83 FR 16276 - Air Plan Approval; GA; Permitting Revision
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 73 (April 16, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 73 (April 16, 2018)
| Page Range | 16276-16279 | |
| FR Document | 2018-07899 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 73 (Monday, April 16, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 16276-16279] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-07899] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0651; FRL-9976-90-Region 4] Air Plan Approval; GA; Permitting Revision AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve changes to the Georgia State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Georgia, through the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GA EPD) of the Department of Natural Resources, on April 11, 2003. EPA is proposing to approve portions of a SIP revision which includes changes to Georgia's rules regarding emissions standards and permitting. This action is being proposed pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and its implementing regulations. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 16, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04- OAR-2006-0651 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, [[Page 16277]] Georgia 30303-8960, or Joel Huey, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Wong can be reached by telephone at (404) 562-8726 or via electronic mail at wong.richard@epa.gov. Mr. Huey can be reached by telephone at (404) 562-9104 or via electronic mail at huey.joel@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On April 11, 2003, GA EPD submitted a SIP revision to EPA for approval that involves changes to Georgia's SIP regulations. In this action, EPA is proposing to approve the portion of the Georgia submission revising GA EPD Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(b)--Permit by Rule Standards. This submission also seeks to revise Rule 391-3- 1-.02(2)(nnn)--NOX Emissions from Large Stationary Gas Turbines and Rule 391-3-1-.02(5)--Open Burning. EPA is not taking action on the proposed changes to Rule 391-3-1-.02(2)(nnn) and Rule 391-3-1-.02(5) at this time. On October 21, 2009, GA EPD submitted a letter withdrawing from the submittal a proposed revision to Georgia Rule 391-3- 1-.02(2)(qqq)--Volatile Organic Compound From Extruded Polystyrene Products Manufacturing Utilizing a Blowing Agent.\1\ On January 5, 2017 (82 FR 1206), EPA approved changes to Rule 391-3-1-.01--Definitions that were also included in the April 11, 2003, submittal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The October 21, 2009, letter is included in the docket for this action. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Analysis of State's Submittal Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(b)--Permit by Rule Standards GA EPD's Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(b)6 establishes ``permit by rule'' \2\ standards for cotton ginning operations and applies to facilities with a potential to emit in excess of the Part 70 program major source thresholds. The rule provides that cotton ginning operations shall be deemed to have a ``permit by rule'' if they (1) maintain a log of the monthly production, and (2) limit annual production to 65,000 standard bales of cotton during any twelve consecutive months.\3\ The rule also stipulates that sources having potential emissions greater than major source thresholds even after meeting these conditions, or that are unable to meet these conditions, must obtain a title V operating permit pursuant to Georgia's Part 70 program. GA EPD's March 14, 2003, submittal would change the annual production threshold to qualify for a ``permit by rule'' from 65,000 standard bales of cotton ginned per year (bales/year) to 120,000 bales/year. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ Also known as an ``exclusionary rule'' or ``prohibitory rule,'' a ``permit by rule'' is an approach that State and local agencies can use to establish enforceable operational limits which ensure that a source's potential emissions are below the major source threshold. See, e.g., ``Guidance an Enforceability Requirements for Limiting Potential to Emit through SIP and Sec. 112 Rules and General Permits,'' Kathie A. Stein, Director, Air Enforcement Division, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, January 25, 1995. \3\ In addition, GA EPD Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(a)2 requires that any facility wishing to operate under the cotton ginning ``permit by rule'' shall certify its qualification in writing to the permitting authority, and the permitting authority shall grant the conditions and terms of the ``permit by rule'' by Certification letter to the facility. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Because of the mostly mechanical nature of the cotton ginning processes and the agricultural material handled, particulate matter (PM) is the primary regulated pollutant of concern. Georgia Rule 391-3- 1-.02(2)(q) uses a process weight calculation to establish allowable PM emission rates (in pounds per hour) from cotton gins based upon the number of bales processed per hour. In support of GA EPD's April 11, 2003, submittal, the State provided a technical rationale intending to show, based upon the allowable emission rate under Rule 391-3- 1-.02(2)(q), that increasing the cotton ginning ``permit by rule'' threshold of Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(b)6 to 120,000 bales/year would still ensure that source emissions would not exceed the major source threshold.\4\ EPA notes, however, that an allowable emission rate alone does not constrain a source's ``potential to emit,'' which is the maximum capacity of a stationary source to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design. See, e.g., 40 CFR 52.21(b)(4) and 40 CFR 70.2. In addition, the emission rate that is allowable under Rule 391-3-1-.02(2)(q) changes according to a source's process rate (i.e., bales ginned per hour) at any particular time. Therefore, EPA's evaluation of potential cotton ginning emissions is based upon the Agency's review of available PM emission factors for cotton ginning operations, in particular emission factors for PM10 and PM2.5 .\5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ Email from Jimmy Johnston, GA EPD, to Stacey Harder, EPA Region 4, May 30, 2007. \5\ Since at least 1995, EPA has considered the regulated form of PM for title V purposes to be particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers, or PM10 . See ``Definition of Regulated Pollutant for Particulate Matter for Purposes of Title V,'' Lydia N. Wegman, October 16, 1995, available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/pmregdef.pdf. In 1997 EPA finalized new air quality standards to regulate particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers, or PM2.5 . See 62 FR 38652 (July 18, 1997). The definition of ``regulated air pollutant'' in 40 CFR 70.2 includes any pollutant for which a NAAQS has been promulgated, including PM2.5 . --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA's Compilation of Air Emission Factors, AP-42, lists emission factors for typical cotton ginning configurations \6\ of 0.82 pound of PM10 per bale (for Configuration No. 1, gins with high- efficiency cyclones on all exhaust streams) and 1.2 pounds of PM10 per bale (for Configuration No. 2, gins with screened drums or cages on the lint cleaners and a battery condenser). But these are ``D'' and ``E''-rated factors, meaning reliability of the factors is below average to poor. The AP-42 emission factors for cotton ginning were last updated in 1996 and do not include emission factors for PM2.5 . EPA's 1998 ``Potential to Emit (PTE) Guidance for Specific Source Categories'' (1998 PTE Guidance) \7\ suggested possible prohibitory rule thresholds of 90,000 bales/year or 72,000 bales/year (for gins similar to Configuration No. 1 and Configuration No. 2, respectively). These numbers were derived by taking 90 percent (to provide a 10 percent safety margin) of the 100 tons per year (tpy) title V major source threshold and dividing by a ``worst case'' emission rate. The 90,000 bale/year and 72,000 bale/year thresholds were based upon emission factors of 2.0 pounds of PM10 per bale and 2.5 pounds of PM10 per bale, depending on the gin configuration, and were considered ``very conservative (worse than the typical `worst-case').'' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ Figure 9.7-1 of AP-42 shows a flow diagram of a typical cotton-ginning process, which includes an unloading system, No. 1 dryer and cleaner, No. 2 dryer and cleaner, No. 1 lint cleaner, No. 2 lint cleaner, mote fan, battery condenser and bailing system, master trash fan and overflow system. \7\ ``Potential to Emit (PTE) Guidance for Specific Source Categories,'' John S. Seitz, April 14, 1998. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA notes that there is more recent preliminary data to consider regarding cotton ginning emission factors. In an effort to develop PM emission factors that are representative of actual cotton ginning emissions, cotton gin associations across the U.S. funded a national study that was conducted during the period 2008-2012 and utilized data collection methodologies defined by EPA.\8\ Peer reviewed articles published on the data gathered from the study suggest a PM10 emission factor of [[Page 16278]] close to 1.3 pounds per bale \9\ and a PM2.5 emission factor of about 0.15 pound per bale \10\ for the most common cotton gin configurations. Subsequently, an environmental scientist analyzed this national study data in light of the 1996 AP-42 data and EPA's 2013 emission factor development procedures \11\ and developed a suggested PM10 emission factor of 1.0 pound per bale and a suggested PM2.5 emission factor of 0.10 pound per bale from typical cotton ginning operations.\12\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ Buser, M.D., Whitelock, D.P., Boykin, J.C., and Holt, G.A., Characterization of Cotton Gin Particulate Matter Emissions--Project Plan, Journal of Cotton Science, 16: 105-116 (2012), available at https://www.cotton.org/journal/2012-16/2/upload/JCS16-105.pdf. \9\ Boykin, J.C., Buser, M.D., Whitelock, D.P., and Holt, G.A., (multiple articles), Journal of Cotton Science, 18:173-182, 183-194, 195-206, 216-225, 248-257, 258-267, 300-308, and 338-347 (2014), available at http://www.cotton.org/journal/2014-18/index.cfm. \10\ Boykin, J.C., Buser, M.D., Whitelock, D.P., and Holt, G.A., (several articles), Journal of Cotton Science, 17:309-319, 320-332, 333-345, 357-367, 391-401; 402-413, 447-456, 489-499; and 357-367 (2013), available at http://www.cotton.org/journal/2013-17/index.cfm. \11\ See generally Eastern Research Group, Inc., Recommended Procedures for Development of Emissions Factors and Use of the WebFIRE Database (No. EPA-453/D-13-001) (August 2013), available at http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/efpac/procedures/procedures81213.pdf. \12\ See Thomas W. Moore, Proposed Updates for AP-42 Cotton Gin Emission Factors, p. 82 table 27b, M.S. Thesis, Oklahoma State University (May 2015). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As noted above, GA EPD's March 14, 2003, submittal would change the cotton ginning ``permit by rule'' threshold from 65,000 bales/year to 120,000 bales/year. The approach of EPA's 1998 PTE Guidance for development of a ``permit by rule'' was to set thresholds that would provide a 10 percent margin of safety from the 100 tpy Part 70 program applicability criterion. Using Georgia's proposed cotton ginning ``permit by rule'' threshold of 120,000 bales/year, an emission factor of 1.5 pounds per bale would result in maximum annual emissions of 90 tpy. According to AP-42, typical cotton gin emission factors for PM10 fall into the range of 0.82 pound per bale to 1.2 pounds per bale, which results in estimated annual PM10 emissions of 49 tpy to 72 tpy from 120,000 bales ginned. And based upon data from the national study, a typical cotton gin emission factor is likely to be in the range of 1.0 pound per bale to 1.3 pounds per bale, which would result in estimated annual PM10 emissions in the range of 60 tpy to 78 tpy from 120,000 bales ginned. Thus, the level of annual PM10 emissions from typical cotton ginning operations, as suggested by emission factors from AP-42 and the national study, provides a significant margin of safety from the 100 tpy Part 70 program threshold. Estimated PM2.5 emissions would be much lower due to the significantly lower emission factor for that size indicator of total PM. This analysis supports approval of GA EPD's revision to its ``permit by rule'' threshold for cotton gins. EPA believes that GA EPD's revision to Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(b)6 will not degrade air quality because it does not change the level of pollutant emissions allowable for cotton ginning operations under the SIP. The impact of the revision would be that cotton ginning operations which process cotton in the range of 65,000 bales/year to 120,000 bales/year (i.e., from the current ``permit by rule'' threshold to the new threshold) would now be able to choose to operate under a ``permit by rule'' rather than a standard operating permit as long as such sources maintain records of their production, in accordance with Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(b)6(i)(I). In addition, all cotton ginning operations in Georgia will still be required to comply with the State's existing PM emission limit at Rule 391-3-1-.02(2)(q), which remains unchanged and requires compliance with a numerical limit on PM emissions based on the number of bales ginned per hour. Further, EPA notes that there are currently no PM nonattainment areas in the State of Georgia and that cotton gins in the State are located primarily in areas which tend to have ambient PM concentrations well below the PM NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve this change to Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(b)6 from GA EPD's April 11, 2003, submittal. III. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the GA EPD Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(b)6--Cotton ginning operations, effective March 26, 2003, which revises permitting requirements for cotton ginning operations. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 office (please contact the person identified in the For Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more information). IV. Proposed Action EPA is proposing to approve a portion of the State of Georgia's April 11, 2003 submittal. Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the change to GA EPD Rule 391-3-1-.03(11)(b)6--Cotton ginning operations. EPA believes that the proposed change to the regulatory portion of the SIP is consistent with section 110 of the CAA and meets the regulatory requirements pertaining to SIPs. EPA also believes that the proposed change is consistent with CAA section 110(l), which states that the Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in CAA section 171), or any other applicable requirement of the Act. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using [[Page 16279]] practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: April 5, 2018. Onis ``Trey'' Glenn, III, Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2018-07899 Filed 4-13-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![16276 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules
content tagging; includes document formats c. Other structured markup formats: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
such as PDF/X). (i) XHTML or HTML, with DOCTYPE AGENCY
c. Other structured or markup formats: declaration and presentation stylesheet(s).
(i) Widely-used serials or journal non- (ii) XML-based document formats (widely- 40 CFR Part 52
proprietary XML-based DTDs/schemas with used and publicly-documented), with
presentation stylesheet(s). [EPA–R04–OAR–2006–0651; FRL–9976–90–
presentation style sheet(s) if applicable.
(ii) Proprietary XML-based format for Region 4]
serials or journals (with documentation) with Includes ODF (ISO/IEC 26300) and OOXML
DTD/schema and presentation stylesheet(s). (ISO/IEC 29500). Air Plan Approval; GA; Permitting
(iii) XHTML or HTML, with DOCTYPE (iii) SGML, with included or accessible Revision
declaration and presentation stylesheet(s). DTD.
(iv) XML-based document formats (widely (iv) Other XML-based non-proprietary AGENCY: Environmental Protection
used and publicly documented). With formats, with presentation stylesheet(s). Agency.
presentation stylesheets, if applicable. (v) XML-based formats that use proprietary ACTION: Proposed rule.
Includes ODF (ISO/IEC 26300) and OOXML DTDs or schemas, with presentation
(ISO/IEC 29500). stylesheet(s). SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
d. PDF (web-optimized with searchable
text).
d. PDF (web-optimized with searchable Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
e. Other formats: text). changes to the Georgia State
(i) Rich text format. e. Other formats: Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by
(ii) Plain text. (i) Rich text format. the State of Georgia, through the Georgia
(iii) Widely-used proprietary word (ii) Plain text. Environmental Protection Division (GA
processing or page-layout formats. (iii) Widely-used proprietary word EPD) of the Department of Natural
(iv) Other text formats not listed here. processing formats. Resources, on April 11, 2003. EPA is
2. Metadata Elements: If included with (iv) Other text formats not listed here. proposing to approve portions of a SIP
published version of work, descriptive data 2. Metadata Elements: If included with revision which includes changes to
(metadata) as described below should published version of work, descriptive data
accompany the deposited material: Georgia’s rules regarding emissions
(metadata) as described below should standards and permitting. This action is
a. Title level metadata: Serial or journal
accompany the deposited material: being proposed pursuant to the Clean
title, ISSN, publisher, frequency, place of
publication. a. As supported by format (e.g., standards- Air Act (CAA or Act) and its
b. Article level metadata, as relevant/or based formats such as ONIX, XMP, MODS, or implementing regulations.
applicable: Volume(s), number(s), issue MARCXML either embedded in or
DATES: Written comments must be
dates(s), article title(s), article author(s), accompanying the digital item): Title, creator,
received on or before May 16, 2018.
article identifier (DOI, etc.). creation date, place of publication, publisher/
c. With other descriptive metadata (e.g., producer/distributor, ISBN, contact ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
subject heading(s), descriptor(s), abstract(s)), information. identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
rather than without. b. Include if part of published version of OAR–2006–0651 at http://
3. Completeness: work: Language of work, other relevant www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
a. All elements considered integral to the identifiers (e.g., DOI, LCCN, etc.), edition, instructions for submitting comments.
publication and offered for sale or Once submitted, comments cannot be
subject descriptors, abstracts.
distribution must be deposited—e.g., articles,
3. Rarity and Special Features: edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
table(s) of contents, front matter, back matter,
etc. Includes all associated external files and a. Limited editions (including those with EPA may publish any comment received
fonts considered integral to or necessary to special features such as high resolution to its public docket. Do not submit
view the work as published. images.) electronically any information you
b. All updates, supplements, releases, and b. Editions with the greatest number of consider to be Confidential Business
supersessions published as part of the work unique features (such as additional content, Information (CBI) or other information
and offered for sale or distribution must be multimedia, interactive elements.) whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
deposited and received in a regular and 4. Completeness: Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
timely manner for proper maintenance of the a. For items published in a finite number etc.) must be accompanied by a written
deposit. of separate components, all elements comment. The written comment is
B. Electronic-Only Books:
1. Content Format:
published as part of the work and offered for considered the official comment and
a. Book-specific structured/markup format, sale or distribution must be deposited. should include discussion of all points
i.e., XML-based markup formats, with Includes all associated external files and you wish to make. EPA will generally
included or accessible DTD/schema, XSD/ fonts considered integral to or necessary to not consider comments or comment
XSL presentation stylesheet(s), and explicitly view the work as published. contents located outside of the primary
stated character encoding: b. All updates, supplements, releases, and submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
(i) BITS-compliant (NLM Book DTD). supersessions published as part of the work other file sharing system). For
(ii) EPUB-compliant. and offered for sale or distribution must be additional submission methods, the full
(iii) Other widely-used book DTD/schemas submitted and received in a regular and EPA public comment policy,
(e.g., TEI, DocBook, etc.). timely manner for proper maintenance of the
b. Page-oriented rendition: information about CBI or multimedia
deposit. submissions, and general guidance on
(i) PDF/UA (Portable Document Format/
Universal Accessibility; compliant with ISO Dated: April 6, 2018. making effective comments, please visit
14289–1). Sarang Vijay Damle, http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
(ii) PDF/A (Portable Document Format/ General Counsel and Associate Register of commenting-epa-dockets.
Archival; compliant with ISO 19005). Copyrights. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
(iii) PDF (Portable Document Format;
[FR Doc. 2018–07484 Filed 4–13–18; 8:45 am] Richard Wong, Air Regulatory
highest quality available, with features such
as searchable text, embedded fonts, lossless Management Section, Air Planning and
BILLING CODE 1410–30–P
compression, high resolution images, device- Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
independent specification of colorspace; and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
content tagging; includes document formats Environmental Protection Agency,
such as PDF/X). Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:32 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM 16APP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_16349/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 73 / Monday, April 16, 2018 / Proposed Rules 16279
practicable and legally permissible ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, On September 20, 2016 (81 FR 64354),
methods, under Executive Order 12898 identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– EPA approved in a final action,
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). OAR–2017–0740 at http:// Tennessee’s July 15, 2016, SIP revision
The SIP is not approved to apply on www.regulations.gov. Follow the online that changed Tennessee Gasoline
any Indian reservation land or in any instructions for submitting comments. Dispensing Facilities, Stage I and II
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe Once submitted, comments cannot be Vapor Recovery, rule 1200–03–18–.24.
has demonstrated that a tribe has edited or removed from Regulations.gov. to: (1) Allow for the removal of the Stage
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian EPA may publish any comment received II requirement and the orderly
country, the rule does not have tribal to its public docket. Do not submit decommissioning of Stage II equipment;
implications as specified by Executive electronically any information you and (2) incorporate by reference Federal
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, consider to be Confidential Business rule 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC,
2000), nor will it impose substantial Information (CBI) or other information and remove certain non-state-specific
direct costs on tribal governments or whose disclosure is restricted by statute. requirements for the Stage I.
preempt tribal law. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, II. Analysis of the State’s Submittal
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 On November 11, 2017, TDEC
comment. The written comment is
Environmental protection, Air considered the official comment and submitted a SIP revision to EPA seeking
pollution control, Incorporation by should include discussion of all points to add clarity for the benefit of the
reference, Intergovernmental relations, you wish to make. EPA will generally regulated community with gasoline
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate not consider comments or comment dispensing facilities. Tennessee is
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping contents located outside of the primary making a minor change to its rules
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or regarding gasoline dispensing facilities
organic compounds. other file sharing system). For (GDF) at subparagraph (1)(d) of rule
additional submission methods, the full 1200–03–18–.24—‘‘For any GDF
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. otherwise exempt from subparagraph (c)
EPA public comment policy,
Dated: April 5, 2018. of this paragraph based on monthly
information about CBI or multimedia
Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III, submissions, and general guidance on throughput, if the GDF ever exceeds the
Regional Administrator, Region 4. making effective comments, please visit applicability threshold specified in
[FR Doc. 2018–07899 Filed 4–13–18; 8:45 am] http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ subparagraph (c) of this paragraph, it
shall be subject to the requirements of
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P commenting-epa-dockets.
subparagraph (c) of this paragraph and
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: shall remain subject to those
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory requirements even if its throughput later
AGENCY Management Section, Air Planning and falls below the threshold. The owner or
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides operator shall inform the Technical
40 CFR Part 52 and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Secretary within 30 days following the
Environmental Protection Agency, exceedance.’’ The revision clarifies the
[EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0740; FRL–9976–81– Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, meaning and application of
Region 4] Georgia 30303–8960. The telephone subparagraph (1)(d) of rule 1200–03–18–
number is (404) 562–9222. Ms. Sheckler .24 by adding the words ‘‘ever’’ and
Air Plan Approval; Tennessee; can also be reached via electronic mail ‘‘and shall remain subject to those
Revisions to Stage I and Stage II Vapor at sheckler.kelly@epa.gov. requirements’’ italicized above.
Recovery Requirements In addition, this revision replaces the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: phrase ‘‘the effective date of this rule’’
AGENCY: Environmental Protection I. Background with the actual effective date of the rule
Agency. (July 14, 2016) and replaces ‘‘three years
ACTION: Proposed rule. On July 15, 2016, Tennessee after effective date’’ with the actual date
submitted a SIP revision to EPA seeking of the rule for compliance (August 14,
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection to modify SIP requirements related to 2019). Finally, this revision adds the list
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a Stage II and Stage I vapor recovery of counties (Davidson, Rutherford,
State Implementation Plan (SIP) systems. In relation to Stage II, TDEC Shelby, Sumner, Knox, Anderson,
revision submitted by the State of sought the removal of the Stage II vapor Williamson and Wilson) that need to
Tennessee through the Tennessee recovery requirements from Tennessee report to their permitting authority (if
Department of Environment and Air Pollution Control Regulation TAPCR they emit more than 25 tons in a
Conservation (TDEC) on November 11, 1200–3–18–.24 through two calendar year) and the cross reference to
2017, for the purpose of establishing mechanisms: (1) The addition of the existing reporting requirement in
minor changes to the gasoline requirements for decommissioning; and rule 1200–03–18–.02 to simplify the
dispensing regulations, including (2) the phase out of the Stage II vapor issuances of notices of authorization
adding clarifying language and effective recovery systems over a 3-year period under pending permit-by-rule
and compliance dates and specifying from January 1, 2016, to January 1, 2019, provisions.
the counties subject to the reporting in Davidson, Rutherford, Sumner, Pursuant to CAA section 110(l), the
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
requirement rule. EPA has preliminarily Williamson and Wilson Counties. TDEC Administrator shall not approve a
determined that Tennessee’s November also sought to amend the Stage I revision of a plan if the revision would
11, 2017, SIP revision is approvable requirements for gasoline dispensing interfere with any applicable
because it is consistent with the Clean facilities by adopting by reference the requirement concerning attainment and
Air Act (CAA or Act) and with EPA’s federal requirements of 40 CFR part 63, reasonable further progress (as defined
regulations and guidance. subpart CCCCCC and removing from the in CAA section 171), or any other
DATES: Comments must be received on SIP the state-specific language for Stage applicable requirement of the Act. The
or before May 16, 2018. I vapor recovery. State’s addition of clarifying language,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:32 Apr 13, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\16APP1.SGM 16APP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_16349/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-04-14 02:19:12
Document Modified: 2018-04-14 02:19:12
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Written comments must be received on or before May 16, 2018. | |
| Contact | Richard Wong, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960, or Joel Huey, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Wong can be reached by telephone at (404) 562-8726 or via electronic mail at [email protected] Mr. Huey can be reached by telephone at (404) 562-9104 or via electronic mail at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 16276 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Sulfur Oxides and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR