limit
modification request of 49 lbs SO2/hr. This limit
modification request included data for the time period of January 16,
2017, through January 15, 2018, and adjusted the calculated limit based
on potential increased production rates and potential increases in ore
sulfur content. On November 10, 2022, Northshore submitted hourly
SO2 CEMS data for the period of January 16, 2017, through
January 15, 2018, as requested by EPA, to allow for EPA's independent
calculation of emission limits.
Using the equation set forth at 52.1235(f)(2) and the hourly
SO2 CEMS data from January 16, 2017 through January 15,
2018, EPA calculated an aggregate SO2 emission limit of 17.0
lbs SO2/hour for Furnaces 11 and 12.\30\ There is no basis
in the FIP for adjusting emission limits to account for possible future
production levels or possible higher ore sulfur content. Therefore,
based on these data and as provided at 40 CFR 52.1235(b)(2)(vi), EPA is
proposing that an aggregate SO2 emission limit of 17.0 lbs
SO2/hr for Northshore Furnaces 11 and 12, based on a 30-day
rolling average, reflects SO2 BART for Northshore.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Northshore Emission Limit Calculations, available in
the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. CAA Section 110(l)
Under CAA section 110(l) (sometimes referred to as an ``anti-
backsliding'' provision), EPA cannot approve a plan revision ``if the
revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 7501
of this title), or any other applicable requirement of this chapter.''
Based on the following analysis, we find that our revisions to the 2016
FIP are consistent with CAA section 110(l) because they will not
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment or
reasonable further progress or any other applicable requirements of the
CAA.
A. NOX Emission Limits
When the 2016 FIP was promulgated, NOX control
technology had not yet been installed on the furnaces at Tilden,
Hibbing, Minorca, and UTAC. Therefore, EPA established initial emission
limitations based on the modeled (estimated) performance of the
proposed technology along with a procedure to refine and modify the
emission limits within a specified range based upon CEMS data collected
after installation of the NOX control technology. The 2016
FIP also allowed for the establishment of a single NOX limit
for all fuels. However, the NOX emission limits in the 2016
FIP are not enforceable and final until EPA takes action to confirm or
modify the initial emission limits established in the 2016 FIP. Because
the NOX limits established in the 2016 FIP have not been
confirmed and made enforceable through the procedures set forth in the
2016 FIP, and are not currently enforceable, the proposed
NOX emission limits do not alter any existing enforceable
limits, since there are no current enforceable limits. Therefore,
approval of the proposed NOX limits would not interfere with
any applicable requirement concerning attainment or reasonable further
progress, or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.
Additionally, even if EPA were to evaluate the proposed
NOX emission limits in relation to the relevant provisions
of the 2016 FIP, we believe the FIP will not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning attainment or reasonable further
progress, or any other applicable requirements of the CAA.\31\ EPA's
proposed action will complete the process set forth in the 2016 FIP to
finalize enforceable NOX emission limits for Tilden,
Hibbing, UTAC, and Minorca within ranges previously established. The
NOX emission limits EPA is proposing reflect BART because
they were calculated using the corrected UPL equation and actual
emission data recorded by CEMS, after installation of the required low-
NOX technology, pursuant to the procedures set forth in
[[Page 96161]]
the 2016 FIP. While crossline averaging was not addressed in the 2016
FIP, under the BART Guidelines, a source may be permitted to ``
`average' emissions across any set of BART-eligible emission units
within a fenceline, as long as the emission reductions from each
pollutant being controlled for BART would be equal to those reductions
that would be obtained by simply controlling each of the BART-eligible
units that constitute BART-eligible sources.'' \32\ Based on EPA's
analysis, the crossline average emission limits proposed for Hibbing
and UTAC are equal to the reductions that would be obtained by
controlling each line separately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ 40 CFR 52.1183(k)(1)(viii), 52.1235(b)(1)(iv)(A)(8) and
52.1235(b)(1)(iv)(B)(8).
\32\ 40 CFR part 51, appendix Y, at V.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed NOX emission limits do not reflect a change
in EPA's BART determination. Rather, the proposed limits were
calculated using CEMS data and the corrected UPL equation, following
the procedure set forth in the 2016 FIP, to more accurately reflect an
emission limit consistent with the actual emission reduction
capabilities of the BART controls and within the natural gas ranges
established in the 2016 FIP. Therefore, there are no expected increases
in NOX emissions compared to the ranges set in the 2016 FIP.
B. SO2 Emission Limits
EPA is proposing to revise the SO2 emission limits
applicable to Minorca, Northshore, and Tilden. Minorca and Northshore
are straight-grate furnaces that do not co-fire with coal;
SO2 emissions from these sources result from sulfur in the
ore processed in the furnaces. As discussed previously, when the
Original FIP was promulgated, SO2 BART for Minorca and
Northshore was established as no further controls. EPA set initial
SO2 emission limits based on limited stack test data and
established a procedure to refine those limits when CEMS data became
available. EPA is proposing to modify the Minorca emission limit from
38.16 lbs SO2/hour to 68.2 lbs SO2/hour and the
Northshore emission limit from 39.0 lbs SO2/hour to 17.0 lbs
SO2/hour. These proposed revised emission limits do not
reflect a change in EPA's BART determination or in operations at the
facilities that would lead to an increase or decrease in SO2
emissions. Rather, the emission limits EPA is proposing establish
emission limits that more accurately reflect BART because they were
calculated using the corrected UPL equation and actual emission data
recorded by CEMS, pursuant to the procedures set forth in the Original
FIP.
Similarly, the 2016 FIP established SO2 BART for Tilden
as a limit on the sulfur content of the coal and no further controls,
and set an SO2 emission limit for Tilden along with a
process to modify that limit when CEMS data became available. EPA is
not proposing to revise any limits on the sulfur content of coal at
Tilden. EPA is only proposing to modify Tilden's emissions limit from
500 lbs SO2/hour to 189 lbs SO2/hour. The revised
emission limit was calculated using the corrected UPL equation and
actual emission data recorded by CEMS, pursuant to the procedures set
forth in the 2016 FIP.
In sum, as a result of the revised SO2 emissions limits
described above, EPA does not expect changes in SO2
emissions from these sources. The limits do not reflect a change in
EPA's BART determination or in operations at the facilities. Rather,
the proposed limits more accurately reflect actual emissions that were
calculated using newly available CEMS data and the corrected UPL
equation.
C. Regional Haze SIPs
On June 12, 2012 (77 FR 34801), EPA approved Minnesota's regional
haze plan for the first implementation planning period as satisfying
the applicable requirements in 40 CFR 51.308, except for BART emission
limits for the taconite facilities. Among the regional haze plan
elements approved were Minnesota's long-term strategy for making
reasonable progress toward visibility goals. Minnesota's long-term
strategy did not rely on the achievement of any particular degree of
emission control from the taconite plants to achieve reasonable
progress goals.
On December 3, 2012 (77 FR 71533), EPA approved Michigan's regional
haze plan for the first implementation planning period as satisfying
the applicable requirements in 40 CFR 51.308, except for BART emission
limits for Tilden, St. Mary's Cement, and Escanaba Paper Company. Among
the regional haze plan elements approved was Michigan's long-term
strategy for making reasonable progress toward visibility goals.
Michigan's long-term strategy did not rely on the achievement of any
particular degree of emission control from the taconite plants to
achieve reasonable progress goals.
On August 23, 2021, Michigan submitted a revision to their regional
haze SIP for the second implementation planning period. Michigan's
submittal provided a long-term strategy and reasonable progress goals
that included 2028 emission projections for Tilden based on a 2016
modeling platform developed by LADCO that did not rely on emission
limits or ranges in the 2016 FIP.
On December 20, 2022, Minnesota submitted a revision to its
regional haze SIP for the second implementation period. Minnesota's
long-term strategy included implementation of the current applicable
limits and ranges in the Original FIP and 2016 FIP for Hibbing,
Minorca, UTAC, and Northshore. However, in applying the long-term
strategy to develop its reasonable progress goals, Minnesota used 2028
projected emissions modeling that relied on the 2016 FIP limits only
for UTAC and not for Hibbing, Minorca, or Northshore. For Hibbing and
Minorca, Minnesota's modeling utilized 2028 projected emissions
provided by LADCO using the 2016 emissions modeling platform since CEMS
data was not available at the time. For Northshore, Minnesota accounted
for the facility being idled until 2031, which was incorporated into an
enforceable agreement as an Administrative Order by Consent issued by
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to Northshore and Cleveland-
Cliffs, Inc. To project 2028 emissions for UTAC, Minnesota used 2017
CEMS data to convert NOX and SO2 emissions and
associated heat input into emission rates that allowed for a comparison
to the limits and ranges in the 2016 FIP. Minnesota kept heat input
rates the same and assumed compliance at the least stringent end of the
emission limit ranges (e.g., for an emission limit range of 2.8-3.0 lbs
NOX/MMBtu, Minnesota assumed 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu in
the emission calculations), resulting in conservative emission
projections for 2028. Using a photochemical model based on the 2028
emission projections for all selected sources in their regional haze
plan, including the taconite facilities, Minnesota estimated future
visibility and established their reasonable progress goals.
Although EPA has not yet taken final action on the regional haze
SIP revisions submitted by Michigan and Minnesota for the second
implementation period, the assumptions used in the long-term strategies
and reasonable progress goals were no more stringent than the currently
applicable Original FIP and 2016 FIP emission limits and ranges or the
revised limits we are proposing in this action. Therefore, the revised
NOX emission limits for Tilden, Hibbing, UTAC, Minorca, and
Northshore represent greater control overall than was assumed in
Michigan's and Minnesota's long-term strategy and would not result in a
degradation of the reasonable progress goals required by 40 CFR
51.308(d)(1).
[[Page 96162]]
D. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Reasonable
Further Progress
With respect to requirements concerning attainment of the NAAQS and
reasonable further progress, EPA is proposing to finalize
NOX BART emission limits for seven subject-to-BART units at
four facilities within the ranges established in the 2016 FIP. EPA is
also proposing to finalize SO2 emission limits for three
facilities which will not result in an increase in SO2
emissions. Thus, the proposed FIP revision will not interfere with
attainment and reasonable further progress requirements.
E. Conclusion
We find that these revisions are consistent with CAA section
110(l). The previous sections of the notice explain how the proposed
FIP revision will comply with applicable regional haze requirements and
general implementation plan requirements and demonstrate that it will
not interfere with any regional haze program requirements, attainment
and reasonable further progress, or any other requirement of the CAA.
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by
law, to make environmental justice (EJ) part of their mission by
identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on communities with EJ concerns.
EPA believes that the human health and environmental conditions
that exist prior to this action do not result in disproportionate and
adverse effects on communities with EJ concerns. To identify
environmental burdens and susceptible populations in communities nearby
the Tilden, Hibbing, Minorca, Northshore, and UTAC facilities, and to
examine the implications of the proposed NOX and
SO2 emission limits, EPA utilized the EJScreen tool to
evaluate environmental and demographic indicators within a 3-mile
buffer, a 10-mile buffer, and the county that each facility is located
in (Marquette County, Michigan for Tilden; St. Louis County, Minnesota
for Hibbing, Minorca, and UTAC; and Lake County, Minnesota for
Northshore).
EPA's screening-level analysis indicates that communities near the
facilities affected by this action score below the national average for
the EJScreen ``Demographic Index'', which is the average of an area's
percent minority and percent low-income populations, i.e., the two
demographic indicators explicitly named in Executive Order 12898.
Additionally, the results indicate that these areas score below the
80th percentile (in comparison to the nation as a whole) in the 13 EJ
Indexes established by EPA, which include a combination of
environmental and demographic information. EPA has provided that if any
of the EJ indexes for the areas under consideration are at or above the
80th percentile nationally, then further review may be appropriate. As
discussed in the EPA's EJ technical guidance, communities with EJ
concerns often experience greater exposure and disease burdens than the
general population, which can increase their susceptibility to adverse
health effects from environmental stressors.
EPA believes that this action is not likely to result in new
disproportionate and adverse effects on communities with EJ concerns.
This action proposes to set final NOX and SO2
emission limits which are not expected to result in new or increased
burdens on residents, including those in communities of EJ concern, as
specified in Executive Order 12898.
EPA invited the identification of EJ and other concerns during its
Tribal consultations which occurred prior to proposing emission limits
for all five taconite facilities. No EJ concerns were raised in the
context of this action. We have determined that this rulemaking will
not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on communities with EJ concerns. The information
supporting this Executive Order review is contained in the docket for
this action, including the EJSCREEN reports considering a 3-mile
buffer, a 10-mile buffer, and the county that each taconite facility is
in.
VI. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to modify the UPL equations used to establish
NOX and SO2 emission limits and to finalize
NOX and/or SO2 limits for the indurating furnaces
at five taconite facilities in accordance with the procedure set forth
in the 2016 FIP. Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the
following NOX limits, with compliance to be determined on a
rolling 30-day average: 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu for all fuels for
Tilden Line 1; a crossline average limit of 1.5 lb NOX/MMBtu
for Hibbing Lines 1, 2, and 3; a crossline average emission limit of
3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu for all fuels for UTAC Lines 1 and 2; and
1.6 lbs NOX/MMBtu for Minorca's indurating furnace. EPA is
proposing to approve the following SO2 limits, with
compliance to be determined on a rolling 30-day average: 189 lbs
SO2/hr for all fuels for Tilden Line 1; an aggregate
emission limit of 247.8 lbs SO2/hr for Hibbing Lines 1, 2,
and 3; 68.2 lbs SO2/hr for Minorca's indurating furnace; and
an aggregate limit of 17.0 lbs SO2/hr for Northshore
Furnaces 11 and 12.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action as defined in
Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094, and was
therefore not subject to a requirement for Executive Order 12866
review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed action does not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. Because the FIP applies to just the taconite facilities in
Michigan and Minnesota, the Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply. See
5 CFR 1320.3(c).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
I certify that this proposed action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
RFA. This proposed action will not impose any requirements on small
entities. This action, if finalized, will add additional controls to
certain sources. None of these sources are owned by small entities, and
therefore are not small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This proposed action does not contain any unfunded mandate as
described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. The proposed action imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local or Tribal governments or the
private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This proposed action does not have federalism implications. It will
not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship
between the national government and the states, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
[[Page 96163]]
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This proposed action does not have Tribal implications, as
specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct
effects on Tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action. Consistent with the EPA Policy on Consultation
and Coordination with Indian Tribes, EPA did discuss this action in
conference calls with the Michigan and Minnesota Tribes.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not 3(f)(1) significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks
addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children.
To the extent this action, if finalized, will limit emissions of
NOX and SO2 emissions, the rule will have a
beneficial effect on children's health by reducing air pollution.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations and
Executive Order 14096: Revitalizing Our Nation's Commitment to
Environmental Justice for All
EPA believes that the human health and environmental conditions
that exist prior to this action do not result in disproportionate and
adverse effects on communities with Environmental Justice concerns.
This proposed FIP limits emissions of NOX and SO2
from five taconite facilities in Michigan and Minnesota. EPA believes
that this action is not likely to result in new disproportionate and
adverse effects on communities with environmental justice concerns.
EPA performed an EJ analysis, as is described above in the section
titled, ``Environmental Justice Considerations.'' The analysis was done
for the purpose of providing additional context and information about
this rulemaking to the public, not as a basis of the action. Due to the
nature of the action being taken here, this action is expected to have
a neutral to positive impact on the air quality of the affected area.
In addition, there is no information in the record upon which this
decision is based inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 12898 of
achieving EJ for communities with EJ concerns.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Regional
haze, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Michael S. Regan,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend title
40 CFR part 52 as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. Section 52.1183 is amended by:
0
a. in paragraph (k) revising (1), (3), (4) and (5);
0
b. in paragraph (l) revising (3), (4)(v) and (4)(xii);
0
c. in paragraph (n) revising (1) and (2); and
0
d. removing and reserving paragraph (p).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 52.1183 Visibility protection.
* * * * *
(k) Tilden Mining Company, or any subsequent owner/operator of the
Tilden Mining Company facility in Ishpeming, Michigan, shall meet the
following requirements:
(1) NOX Emission Limits.
(i) An emission limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBTU, based on a
30-day rolling average, shall apply to Tilden Grate Kiln Line 1
(EUKILN1) beginning January 3, 2025.
(ii) Compliance with this emission limit shall be demonstrated with
data collected by a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) for
NOX.
(2) SO2 Emission Limits. * * *
(3) The owner or operator of the Tilden Grate Kiln Line 1 (EUKILN1)
furnace shall meet an emission limit of 189.0 lbs SO2/hr,
based on a 30-day rolling average, beginning on January 3, 2025.
Compliance with this emission limit shall be demonstrated with data
collected by a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) for
SO2. Beginning November 12, 2016, any coal burned on Tilden
Grate Kiln Line 1 shall have no more than 0.60 percent sulfur by weight
based on a monthly block average. The sampling and calculation
methodology for determining the sulfur content of coal must be
described in the monitoring plan required for this furnace.
(4) Emissions resulting from the combustion of fuel oil are not
included in the calculation of the 30-day rolling average. However, if
any fuel oil is burned after the first day that SO2 CEMS are
required to be operational, then the information specified in (k)(5)
must be submitted, for each calendar year, to the Regional
Administrator at [email protected] no later than 30 days after the
end of each calendar year so that a limit can be set.
(5) Records shall be kept for any day during which fuel oil is
burned as fuel (either alone or blended with other fuels) in Grate Kiln
Line 1. These records must include, at a minimum, the gallons of fuel
oil burned per hour, the sulfur content of the fuel oil, and the
SO2 emissions in pounds per hour. If any fuel oil is burned
after the first day that SO2 CEMS are required to be
operational, then the records must be submitted, for each calendar
year, to the Regional Administrator at [email protected] no later
than 30 days after the end of each calendar year.
(l) Testing and monitoring.
* * *
(3) The owner or operator shall install, certify, calibrate,
maintain, and operate one or more continuous diluent monitor(s)
(O2 or CO2) and continuous stack gas flow rate
monitor(s) on Tilden Grate Kiln Line 1 to allow conversion of the
NOX and SO2 concentrations to units of the
standard (lbs/MMBTU and lbs/hr, respectively) unless a demonstration is
made that a diluent monitor and/or continuous flow rate monitor are not
needed for the owner or operator to demonstrate compliance with
applicable emission limits in units of the standard.
(4) * * *
* * * * *
(v) The owner or operator of each CEMS must furnish the Regional
Administrator a written report of the results of each quarterly
performance evaluation and a data accuracy assessment pursuant to 40
CFR part 60 appendix F within 60 days after the calendar quarter in
which the
[[Page 96164]]
performance evaluation was completed. These reports shall be submitted
to the Regional Administrator at [email protected].
* * * * *
(xii) Data substitution must not be used for purposes of
determining compliance under this regulation. If CEMS data is measuring
only a portion of the NOX or SO2 emitted during
startup, shutdown, or malfunction conditions, the CEMS data may be
supplemented, but not modified, by the addition of calculated emission
rates using procedures set forth in the site specific monitoring plan.
* * * * *
(n) Reporting requirements.
(1) Unless instructed otherwise, all requests, reports, submittals,
notifications, and other communications required by this section shall
be submitted to the Regional Administrator at [email protected].
References in this section to the Regional Administrator shall mean the
EPA Regional Administrator for Region 5.
(2) The owner or operator of each BART affected unit identified in
this section and CEMS required by this section must provide to the
Regional Administrator the written notifications, reports, and plans
identified at paragraphs (n)(2)(i) through (viii) of this section.
* * *
* * * * *
(p) [Reserved]
* * * * *
0
3. Section 52.1235 is amended by:
0
a. in paragraph (b) revising (1)(ii), (1)(iv), (1)(v), (1)(vi),
(2)(ii), (2)(v) and (2)(vi);
0
b. in paragraph (c) revising (1), (2), (3), (4)(ii), (4)(v), and
(4)(xii); and
0
c. in paragraph (e) revising (1) and (2); and
0
d. revising paragraph (f).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 52.1235 Regional haze.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) NOX emission limits.
(i) * * *
(ii) Hibbing Taconite Company
(A) An aggregate emission limit of 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu,
based on a 30-day rolling average, shall apply to the combined
NOX emissions from the three indurating furnaces, Line 1
(EU020), Line 2 (EU021), and Line 3 (EU022), beginning on January 3,
2025. To determine the aggregate emission rate, the combined
NOX emissions from Lines 1, 2, and 3 shall be divided by the
total heat input to the three lines (in MMBtu) during every rolling 30-
day period.
(B) Compliance with this emission limit shall be demonstrated with
data collected by a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) for
NOX.
(iii) * * *
(iv) United Taconite
(A) An aggregate emission limit of 3.0 lbs NOX/MMBtu,
based on a 30-day rolling average, shall apply to the combined
NOX emissions from the two indurating furnaces, Grate Kiln
Line 1 (EU040) and Grate Kiln Line 2 (EU042), beginning on January 3,
2025. To determine the aggregate emission rate, the combined
NOX emissions from Grate Kiln Line 1 and Grate Kiln Line 2
shall be divided by the total heat input to the two lines (in MMBtu)
during every rolling 30-day period.
(B) Compliance with this emission limit shall be demonstrated with
data collected by a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) for
NOX.
(v) Minorca Mine
(A) An emission limit of 1.6 lbs NOX/MMBtu, based on a
30-day rolling average, shall apply to the Minorca Mine indurating
furnace (EU026). This emission limit will become enforceable on January
3, 2025.
(B) Compliance with this emission limit will be demonstrated with
data collected by a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) for
NOX.
(vi) Northshore Mining Company--Silver Bay: An emission limit of
1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu, based on a 30-day rolling average, shall
apply to Furnace 11 (EU100/EU104) beginning October 10, 2018. An
emission limit of 1.5 lbs NOX/MMBtu, based on a 30-day
rolling average, shall apply to Furnace 12 (EU110/114) beginning
October 11, 2019. However, for any 30, or more, consecutive days when
only natural gas is used at either Northshore Mining Furnace 11 or
Furnace 12, a limit of 1.2 lbs NOX/MMBtu, based on a 30-day
rolling average, shall apply. An emission limit of 0.085 lbs
NOX/MMBtu, based on a 30-day rolling average, shall apply to
Process Boiler #1 (EU003) and Process Boiler #2 (EU004) beginning
October 10, 2021. The 0.085 lbs NOX/MMBtu emission limit for
each process boiler applies at all times a unit is operating, including
periods of start-up, shut-down and malfunction.
(2) SO2 Emission Limits.
(i) * * *
(ii) Hibbing Taconite Company
(A) An aggregate emission limit of 247.8 lbs SO2/hour,
based on a 30-day rolling average, shall apply to the combined
SO2 emissions from the three indurating furnaces, Line 1
(EU020), Line 2 (EU0021), and Line 3 (EU022), beginning on February 10,
2017. To determine the aggregate emission rate, the combined
SO2 emissions from Lines 1, 2, and 3 shall be divided by the
total hours of operation of the three lines during every rolling 30-day
period.
(B) Compliance with this emission limit shall be demonstrated with
data collected by a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) for
SO2.
(C) Emissions resulting from the combustion of fuel oil are not
included in the calculation of the 30-day rolling average. However, if
any fuel oil is burned after the first day that SO2 CEMS are
required to be operational, then the information specified in
(b)(2)(vii) must be submitted, for each calendar year, to the Regional
Administrator at [email protected] no later than 30 days after the
end of each calendar year so that a limit can be set.
(iii) * * *
(iv) * * *
(v) Minorca Mine
(A) An emission limit of 68.2 lbs SO2/hr, based on a 30-
day rolling average, shall apply to the indurating furnace (EU026)
beginning January 3, 2025.
(B) Compliance with this emission limit shall be demonstrated with
data collected by a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) for
SO2.
(C) Emissions resulting from the combustion of fuel oil are not
included in the calculation of the 30-day rolling average. However, if
any fuel oil is burned after the first day that SO2 CEMS are
required to be operational, then the information specified in
(b)(2)(vii) must be submitted, for each calendar year, to the Regional
Administrator at [email protected] no later than 30 days after the
end of each calendar year so that a limit can be set.
(vi) Northshore Mining Company--Silver Bay
(A) An aggregate emission limit of 17.0 lbs SO2/hr,
based on a 30-day rolling average, shall apply to Furnace 11 (EU100/
EU104) and Furnace 12 (EU110/EU114) beginning January 3, 2025. To
determine the aggregate emission rate, the combined SO2
emissions from Furnace 11 and Furnace 12 shall be divided by the total
hours of operation of the two furnaces during every rolling 30-day
period.
(B) Compliance with these emission limits shall be demonstrated
with data collected by a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS)
for SO2.
(C) Emissions resulting from the combustion of fuel oil are not
included in the calculation of the 30-day rolling average. However, if
any fuel oil is burned after the first day that SO2 CEMS are
required to be operational, then the information specified in
(b)(2)(vii) must
[[Page 96165]]
be submitted, for each calendar year, to the Regional Administrator at
[email protected] no later than 30 days after the end of each
calendar year so that a limit can be set.
(D) The owner or operator may submit to EPA for approval an
alternative monitoring procedure request. The request shall include at
least one year of CEMS data demonstrating consistent values at or below
5 lbs SO2/hr. The alternative monitoring procedure request
shall not remove the obligation to maintain and operate a flow rate
monitor in the stack. If approved, the owner or operator would not be
required to operate the SO2 CEMS and may demonstrate
continuous compliance using an emission factor derived from the average
of at least one year of existing SO2 data using the
procedure set forth in the site specific monitoring plan, and verified
by annual stack tests using EPA approved test methods, multiplied by
the daily measured flow rate as recorded by the flow rate monitor and
recorded as the daily lb/hr SO2 emission rate.
(vii) * * *
(c) Testing and monitoring.
(1) The owner or operator of the respective facility shall install,
certify, calibrate, maintain and operate continuous emissions
monitoring systems (CEMS) for NOX on United States Steel
Corporation, Keetac unit EU030; Hibbing Taconite Company units EU020,
EU021, and EU022; United States Steel Corporation, Minntac units EU225,
EU261, EU282, EU315, and EU334; United Taconite units EU040 and EU042;
Minorca Mine unit EU026; and Northshore Mining Company-Silver Bay units
Furnace 11 (EU100/EU104) and Furnace 12 (EU110/EU114). Compliance with
the emission limits for NOX shall be determined using data
from the CEMS.
(2) The owner or operator shall install, certify, calibrate,
maintain, and operate CEMS for SO2 on United States Steel
Corporation, Keetac unit EU030; Hibbing Taconite Company units EU020,
EU021, and EU022; United States Steel Corporation, Minntac units EU225,
EU261, EU282, EU315, and EU334; United Taconite units EU040 and EU042;
Minorca Mine unit EU026; and Northshore Mining Company-Silver Bay units
Furnace 11 (EU100/EU104) and Furnace 12 (EU110/EU114).
(3) The owner or operator shall install, certify, calibrate,
maintain, and operate one or more continuous diluent monitor(s)
(O2 or CO2) and continuous stack gas flow rate
monitor(s) on the BART affected units to allow conversion of the
NOX and SO2 concentrations to units of the
standard (lbs/MMBTU and lbs/hr, respectively) unless a demonstration is
made that a diluent monitor and/or continuous flow rate monitor are not
needed for the owner or operator to demonstrate compliance with
applicable emission limits in units of the standards.
(4) * * *
(i) * * *
(ii) CEMS must be installed and operational such that the
operational status of the CEMS identified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2)
of this section shall be verified by, as a minimum, completion of the
manufacturer's written requirements or recommendations for
installation, operation, and calibration of the devices.
* * * * *
(v) The owner or operator of each CEMS must furnish the Regional
Administrator a written report of the results of each quarterly
performance evaluation and a data accuracy assessment pursuant to 40
CFR part 60 appendix F within 60 days after the calendar quarter in
which the performance evaluation was completed. These reports shall be
submitted to the Regional Administrator at [email protected].
* * * * *
(xii) Data substitution must not be used for purposes of
determining compliance under this section. If CEMS data is measuring
only a portion of the NOX or SO2 emitted during
startup, shutdown, or malfunction conditions, the CEMS data may be
supplemented, but not modified, by the addition of calculated emission
rates using procedures set forth in the site specific monitoring plan.
* * *
* * * * *
(e) Reporting Requirements
(1) Unless instructed otherwise, all requests, reports, submittals,
notifications, and other communications required by this section shall
be submitted to the Regional Administrator at [email protected].
References in this section to the Regional Administrator shall mean the
EPA Regional Administrator for Region 5.
(2) The owner or operator of each BART affected unit identified in
this section and CEMS required by this section must provide to the
Regional Administrator the written notifications, reports and plans
identified at paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through (viii) of this section.
* * *
* * * * *
(f) Equations for establishing the upper predictive limit--
(1) Equation for normal distribution and statistically independent
data.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04DE24.035
Where:
x = average or mean of hourly test run data;
t[(n-1),(0.99)] = t score, the one-tailed t
value of the Student's t distribution for a specific degree of
freedom (n-1) and a confidence level (0.99, to reflect the 99th
percentile)
s\2\ = variance of the hourly data set;
n = number of values (e.g., 5,760 if 8 months of valid lbs
NOX/MMBTU hourly values)
m = number of values used to calculate the test average (m = 720 as
per averaging time)
(i) To determine if statistically independent, use the Rank von
Neumann Test on p. 137 of data Quality Assessment: Statistical Methods
for Practitioners EPA QA/G-9S.
(ii) Alternative to Rank von Neumann test to determine if data are
dependent, data are dependent if t test value is greater than t
critical value, where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP04DE24.036
r = correlation between data points
t critical = t[(n-2),(0.95)] = t score, the two-tailed t
value of the Student's t distribution for a specific degree of
freedom (n-2) and a confidence level (0.95)
(iii) The Anderson-Darling normality test is used to establish
whether the data are normally distributed. That is, a distribution is
considered to be normally distributed when p > 0.05.
(2) Non-parametric equation for data not normally distributed and
normally distributed but not statistically independent.
m = (n+1) * [alpha]
m = the rank of the ordered data point, when data are sorted
smallest to largest. The data points are 720-hour averages for
establishing NOX limits.
n = number of data points (e.g., 5040 720-hourly averages for eight
months of valid NOX lbs/MMBTU values)
[alpha] = 0.99, to reflect the 99th percentile
If m is a whole number, then the limit, UPL, shall be computed as:
UPL = Xm
Where:
Xm = value of the mth data point in terms of lbs SO2/hr
or lbs NOX/MMBtu, when the data are sorted smallest to
largest.
If m is not a whole number, the limit shall be computed by linear
interpolation according to the following equation.
[[Page 96166]]
UPL = xm = xmi[middot]md= xmi + 0.md(xm(i+1) - xmi)
Where:
mi = the integer portion of m, i.e., m truncated at zero decimal
places, and
md = the decimal portion of m
[FR Doc. 2024-27635 Filed 12-3-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
