83 FR 28577 - Air Plan Approval; TN: Revisions to New Source Review
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 119 (June 20, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 119 (June 20, 2018)
| Page Range | 28577-28582 | |
| FR Document | 2018-13142 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 20, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 28577-28582] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-13142] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0050; FRL-9979-66--Region 4] Air Plan Approval; TN: Revisions to New Source Review AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve changes to the Tennessee State Implementation Plan (SIP) to revise New Source Review (NSR) regulations. Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the portions of a SIP revision submitted by the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), on May 28, 2009, that modify the definitions of ``baseline actual emissions.'' This action is being proposed pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 20, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04- OAR-2017-0050, 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: D. Brad Akers, 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. Mr. Akers can be reached via telephone at (404) 562-9089 or via electronic mail at [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. What action is EPA proposing? On May 28, 2009, TDEC submitted a SIP revision to EPA for approval that contains changes to Tennessee's SIP-approved major NSR permitting regulations at Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations (TAPCR) 1200-3-9-.01--``Construction Permits,'' including the adoption of federal requirements and the modification of certain other provisions.\1\ In this action, EPA is proposing to approve the portions of this SIP submission that make changes to the definitions of ``baseline actual emissions'' in Tennessee's SIP-approved Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) regulations at TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01(4)--``Prevention of Significant Air Quality Deterioration'' and 1200-3-9-.01(5)(b)-- ``Nonattainment Areas,'' respectively.\2\ Tennessee's NSR regulations at TAPCR 1200-3-9--.01 were last revised in the SIP on July 25, 2013 (78 FR 44886). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ The major NSR program, established in parts C and D of title I of the CAA and EPA's implementing regulations at 40 CFR 51.165, 40 CFR 51.166, and 40 CFR 52.21, is a preconstruction review and permitting program applicable to new major stationary sources of regulated NSR pollutants and major modifications at existing major stationary sources. A major modification is defined as any physical change in or change in the method of operation of a major stationary source that would result in a significant emissions increase of a regulated NSR pollutant and a significant net emissions increase of that pollutant from the major stationary source. See 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1), 51.166(b)(2)(i), and 52.21(b)(2)(i). \2\ EPA's regulations governing the implementation of NSR permitting programs are contained in 40 CFR 51.160-.166, 52.21, 52.24, and part 51, Appendix S. The CAA NSR program is composed of three separate programs: PSD, NNSR, and Minor NSR. PSD is established in part C of title I of the CAA and applies in areas that meet the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)-- ``attainment areas''--as well as areas where there is insufficient information to determine if the area meets the NAAQS-- ``unclassifiable areas.'' The NNSR program is established in part D of title I of the CAA and applies in areas that are not in attainment of the NAAQS--``nonattainment areas.'' The Minor NSR program addresses construction or modification activities that do not qualify as ``major'' and applies regardless of the designation of the area in which a source is located. Together, these programs are referred to as the NSR programs. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 28578]] II. Background On December 31, 2002, EPA published revisions to the federal PSD and NNSR regulations. See 67 FR 80186 (hereinafter referred to as the 2002 NSR Rule). These revisions included several major changes to the major NSR program, including the addition of an actual-to-projected- actual emissions test and the use of ``baseline actual emissions'' for determining major NSR applicability for existing emissions units. For projects involving multiple existing emissions units, the definitions require the use of one consecutive 24-month period to determine baseline emissions for the emissions units being changed and allows for the use of different consecutive 24-month baseline periods for each regulated pollutant. See 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xxxv), 51.166(b)(47), and 52.21(b)(48). EPA included this language in the definitions because NSR is, and has always been treated as, a pollutant-specific program.\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ See ``Technical Support Document for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment Area New Source Review (NSR): Reconsideration,'' pp. 14-15, available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-12/documents/petitionresponses10-30-03.pdf, and included in the docket for this proposed action. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On September 14, 2007, EPA approved SIP submittals from TDEC incorporating revisions to Tennessee's major NSR regulations in response to the 2002 NSR Rule (as modified in subsequent EPA rulemakings).\4\ In defining ``baseline actual emissions'' in its major NSR regulations, Tennessee elected not to adopt the provision in the federal definitions that allows the use of different consecutive 24- month baseline periods for each regulated pollutant for projects involving multiple existing emission units. Therefore, Tennessee's SIP- approved regulations only allow the same 24-month period to be chosen for all regulated NSR pollutants when calculating baseline actual emissions for major NSR applicability determinations for projects involving multiple emissions units. Compared to the federal definitions, Tennessee's SIP-approved regulations offer less flexibility in determining baseline actual emissions for these projects. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ EPA published rules on November 7, 2003 (68 FR 63021) and June 13, 2007 (72 FR 32526), modifying the 2002 NSR Rule. Sometimes, these three rules are collectively referred to as ``NSR reform.'' For more information on NSR reform, see https://www.epa.gov/nsr/nsr-regulatory-actions#nsrreform. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On May 28, 2009, Tennessee submitted a SIP revision that would, among other things, change the definitions of ``baseline actual emissions'' in its SIP-approved major NSR regulations to allow for the use of different 24-month periods for each regulated NSR pollutant for projects involving multiple emissions units, but only under certain limiting circumstances not included in the federal definitions. The text of Tennessee's proposed changes to its SIP-approved definitions of ``baseline actual emissions'' is provided in section III along with EPA's assessment under CAA section 110(l). Section 110(l) prohibits EPA from approving a SIP revision that would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP) (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. III. Analysis of Tennessee's Submittal Tennessee's May 28, 2009, submittal revises the SIP-approved definitions of ``baseline actual emissions'' at TAPCR 1200-3- 9-.01(4)(b)(45)(i)(III) and 1200-3-9-.01(4)(b)(45)(ii)(IV) for PSD, and 1200-3-9-.01(5)(b)(1)(xlvii)(I)III and 1200-3- 9-.01(5)(b)(1)(xlvii)(II)IV for NNSR. The relevant portion of the SIP- approved definitions read as follows: ``For a regulated NSR pollutant, when a project involves multiple emissions units, only one consecutive 24-month period must be used to determine the baseline actual emissions for the emissions units being changed.'' The proposed language reads as follows (strikethrough indicates language removed and underlined text indicates language added): BILLING CODE 6560-50-P [[Page 28579]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20JN18.007 [[Page 28580]] [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20JN18.008 BILLING CODE 6560-50-C Accordingly, a project involving multiple emissions units that would be subject to major NSR permitting under the current SIP-approved regulations would not be subject to these requirements under the revised definitions if it met the limiting criteria identified above for the use of pollutant-specific baseline periods. As noted above, EPA's major NSR rules do not contain such limiting criteria. Under the federal major NSR rules, a state must adopt the federal definitions into its SIP unless the state's definitions are more stringent than, or at least as stringent as, the federal definitions. See 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) and 51.166(b). EPA proposes to find that Tennessee's revisions to its SIP-approved definitions of ``baseline actual emissions'' are more stringent than the federal definitions given the limiting criteria and are therefore allowable changes to the State's SIP-approved NSR program pursuant to 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) and 51.166(b). As noted above, section 110(l) of the CAA prohibits EPA from approving a SIP revision that would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and RFP (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. The State is allowed to relax its SIP regulations as long as section 110(l) is met. EPA proposes to determine that the proposed changes to the Tennessee SIP, as described above, would not violate section 110(l) for the reasons discussed below. First, Tennessee's proposed changes will maintain the State program at a more stringent level than the federal NSR requirements. Unlike the federal rules, Tennessee's revised rules only allow for the use of different 2-year baseline periods under the limiting condition that ``one or more pollutants were emitted during such 2-year period in amounts that were less than otherwise permitted for reasons other than operations at a lower production or utilization rate.'' The revised rules then provide qualifying examples that would satisfy this condition, such as the voluntary use of cleaner fuels, lower volatile organic compounds coatings, improvements in control efficiency, addition of a control device, and alternate production methods, raw materials, or products that result in lower emissions of one or more pollutants. The permittee bears the burden of demonstrating that the limiting conditions of the regulation have been met, and if the demonstration is approved by the TDEC Technical Secretary, the demonstration and the Technical Secretary's approval must be included in the permit record. Accordingly, Tennessee's revised rules encourage sources to reduce emissions in order to qualify for the use of multiple, pollutant-specific baselines. EPA also believes that the impact, if any, on air quality as a result of the proposed change would be small given [[Page 28581]] the nature of the actual-to-projected-actual test and the limited applicability of the multiple baseline provision for the following reasons. First, the definition of ``projected actual emissions'' provides that the owner or operator ``[s]hall exclude, in calculating any increase in emissions that results from the particular project, that portion of the unit's emissions following the project that an existing unit could have accommodated during the consecutive 24-month period used to establish the baseline actual emissions under part (b)45. of this paragraph and that are also unrelated to the particular project, including any increased utilization due to product demand growth.'' TAPCR 1200-03-09-.01(4)(b)38.(i)(III). Under this provision, once the qualifying portion of any projected emissions increase is excluded, the result is the increase from the project. Accordingly, in most cases, the baseline actual emissions rate would not change the calculated emissions increase from an existing emissions unit. Second, the provision does not apply to new sources or new units at existing sources.\8\ Third, as it relates to existing emissions units, the change only applies to projects that involve multiple emissions units and only has a potential air quality impact on those projects that might otherwise have triggered PSD or NNSR applicability for more than one pollutant. Finally, the provision is further restricted to permittees who can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Technical Secretary, that emissions during the single baseline period were less than otherwise permitted for reasons other than operations at a lower production or utilization rate. In addition to narrowing the number of sources that qualify for the use of different baseline periods, this restriction also encourages the use of voluntary emissions reduction measures. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ See footnote 6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Moreover, the State is currently attaining all of the NAAQS except for the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) NAAQS in a portion of Sullivan County.\9\ Previous nonattainment areas for other NAAQS have all been redesignated to attainment, as shown in Table 1. Air quality in Tennessee has been improving in recent years, and Table 1 includes the available margin between current air quality monitoring design values, in micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) and parts per billion (ppb), and the most current corresponding NAAQS in each redesignated (maintenance) area.\10\ Additionally, none of the monitors in Tennessee outside of the Sullivan County SO2 nonattainment area show violating air quality data for any NAAQS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\ On May 12, 2017, TDEC submitted a plan to EPA to attain the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in Sullivan County. \10\ Air quality design values for all criteria air pollutants are available at: https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values. Table 1--Current Air Quality Status in Tennessee for Maintenance Areas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Margin relative to Maintenance areas NAAQS for which area is Status Current NAAQS 2015-2017 DV current NAAQS maintenance with 2014-2016 DV -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chattanooga........................ 1997 annual PM2.5 (15.0 Redesignated............. 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\.... 9.0 [mu]g/m\3\..... -3 [mu]g/m\3\ [mu]g/m\3\). (25.0%) Knoxville.......................... 2008 ozone (75.0 ppb).... Redesignated............. 70 ppb............. 68 * ppb........... -2 ppb (2.9%) Knoxville.......................... 1997 annual PM2.5 (15.0 Redesignated............. 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\.... 10.0 [mu]g/m\3\.... -2 [mu]g/m\3\ [mu]g/m\3\). (16.7%) Knoxville.......................... 2006 24-hour PM2.5 (35 Redesignated............. 35 [mu]g/m\3\...... 34 [mu]g/m\3\...... -1 [mu]g/m\3\ [mu]g/m\3\). (2.9%) Memphis............................ 2008 ozone (75 ppb)...... Redesignated............. 70 ppb............. 67 ppb............. -3 ppb (4.3%) Sullivan County.................... 2008 lead (0.15 [mu]g/ Redesignated............. 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\.... 0.01 [mu]g/m\3\.... -0.14 [mu]g/m\3\ m\3\). (93.3%) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * The TDEC relocated the Loudon Pope ozone site (AQS # 47-105-0108) to Loudon Elementary School (formerly Loudon Middle School, AQS # 47-105-0109) between the 2016 and 2017 ozone seasons, in accordance with the monitoring network plan. This is the combined DV between sites 47-105-0108 and 47-105- 0109. Regarding the Sullivan County SO2 nonattainment area, the proposed change would not impact SO2 concentrations in this area because it is in nonattainment for only one pollutant. Tennessee's revised rules only have a potential air quality impact in a nonattainment area with a multiple-unit project that could avoid NNSR through the use of different baseline periods for different pollutants. Therefore, in a nonattainment area such as Sullivan County where only one pollutant is subject to NNSR review, the revised rule has no impact. Additionally, any projects that would not qualify as major modifications under the revised definitions would still be subject to the preconstruction review and permitting requirements of Tennessee's SIP-approved minor NSR regulations at TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01(1). Under the SIP, no construction permit shall be issued if approval to construct or modify the air contaminant source would violate ambient air quality standards, would cause a violation of any requirement under TAPCR 1200- 3, would result in a violation of applicable portions of the control strategy, or would interfere with attainment or maintenance of NAAQS in a neighboring state. See TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01(1)(e).\11\ Therefore, the revision should not interfere with attainment or maintenance or any other requirement of the CAA because any project that would qualify for the use of different baseline periods would still be subject to the preconstruction review and permitting requirements of the SIP-approved minor NSR program. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ Tennessee's SIP-approved minor NSR rules require a source impact analysis with modeling. See TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01(1)(f). These rules also require BACT for minor NSR sources in nonattainment areas. See TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01(5)(b)2.(ii). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IV. Incorporation by Reference In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the portions of TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01 ``Construction Permits,'' effective April 24, 2013, that specifically revise the definitions of ``baseline actual [[Page 28582]] emissions'' in Tennessee's SIP-approved PSD and NNSR regulations as discussed above.\12\ 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). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ The state effective date of the rule changes to the definitions of ``baseline actual emissions'' in Tennessee's May 28, 2009, SIP revision is May 10, 2009. However, these changes to Tennessee's rule are captured and superseded by the version of TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01 that was state effective on April 24, 2013. On July 25, 2013 (78 FR 44889), EPA approved portions of the April 24, 2013 version of TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01 into the SIP and modified the state effective date at 40 CFR 52.2220(c) accordingly. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- V. Proposed Action EPA is proposing to approve the portions of Tennessee's May 28, 2009, SIP revision that change the definitions of ``baseline actual emissions'' in TAPCR 1200-3-9-.01,--``Construction Permits,'' as discussed above. VI. 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. 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 proposed action:Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866; 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 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, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: June 8, 2018. Onis ``Trey'' Glenn, III, Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2018-13142 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 28577
• Is not a significant regulatory action Dated: June 8, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D.
subject to review by the Office of Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III, Brad Akers, Air Regulatory Management
Management and Budget under Regional Administrator, Region 4. Section, Air Planning and
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, [FR Doc. 2018–13144 Filed 6–19–18; 8:45 am] Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
January 21, 2011); Environmental Protection Agency,
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta,
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Akers can be
action because SIP approvals are AGENCY reached via telephone at (404) 562–9089
exempted under Executive Order 12866; or via electronic mail at akers.brad@
• Does not impose an information 40 CFR Part 52 epa.gov.
collection burden under the provisions [EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0050; FRL–9979– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 66—Region 4]
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); I. What action is EPA proposing?
• Is certified as not having a Air Plan Approval; TN: Revisions to On May 28, 2009, TDEC submitted a
significant economic impact on a New Source Review SIP revision to EPA for approval that
substantial number of small entities contains changes to Tennessee’s SIP-
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 approved major NSR permitting
Agency.
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); regulations at Tennessee Air Pollution
ACTION: Proposed rule.
• Does not contain any unfunded Control Regulations (TAPCR) 1200–3–
mandate or significantly or uniquely SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 9–.01—‘‘Construction Permits,’’
affect small governments, as described Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve including the adoption of federal
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act changes to the Tennessee State requirements and the modification of
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Implementation Plan (SIP) to revise certain other provisions.1 In this action,
• Does not have Federalism New Source Review (NSR) regulations. EPA is proposing to approve the
implications as specified in Executive Specifically, EPA is proposing to portions of this SIP submission that
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, approve the portions of a SIP revision make changes to the definitions of
1999); submitted by the State of Tennessee, ‘‘baseline actual emissions’’ in
• Is not an economically significant through the Tennessee Department of Tennessee’s SIP-approved Prevention of
regulatory action based on health or Environment and Conservation (TDEC), Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
safety risks subject to Executive Order on May 28, 2009, that modify the Nonattainment New Source Review
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); definitions of ‘‘baseline actual (NNSR) regulations at TAPCR 1200–3–
• Is not a significant regulatory action emissions.’’ This action is being 9–.01(4)—‘‘Prevention of Significant Air
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR proposed pursuant to the Clean Air Act Quality Deterioration’’ and 1200–3–9–
28355, May 22, 2001); (CAA or Act). .01(5)(b)—‘‘Nonattainment Areas,’’
• Is not subject to requirements of DATES: Comments must be received on
respectively.2 Tennessee’s NSR
section 12(d) of the National or before July 20, 2018. regulations at TAPCR 1200–3–9–-.01
Technology Transfer and Advancement were last revised in the SIP on July 25,
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 2013 (78 FR 44886).
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
application of those requirements would OAR–2017–0050, at http:// 1 The major NSR program, established in parts C
be inconsistent with the CAA; and www.regulations.gov. Follow the online and D of title I of the CAA and EPA’s implementing
• Does not provide EPA with the instructions for submitting comments. regulations at 40 CFR 51.165, 40 CFR 51.166, and
discretionary authority to address, as Once submitted, comments cannot be 40 CFR 52.21, is a preconstruction review and
appropriate, disproportionate human edited or removed from Regulations.gov. permitting program applicable to new major
stationary sources of regulated NSR pollutants and
health or environmental effects, using EPA may publish any comment received major modifications at existing major stationary
practicable and legally permissible to its public docket. Do not submit sources. A major modification is defined as any
methods, under Executive Order 12898 electronically any information you physical change in or change in the method of
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). consider to be Confidential Business operation of a major stationary source that would
result in a significant emissions increase of a
The SIP is not approved to apply on Information (CBI) or other information regulated NSR pollutant and a significant net
any Indian reservation land or in any whose disclosure is restricted by statute. emissions increase of that pollutant from the major
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe Multimedia submissions (audio, video, stationary source. See 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1),
has demonstrated that a tribe has etc.) must be accompanied by a written 51.166(b)(2)(i), and 52.21(b)(2)(i).
2 EPA’s regulations governing the implementation
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian comment. The written comment is of NSR permitting programs are contained in 40
country, the rule does not have tribal considered the official comment and CFR 51.160–.166, 52.21, 52.24, and part 51,
implications as specified by Executive should include discussion of all points Appendix S. The CAA NSR program is composed
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, you wish to make. EPA will generally of three separate programs: PSD, NNSR, and Minor
NSR. PSD is established in part C of title I of the
2000), nor will it impose substantial not consider comments or comment CAA and applies in areas that meet the national
direct costs on tribal governments or contents located outside of the primary ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)—
preempt tribal law. submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or ‘‘attainment areas’’—as well as areas where there is
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
other file sharing system). For insufficient information to determine if the area
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 meets the NAAQS—‘‘unclassifiable areas.’’ The
additional submission methods, the full NNSR program is established in part D of title I of
Environmental protection, Air EPA public comment policy, the CAA and applies in areas that are not in
pollution control, Carbon monoxide, information about CBI or multimedia attainment of the NAAQS—‘‘nonattainment areas.’’
Incorporation by reference, Lead, submissions, and general guidance on The Minor NSR program addresses construction or
modification activities that do not qualify as
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate making effective comments, please visit ‘‘major’’ and applies regardless of the designation
matter, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ of the area in which a source is located. Together,
compounds. commenting-epa-dockets. these programs are referred to as the NSR programs.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:51 Jun 19, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JNP1.SGM 20JNP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_28696/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules 28581
the nature of the actual-to-projected- emissions rate would not change the voluntary emissions reduction
actual test and the limited applicability calculated emissions increase from an measures.
of the multiple baseline provision for existing emissions unit. Second, the Moreover, the State is currently
the following reasons. First, the provision does not apply to new sources attaining all of the NAAQS except for
definition of ‘‘projected actual or new units at existing sources.8 Third, the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2)
emissions’’ provides that the owner or as it relates to existing emissions units,
NAAQS in a portion of Sullivan
operator ‘‘[s]hall exclude, in calculating the change only applies to projects that
County.9 Previous nonattainment areas
any increase in emissions that results involve multiple emissions units and
from the particular project, that portion only has a potential air quality impact for other NAAQS have all been
of the unit’s emissions following the on those projects that might otherwise redesignated to attainment, as shown in
project that an existing unit could have have triggered PSD or NNSR Table 1. Air quality in Tennessee has
accommodated during the consecutive applicability for more than one been improving in recent years, and
24-month period used to establish the pollutant. Finally, the provision is Table 1 includes the available margin
baseline actual emissions under part further restricted to permittees who can between current air quality monitoring
(b)45. of this paragraph and that are also demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the design values, in micrograms per cubic
unrelated to the particular project, Technical Secretary, that emissions meter (mg/m3) and parts per billion
including any increased utilization due during the single baseline period were (ppb), and the most current
to product demand growth.’’ TAPCR less than otherwise permitted for corresponding NAAQS in each
1200–03–09–.01(4)(b)38.(i)(III). Under reasons other than operations at a lower redesignated (maintenance) area.10
this provision, once the qualifying production or utilization rate. In Additionally, none of the monitors in
portion of any projected emissions addition to narrowing the number of Tennessee outside of the Sullivan
increase is excluded, the result is the sources that qualify for the use of County SO2 nonattainment area show
increase from the project. Accordingly, different baseline periods, this violating air quality data for any
in most cases, the baseline actual restriction also encourages the use of NAAQS.
TABLE 1—CURRENT AIR QUALITY STATUS IN TENNESSEE FOR MAINTENANCE AREAS
Margin
relative to
NAAQS for which Current
Maintenance areas Status 2015–2017 DV current
area is maintenance NAAQS NAAQS with
2014–2016 DV
Chattanooga ................... 1997 annual PM2.5 (15.0 μg/m3) ..... Redesignated ... 12.0 μg/m3 .......... 9.0 μg/m3 ............ ¥3 μg/m3
(25.0%)
Knoxville .......................... 2008 ozone (75.0 ppb) .................... Redesignated ... 70 ppb ................. 68 * ppb ............... ¥2 ppb (2.9%)
Knoxville .......................... 1997 annual PM2.5 (15.0 μg/m3) ..... Redesignated ... 12.0 μg/m3 .......... 10.0 μg/m3 .......... ¥2 μg/m3
(16.7%)
Knoxville .......................... 2006 24-hour PM2.5 (35 μg/m3) ...... Redesignated ... 35 μg/m3 ............. 34 μg/m3 ............. ¥1 μg/m3 (2.9%)
Memphis ......................... 2008 ozone (75 ppb) ....................... Redesignated ... 70 ppb ................. 67 ppb ................. ¥3 ppb (4.3%)
Sullivan County ............... 2008 lead (0.15 μg/m3) .................... Redesignated ... 0.15 μg/m3 .......... 0.01 μg/m3 .......... ¥0.14 μg/m3
(93.3%)
* The TDEC relocated the Loudon Pope ozone site (AQS # 47–105–0108) to Loudon Elementary School (formerly Loudon Middle School, AQS
# 47–105–0109) between the 2016 and 2017 ozone seasons, in accordance with the monitoring network plan. This is the combined DV between
sites 47–105–0108 and 47–105–0109.
Regarding the Sullivan County SO2 be subject to the preconstruction review of the CAA because any project that
nonattainment area, the proposed and permitting requirements of would qualify for the use of different
change would not impact SO2 Tennessee’s SIP-approved minor NSR baseline periods would still be subject
concentrations in this area because it is regulations at TAPCR 1200–3–9–.01(1). to the preconstruction review and
in nonattainment for only one pollutant. Under the SIP, no construction permit permitting requirements of the SIP-
Tennessee’s revised rules only have a shall be issued if approval to construct approved minor NSR program.
potential air quality impact in a or modify the air contaminant source IV. Incorporation by Reference
nonattainment area with a multiple-unit would violate ambient air quality
project that could avoid NNSR through standards, would cause a violation of In this document, EPA is proposing to
the use of different baseline periods for any requirement under TAPCR 1200–3, include in a final EPA rule regulatory
different pollutants. Therefore, in a would result in a violation of applicable text that includes incorporation by
nonattainment area such as Sullivan portions of the control strategy, or reference. In accordance with
County where only one pollutant is would interfere with attainment or requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
subject to NNSR review, the revised rule maintenance of NAAQS in a proposing to incorporate by reference
has no impact. neighboring state. See TAPCR 1200–3– the portions of TAPCR 1200–3–9–.01
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Additionally, any projects that would 9–.01(1)(e).11 Therefore, the revision ‘‘Construction Permits,’’ effective April
not qualify as major modifications should not interfere with attainment or 24, 2013, that specifically revise the
under the revised definitions would still maintenance or any other requirement definitions of ‘‘baseline actual
8 Seefootnote 6. 10 Air quality design values for all criteria air TAPCR 1200–3–9–.01(1)(f). These rules also require
9 On May 12, 2017, TDEC submitted a plan to pollutants are available at: https://www.epa.gov/air- BACT for minor NSR sources in nonattainment
EPA to attain the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in trends/air-quality-design-values. areas. See TAPCR 1200–3–9–.01(5)(b)2.(ii).
11 Tennessee’s SIP-approved minor NSR rules
Sullivan County.
require a source impact analysis with modeling. See
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:51 Jun 19, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JNP1.SGM 20JNP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_28696/page/5.svg)
![28582 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2018 / Proposed Rules
emissions’’ in Tennessee’s SIP-approved • Does not have Federalism following four actions regarding the
PSD and NNSR regulations as discussed implications as specified in Executive Tennessee State Implementation Plan
above.12 EPA has made, and will Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, (SIP): approve Tennessee’s November
continue to make, these materials 1999); 22, 2017, SIP submittal seeking to
generally available through • Is not an economically significant change reliance from the Clean Air
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA regulatory action based on health or Interstate Rule (CAIR) to Cross-State Air
Region 4 office (please contact the safety risks subject to Executive Order Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for certain
person identified in the FOR FURTHER 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); regional haze requirements; convert
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this • Is not a significant regulatory action EPA’s limited approval/limited
preamble for more information). subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR disapproval of Tennessee’s regional
28355, May 22, 2001); haze plan to a full approval; remove
V. Proposed Action • Is not subject to requirements of EPA’s Federal Implementation Plan
EPA is proposing to approve the section 12(d) of the National (FIP) for Tennessee which replaced
portions of Tennessee’s May 28, 2009, Technology Transfer and Advancement reliance on CAIR with reliance on
SIP revision that change the definitions Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because CSAPR to address the deficiencies
of ‘‘baseline actual emissions’’ in application of those requirements would identified in the limited disapproval of
TAPCR 1200–3–9–.01,—‘‘Construction be inconsistent with the CAA; and Tennessee’s regional haze plan; and
Permits,’’ as discussed above. • Does not provide EPA with the convert the conditional approvals of the
discretionary authority to address, as visibility prong of Tennessee’s
VI. Statutory and Executive Order appropriate, disproportionate human infrastructure SIP submittals for the
Reviews health or environmental effects, using 2012 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5),
Under the CAA, the Administrator is practicable and legally permissible 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), and 2010
required to approve a SIP submission methods, under Executive Order 12898 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) National Ambient
that complies with the provisions of the (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to full
Act and applicable Federal regulations. The SIP is not approved to apply on approvals.
See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). any Indian reservation land or in any DATES: Comments must be received on
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, other area where EPA or an Indian tribe or before July 20, 2018.
EPA’s role is to approve state choices, has demonstrated that a tribe has
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
provided that they meet the criteria of jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
identified by Docket ID No EPA–R04–
the CAA. This action merely proposes to country, the rule does not have tribal
OAR–2018–0187 at http://
approve state law as meeting Federal implications as specified by Executive
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
requirements and does not impose Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
instructions for submitting comments.
additional requirements beyond those 2000), nor will it impose substantial
Once submitted, comments cannot be
imposed by state law. For that reason, direct costs on tribal governments or
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
this proposed action: preempt tribal law.
EPA may publish any comment received
• Is not a significant regulatory action
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 to its public docket. Do not submit
subject to review by the Office of
Environmental protection, Air electronically any information you
Management and Budget under
pollution control, Carbon monoxide, consider to be Confidential Business
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
Incorporation by reference, Lead, Information (CBI) or other information
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 matter, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory compounds. etc.) must be accompanied by a written
action because SIP approvals are comment. The written comment is
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
exempted under Executive Order 12866; considered the official comment and
Dated: June 8, 2018. should include discussion of all points
• Does not impose an information
Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III, you wish to make. EPA will generally
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Regional Administrator, Region 4. not consider comments or comment
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); [FR Doc. 2018–13142 Filed 6–19–18; 8:45 am] contents located outside of the primary
• Is certified as not having a BILLING CODE 6560–50–P submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
significant economic impact on a other file sharing system). For
substantial number of small entities additional submission methods, the full
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EPA public comment policy,
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); AGENCY information about CBI or multimedia
• Does not contain any unfunded submissions, and general guidance on
mandate or significantly or uniquely 40 CFR Part 52 making effective comments, please visit
affect small governments, as described [EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0187; FRL–9979– http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 62—Region 4] commenting-epa-dockets.
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Air Plan Approval; Tennessee; Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory
12 The state effective date of the rule changes to Regional Haze Plan and Prong 4 Management Section, Air Planning and
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
the definitions of ‘‘baseline actual emissions’’ in (Visibility) for the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
Tennessee’s May 28, 2009, SIP revision is May 10, NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS
2009. However, these changes to Tennessee’s rule
and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
are captured and superseded by the version of AGENCY: Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency,
TAPCR 1200–3–9–.01 that was state effective on Agency (EPA). Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta,
April 24, 2013. On July 25, 2013 (78 FR 44889), Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. Notarianni can
EPA approved portions of the April 24, 2013 ACTION: Proposed rule.
version of TAPCR 1200–3–9–.01 into the SIP and
be reached by telephone at (404) 562–
modified the state effective date at 40 CFR SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 9031 or via electronic mail at
52.2220(c) accordingly. Agency (EPA) is proposing to take the notarianni.michele@epa.gov.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:51 Jun 19, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20JNP1.SGM 20JNP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_28696/page/6.svg)
Document Created: 2018-06-20 00:20:31
Document Modified: 2018-06-20 00:20:31
| 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 | Comments must be received on or before July 20, 2018. | |
| Contact | D. Brad Akers, 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. Mr. Akers can be reached via telephone at (404) 562-9089 or via electronic mail at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 28577 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Carbon Monoxide; Incorporation by Reference; Lead; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Particulate Matter; Sulfur Oxides and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR