83_FR_55872 83 FR 55656 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Wyoming; Revisions to Regional Haze State Implementation Plan

83 FR 55656 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Wyoming; Revisions to Regional Haze State Implementation Plan

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 216 (November 7, 2018)

Page Range55656-55665
FR Document2018-24372

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a source-specific revision to the Wyoming State Implementation Plan (SIP) that provides an alternative to Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) for Unit 3 at the Naughton Power Plant (``the SIP revision'') that is owned and operated by PacifiCorp. The EPA proposes to find that the BART alternative for Naughton Unit 3 would provide greater reasonable progress toward natural visibility conditions than BART in accordance with the requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the EPA's Regional Haze Rule (RHR). The SIP revision was submitted by the State of Wyoming on November 28, 2017. The SIP revision for Naughton Unit 3 was submitted along with Wyoming's 5-year progress report, which is required under the Regional Haze Rule. However, the EPA is not proposing to act on the 5-year progress report in this rulemaking.

Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 216 (Wednesday, November 7, 2018)
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 216 (Wednesday, November 7, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55656-55665]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-24372]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2018-0607; FRL-9986-03-Region 8]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Wyoming; Revisions to Regional Haze State Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a source-specific revision to the Wyoming State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) that provides an alternative to Best Available Retrofit 
Technology (BART) for Unit 3 at the Naughton Power Plant (``the SIP 
revision'') that is owned and operated by PacifiCorp. The EPA proposes 
to find that the BART alternative for Naughton Unit 3 would provide 
greater reasonable progress toward natural visibility

[[Page 55657]]

conditions than BART in accordance with the requirements of section 110 
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the EPA's Regional Haze Rule (RHR). The 
SIP revision was submitted by the State of Wyoming on November 28, 
2017.
    The SIP revision for Naughton Unit 3 was submitted along with 
Wyoming's 5-year progress report, which is required under the Regional 
Haze Rule. However, the EPA is not proposing to act on the 5-year 
progress report in this rulemaking.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 7, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2018-0607, to the Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from 
www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its 
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you 
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia 
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written 
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, 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: Aaron Worstell, Air Program, EPA, 
Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-
1129, (303) 312-6073, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. General Information
II. Background
III. The SIP Revision for Naughton Unit 3
IV. Clean Air Action Section 110(l)
V. Consultation With FLMs
VI. The EPA's Proposed Action
VII. Incorporation by Reference
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

A. Definitions

    For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain 
words or acronyms as follows:
     The words Wyoming and State mean the State of Wyoming.
     The word Naughton refers to the Naughton Plant.
     The initials BART mean or refer to Best Available Retrofit 
Technology.
     The term Class I area refers to a mandatory Class I 
federal area.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 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.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The initials CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air Act.
     The initials CBI mean or refer to Confidential Business 
Information.
     The initials EGU mean or refer to Electric Generating 
Unit.
     The words EPA, we, us, or our mean or refer to the United 
States Environmental Protection Agency.
     The initials FGR mean flue gas recirculation.
     The initials FIP mean or refer to Federal Implementation 
Plan.
     The initials LNB mean or refer to low-NOX 
burners.
     The initials MMBtu mean or refer to million British 
thermal units.
     The initials NAAQS mean or refer to National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards.
     The initials NOX mean or refer to nitrogen oxides.
     The initials OFA mean or refer to over fire air.
     The initials PM mean or refer to Particulate Matter, which 
is inclusive of PM10 (particulate matter less than or equal 
to 10 micrometers) and PM2.5 (particulate matter less than 
or equal to 2.5 micrometers).
     The initials SCR mean or refer to Selective Catalytic 
Reduction.
     The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation 
Plan.
     The initials SO2 mean or refer to Sulfur Dioxide.

B. Docket

    All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov 
index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly 
available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically in 
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program, Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 
Colorado 80202-1129. The EPA requests that if at all possible, you 
contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy 
of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding 
federal holidays.

II. Background

A. Requirements of the Clean Air Act and the 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 which 
impairment results from manmade air pollution.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 42 U.S.C. 7491(a). Areas designated as mandatory Class I 
Federal areas consist of national parks exceeding 6,000 acres, 
wilderness areas and national memorial parks exceeding 5,000 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, 
the 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 whose visibility 
they consider to be 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 
section, we mean a ``mandatory Class I Federal area.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA promulgated a rule to address regional haze on July 1, 
1999.\3\ The RHR revised the existing visibility regulations \4\ to 
integrate provisions addressing regional haze and established a 
comprehensive visibility protection program for Class I areas. The 
requirements for regional haze, found at 40 CFR 51.308 and 40 CFR 
51.309, are included in the EPA's visibility protection regulations at 
40 CFR 51.300 through 40 CFR 51.309. The EPA revised the RHR on January 
10, 2017.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 64 FR 35714, 35714 (July 1, 1999) (codified at 40 CFR part 
51, subpart P).
    \4\ The EPA had previously promulgated regulations to address 
visibility impairment in Class I areas that is ``reasonably 
attributable'' to a single source or small group of sources, i.e., 
reasonably attributable visibility impairment (RAVI). 45 FR 80084, 
80084 (December 2, 1980).
    \5\ 82 FR 3078 (January 10, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CAA requires each state to develop a SIP to meet various air 
quality

[[Page 55658]]

requirements, including protection of visibility.\6\ Regional haze SIPs 
must assure reasonable progress toward the national goal of achieving 
natural visibility conditions in Class I areas. A state must submit its 
SIP and SIP revisions to the EPA for approval. Once approved, a SIP is 
enforceable by the EPA and citizens under the CAA; that is, the SIP is 
federally enforceable. If a state elects not to make a required SIP 
submittal, fails to make a required SIP submittal or if we find that a 
state's required submittal is incomplete or not approvable, then we 
must promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to fill this 
regulatory gap.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 42 U.S.C. 7410(a), 7491, and 7492(a); CAA sections 110(a), 
169A, and 169B.
    \7\ 42 U.S.C. 7410(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART)

    Section 169A of the CAA directs states as part of their SIPs to 
evaluate the use of retrofit controls at certain larger, often 
uncontrolled, older stationary sources in order to address visibility 
impacts from these sources. Specifically, section 169A(b)(2)(A) of the 
CAA requires states' implementation plans to 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 built between 1962 and 1977 procure, 
install, and operate the ``Best Available Retrofit Technology'' as 
determined by the states through their SIPs. Under the RHR, states (or 
the 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.\8\ Rather 
than requiring source-specific BART controls, states also have the 
flexibility to adopt an emissions trading program or other alternative 
program as long as the alternative provides greater reasonable progress 
towards improving visibility than BART.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 40 CFR 51.308(e). The EPA designed the Guidelines for BART 
Determinations Under the Regional Haze Rule (Guidelines) 40 CFR 
Appendix Y to part 51 ``to help States and others (1) identify those 
sources that must comply with the BART requirement, and (2) 
determine the level of control technology that represents BART for 
each source.'' Guidelines, Section I.A. Section II of the Guidelines 
describes the four steps to identify BART sources, and Section III 
explains how to identify BART sources (i.e., sources that are 
``subject to BART'').
    \9\ 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2). WildEarth Guardians v. EPA, 770 F.3d 
919 (10th Cir. 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. BART Alternatives

    An alternative program to BART must meet requirements under 40 CFR 
51.308(e)(2) and (e)(3). These requirements for alternative programs 
relate to the ``better-than-BART'' test and fundamental elements of any 
alternative program.
    In order to demonstrate that the alternative program achieves 
greater reasonable progress than source-specific BART, a state must 
demonstrate that its SIP meets the requirements in 40 CFR 
51.308(e)(2)(i) through (v). The state or the EPA must conduct an 
analysis of the best system of continuous emission control technology 
available and the associated reductions for each source subject to BART 
covered by the alternative program, termed a ``BART benchmark.'' Where 
the alternative program has been designed to meet requirements other 
than BART, simplifying assumptions may be used to establish a BART 
benchmark.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(E), the state or the EPA, must 
also provide a determination that the alternative program achieves 
greater reasonable progress than BART under 40 CFR 51.308(e)(3) or 
otherwise based on the clear weight of evidence. 40 CFR 51.308(e)(3), 
in turn, provides specific tests applicable under specific 
circumstances for determining whether the alternative achieves greater 
reasonable progress than BART. If the distribution of emissions for the 
alternative program is not substantially different than for BART, and 
the alternative program results in greater emissions reductions, then 
the alternative program may be deemed to achieve greater reasonable 
progress. If the distribution of emissions is significantly different, 
the differences in visibility between BART and the alternative program, 
must be determined by conducting dispersion modeling for each impacted 
Class I area for the best and worst 20 percent of days. This modeling 
demonstrates ``greater reasonable progress'' if both of the two 
following criteria are met: (1) Visibility does not decline in any 
Class I area; and (2) there is overall improvement in visibility when 
comparing the average differences between BART and the alternative 
program across all the affected Class I areas. Alternatively, pursuant 
to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2), states may show that the alternative achieves 
greater reasonable progress than the BART benchmark ``based on the 
clear weight of evidence'' determinations. Specific RHR requirements 
for alternative programs are discussed in more detail in Section 
III.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Generally, a SIP addressing regional haze must include emission 
limits and compliance schedules for each source subject to BART. In 
addition to the RHR's requirements, general SIP requirements mandate 
that the SIP include all regulatory requirements related to monitoring, 
recordkeeping, and reporting for the alternative's enforceable 
requirements. See CAA section 110(a); 40 CFR part 51, subpart K.

D. Reasonable Progress Requirements

    In addition to BART requirements, as mentioned previously, each 
regional haze SIP must contain measures as necessary to make reasonable 
progress towards the national visibility goal. Finally, the SIP must 
establish reasonable progress goals (RPGs) for each Class I area within 
the state for the plan implementation period (or ``planning period''), 
based on the measures included in the long-term strategy.\11\ If an RPG 
provides for a slower rate of improvement in visibility than the rate 
under which the national goal of no anthropogenic visibility impact 
would be attained by 2064, the SIP must demonstrate, based on the four 
reasonable progress factors, why that faster rate is not reasonable and 
the slower rate provided for by the SIP's state-specific RPG is 
reasonable.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 40 CFR 51.308(d).
    \12\ 40 CFR 51.308(d)(1)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Consultation With Federal Land Managers (FLMs)

    The RHR requires that a state consult with FLMs before adopting and 
submitting a required SIP or SIP revision.\13\ Further, the EPA, or 
state when considering a SIP revision, must include in its proposal a 
description of how it addressed any comments provided by the FLMs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 40 CFR 51.308(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Requirements for Regional Haze SIPs Submitted Under 40 CFR 51.309

    The EPA's RHR provides two paths to address regional haze. One is 
40 CFR 51.308, requiring states to perform individual point source BART 
determinations and evaluate the need for other control strategies. The 
other method for addressing regional haze is through 40 CFR 51.309, and 
is an option for nine states termed the ``Transport Region States,'' 
which include: Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New 
Mexico, Oregon, Utah and Wyoming. By meeting the requirements under 40 
CFR 51.309, a Transport Region State can be deemed to be making 
reasonable progress toward the

[[Page 55659]]

national goal of achieving natural visibility conditions for the 16 
Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Colorado Plateau is a high, semi-arid tableland in 
southeast Utah, northern Arizona, northwest New Mexico, and western 
Colorado. The 16 mandatory Class I areas are: Grand Canyon National 
Park, Mount Baldy Wilderness, Petrified Forest National Park, 
Sycamore Canyon Wilderness, Black Canyon of the Gunnison National 
Park Wilderness, Flat Tops Wilderness, Maroon Bells Wilderness, Mesa 
Verde National Park, Weminuche Wilderness, West Elk Wilderness, San 
Pedro Park Wilderness, Arches National Park, Bryce Canyon National 
Park, Canyonlands National Park, Capital Reef National Park and Zion 
National Park.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 309 requires those Transport Region States that choose to 
participate to adopt regional haze strategies that are based on 
recommendations from the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission 
(GCVTC) for protecting the 16 Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau. 
The purpose of the GCVTC was to assess information about the adverse 
impacts on visibility in and around the 16 Class I areas on the 
Colorado Plateau and to provide policy recommendations to the EPA to 
address such impacts. The GCVTC determined that all Transport Region 
States could potentially impact the Class I areas on the Colorado 
Plateau. The GCVTC submitted a report to the EPA in 1996 for protecting 
visibility for the Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau, and the EPA 
codified these recommendations as an option available to states as part 
of the RHR.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 64 FR 35714, 35749 (July 1, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA determined that the GCVTC strategies would provide for 
reasonable progress in mitigating regional haze if supplemented by an 
annex containing quantitative emission reduction milestones and 
provisions for a trading program or other alternative measure.\16\ In 
September 2000, the Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP), which is 
the successor organization to the GCVTC, submitted an annex to the EPA. 
The annex contained SO2 emissions reduction milestones and 
detailed provisions of a backstop trading program to be implemented 
automatically if voluntary measures failed to achieve the 
SO2 milestones. The EPA codified the annex on June 5, 2003 
at 40 CFR 51.309(h).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 64 FR 35714, 35749, 35756 (July 1, 1999).
    \17\ 68 FR 33764, 33767 (June 5, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Five western states, including Wyoming, submitted implementation 
plans under section 309 in 2003.\18\ The EPA was challenged by the 
Center for Energy and Economic Development (CEED) on the validity of 
the annex provisions. In CEED v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals 
vacated the EPA approval of the WRAP annex.\19\ In response to the 
court's decision, the EPA vacated the annex requirements adopted under 
40 CFR 51.309(h), but left in place the stationary source requirements 
in 40 CFR 51.309(d)(4).\20\ The requirements under 40 CFR 51.309(d)(4) 
contain general requirements pertaining to stationary sources and 
market trading, and allow states to adopt alternatives to the point 
source application of BART.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Five states--Arizona, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah and 
Wyoming--and Albuquerque-Bernalillo County, New Mexico, initially 
exercised this option by submitting plans to the EPA in December 
2003. Oregon elected to cease participation in 2006, and Arizona 
elected to cease participation in 2010.
    \19\ Ctr. for Energy & Econ. Dev. v. EPA, 398 F.3d 653, 654 
(D.C. Cir. 2005).
    \20\ 71 FR 60612 (October 13, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thus, rather than requiring source-specific BART controls as 
explained previously in Section II.B., states have the flexibility to 
adopt an emissions trading program or other alternative program if the 
alternative provides greater reasonable progress than would be achieved 
by the application of BART pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2). Under 40 
CFR 51.309, states can satisfy the SO2 BART requirements by 
adopting SO2 emissions milestones and a backstop trading 
program. Under this approach, states must establish declining 
SO2 emissions milestones for each year of the program 
through 2018. The milestones must be consistent with the GCVTC's goal 
of 50 to 70 percent reduction in SO2 emissions by 2040. The 
backstop trading program would be implemented if a milestone is 
exceeded and the program is triggered.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 40 CFR 51.309(d)(4)(v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. History of NOX and PM BART Determinations for Naughton Unit 3

1. PacifiCorp Naughton Unit 3
    The PacifiCorp Naughton Power Plant, located in Lincoln County, 
Wyoming, is comprised of three pulverized coal-fired units with a total 
net generating capacity of 700 megawatts (MW). All three boilers are 
tangentially fired and burn subbituminous coal. Naughton Unit 3 
generates a nominal 330 MW and commenced operation in 1971. Naughton 
Unit 3 is currently equipped with low-NOX burners (LNB) and 
overfire air (OFA) to control NOX, sodium-based wet flue gas 
desulfurization to control SO2, and an electrostatic 
precipitator and flue gas conditioning to control PM.\22\ All three 
units are within the statutory definition of BART-eligible units, and 
were determined to be subject to BART by Wyoming in its 2011 Regional 
Haze SIP (discussed below).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ PM includes both PM10 and PM2.5. See 
Definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. 2011 Wyoming Regional Haze SIP
    Wyoming submitted its SIP revision to the EPA on January 12, 2011, 
to address the requirements of section 309(g) of the RHR. On June 10, 
2013, the EPA proposed to approve portions of the Wyoming Regional Haze 
SIP, including the State's NOX and PM BART determinations 
for Naughton Unit 3.\23\ Specifically, we proposed to approve: (1) 
Wyoming's NOX BART emission limit of 0.07 lb/MMBtu (30-day 
rolling average), reflecting the existing LNBs plus OFA and the 
installation of selective catalytic reduction (SCR), and (2) Wyoming's 
PM BART emission limit of 0.015 lb/MMBtu, reflecting installation of a 
new full-scale fabric filter.24 25 We also proposed to 
approve the associated compliance dates that required that PacifiCorp 
comply with the NOX and PM BART emission limits within 5 
years from the effective date of our final rule (that is, by March 4, 
2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 78 FR 34738 (June 10, 2013); 78 FR 34760 (June 10, 2013).
    \24\ The BART requirement is met through compliance with the 
specified emission limit, and may be achieved through measures other 
than the referenced control technology.
    \25\ Wyoming's 2011 SIP also contained NOX emission 
limits of 259 lb/hr (30-day rolling average) and 1,134 tons/year, 
and PM emission limits of 56 lb/hr and 243 tons/year. These hourly 
and annual limits are the product of the respective lb/MMBtu 
emission limit and the design heat input for an hour or year. 
However, EPA's SIP approval only included the lb/MMBtu emission 
limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the public comment period for the EPA's proposed rule, 
PacifiCorp submitted comments indicating that, in place of installing 
SCR on Naughton Unit 3 to meet the NOX BART emission limit 
of 0.07 lb/MMbtu (30-day rolling average), it planned to convert the 
unit to natural gas firing by the end of 2018. On July 5, 2013, at the 
request of PacifiCorp, Wyoming issued air quality permit MD-14506 \26\ 
to modify the Naughton Power Plant by converting Unit 3 to fire natural 
gas. In a meeting with PacifiCorp held on October 31, 2013, the company 
clarified to the EPA that its comments were a request that the EPA 
establish emission limits reflecting conversion to natural gas through 
a FIP. In response to PacifiCorp's request, in our final rule the EPA 
indicated that while we tentatively supported PacifiCorp's planned 
conversion of Naughton Unit 3 to burn natural gas, we were unable to 
impose the associated emission limits

[[Page 55660]]

through a FIP.\27\ We found no basis to disapprove Wyoming's SIP 
requirement for Naughton Unit 3 and were therefore obligated to approve 
them. Accordingly, in a final rule dated January 30, 2014, the EPA 
approved Wyoming's NOX and PM emission limits for Naughton 
Unit 3 that reflected the installation of SCR and a new full-scale 
fabric filter baghouse.\28\ At the time, we acknowledged that Wyoming 
intended to submit a revision to its regional haze SIP for Naughton 
Unit 3 that would reflect conversion to natural gas. We indicated that 
we would act on the SIP revision in an expedited timeframe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The emission limits and other requirements associated with 
the BART alternative were superseded by subsequent permits.
    \27\ 79 FR 5045 (January 30, 2014).
    \28\ 79 FR 5220, 5221 (January 30, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Though we approved Wyoming's NOX and PM BART \29\ 
emission limits for Naughton Unit 3, we disapproved the monitoring, 
record-keeping, and reporting requirements in the SIP for all BART 
sources, and promulgated federal requirements in their place for the 
reasons stated in our January 30, 2014 final rule and June 10, 2013 
proposed rule.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Separately, under 40 CFR 51.309, Wyoming submitted a SIP 
satisfying BART requirements for SO2 by adopting 
SO2 emission milestones and a backstop trading program. 
We finalized approval of Wyoming's 309 program for SO2 on 
December 12, 2012. 77 FR 73926 (December 12, 2012).
    \30\ 79 FR 5221, 5222 (January 30, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Wyoming Regional Haze SIP Revision for Naughton Unit 3
    On November 28, 2017, Wyoming submitted a revision to the Wyoming 
Regional Haze SIP (``SIP revision'') that provides an alternative to 
NOX and PM BART for Naughton Unit 3 (``Naughton Unit 3 BART 
Alternative''). This SIP revision is in Appendix B to Wyoming's 5-year 
progress report, titled Alternative to BART for NOX and PM for 
PacifiCorp Naughton Unit 3, and includes five air quality permits for 
the Naughton Power Plant.\31\ The SIP revision is the subject of this 
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Appendix B to the SIP contains the State's better than BART 
demonstration (PDF pp. 184-193) and five air quality permits issued 
by the State of Wyoming for the Naughton Power Plant. Permit Nos. 
P0021110 (March 7, 2017), PDF pp. 194-198; P0021918 (November 18, 
2016), PDF pp. 199-200; MD-15946 (March 20, 2014), PDF pp. 201-205; 
MD-14506 (July 5, 2013), PDF pp. 206-215; and MD-6042A2 (March 7, 
2012), PDF pp. 216-220.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. The SIP Revision for Naughton Unit 3

A. Summary of the SIP Revision

    The November 28, 2017 SIP revision requires that PacifiCorp cease 
firing coal at Naughton Unit 3 no later than January 30, 2019.\32\ The 
SIP revision establishes NOX and PM emission limits that 
reflect firing natural gas, installation of new low-NOX gas 
burners along with a boiler flue gas recirculation system (FGR) for 
NOX control, and a limit on annual heat input of 12,964,800 
MMBtu/year (based on 12-month rolling average of hourly heat input 
values \33\) equal to 40 percent of the maximum design heat input when 
firing coal.\34\ Collectively, these control measures will 
significantly reduce NOX and PM emissions. The SIP revision 
includes the associated compliance deadlines, monitoring, recordkeeping 
and reporting requirements. Finally, the SIP revision includes a 
determination that the Naughton Unit 3 BART alternative is ``better 
than BART'' based on a demonstration that it fulfills the requirements 
of 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2) for a BART alternative. More information 
regarding Wyoming's analysis of the BART alternative is set forth 
below, along with the EPA's evaluation of the analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ The coal pulverizers will be removed from service.
    \33\ The EPA understands the ``12-month rolling average heat 
input of hourly heat input values'' to mean that the hourly heat 
input values are summed for each month, and that these monthly 
values are then averaged on a rolling 12-month basis.
    \34\ The State's SIP explains that ``. . . PacifiCorp will no 
longer operate the unit as a base-load Electric Generating Unit 
(EGU). Instead it will be operated as a peaking unit with a maximum 
annual heat input factor of 40%, or 12,964,800 MMBtu based on 12-
month rolling average of hourly heat input values.'' SIP Appendix B 
at p. 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. The EPA's Evaluation of the SIP Revision

    The RHR establishes the requirements for BART alternatives. Three 
of the requirements are of relevance to our evaluation of the Naughton 
Unit 3 BART alternative. We evaluate the proposed alternative to the 
NOX and PM BART requirements in the SIP revision with 
respect to each of these following elements:
     A demonstration that the emissions trading program or 
other alternative measure will achieve greater reasonable progress than 
would have resulted from the installation and operation of BART at all 
sources subject to BART in the state and covered by the alternative 
program.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     A requirement that all necessary emissions reductions take 
place during the period of the first long-term strategy for regional 
haze.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     A demonstration that the emissions reductions resulting 
from the alternative measure will be surplus to those reductions 
resulting from the measures adopted to meet requirements of the CAA as 
of the baseline date of the SIP.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our evaluation draws from Appendix B of the SIP submittal: 
Alternative to BART for NOX and PM for PacifiCorp Naughton Unit 3.
1. Demonstration That the Alternative Measure Will Achieve Greater 
Reasonable Progress
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i), a state must demonstrate that 
the alternative measure will achieve greater reasonable progress than 
would have resulted from the installation and operation of BART at all 
sources subject to BART in the state and covered by the alternative 
program. For a source-specific BART alternative, the critical elements 
of this demonstration are:
     A list of all BART-eligible sources within the state;
     A list of all BART-eligible sources and all BART source 
categories covered by the alternative program;
     An analysis of BART and associated emission reductions;
     An analysis of projected emissions reductions achievable 
through the BART alternative; and
     A determination that the alternative achieves greater 
reasonable progress than would be achieved through the installation and 
operation of BART.
    We summarize the SIP revision with respect to each of these 
elements and provide our evaluation in the proceeding sections.
 A List of All BART-Eligible Sources Within the State
    Table 1 shows a list of all BART-eligible sources in the State of 
Wyoming.

                 Table 1--Wyoming BART-Eligible Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Company                             Facility
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PacifiCorp................................  Jim Bridger.
Basin Electric............................  Laramie River.
PacifiCorp................................  Dave Johnston.
PacifiCorp................................  Naughton.
PacifiCorp................................  Wyodak.
FMC.......................................  Westvaco.
General Chemical..........................  Green River.
Black Hills...............................  Neil Simpson 1.
Sinclair..................................  Sinclair Refinery.
Sinclair..................................  Casper Refinery.
FMC.......................................  Granger.
Dyno Nobel................................  Dyno Nobel.
OCI Wyoming...............................  OCI Wyoming.
P4 Production.............................  P4 Production.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 A List of All BART-Eligible Sources and All BART Source 
Categories Covered by the BART Alternative Program
    Table 2 shows a list of all the BART-eligible sources covered by 
the BART

[[Page 55661]]

alternative program along with the BART source category.

                       Table 2--Wyoming Subject-to-BART Sources Covered by the Alternative
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Company                         Facility          Subject-to-BART units       Source category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PacifiCorp...........................  Naughton Power Plant...  Unit 3.................  Electrical generating
                                                                                          units.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Analysis of BART and Associated Emission Reductions
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(C), the SIP must include an 
analysis of BART and associated emission reductions at Naughton Unit 3. 
As noted above, Wyoming's BART analyses and determinations for Naughton 
Unit 3 were included in the 2011 Wyoming Regional Haze SIP. The EPA 
approved Wyoming's NOX BART emission limit of 0.07 lb/MMBtu 
(30-day rolling average) for Naughton Unit 3 that reflected existing 
LNBs plus OFA with the installation of SCR.\38\ In addition to the 
NOX BART emission limit of 0.07 lb/MMBtu approved by the 
EPA, the 2011 SIP included NOX emission limits of 259 lb/hr 
(30-day rolling average) and 1,134 tons/year. We also approved 
Wyoming's PM BART emission limit of 0.015 lb/that reflected 
installation of a new full-scale fabric filter.\39\ In addition to the 
PM BART emission limit of 0.015 lb/MMBtu approved by the EPA, the 2011 
SIP included PM emission limits of 56 lb/hr and 243 tons/year. These 
BART determinations are shown in the SIP revision, and are summarized 
in Table 3 below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ 79 FR 5045 (January 30, 2014).
    \39\ Ibid.

    Table 3--Summary of Wyoming's NOX and PM BART Determinations for
                             Naughton Unit 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Permitted controls               NOX                   PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCR, New Fabric Filter          0.07 lb/MMBtu (30- 0.015 lb/MMBtu.
 Baghouse.                       day rolling).     56 lb/hr.
                                259 lb/hr (30-day  243 tons/yr.
                                 rolling).
                                1,134 tons/yr....
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We propose to find that Wyoming has met the requirement for an 
analysis of BART and associated emission reductions achievable at 
Naughton Unit 3 under 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(C). Note that the emission 
reductions associated with BART, when expressed in tons reduced per 
year, are shown in the section that follows.
 Analysis of Projected Emissions Reductions Achievable Through 
the BART Alternative
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(D), the SIP must include an 
analysis of projected emissions reductions achievable through the BART 
alternative. The BART alternative achieves emission reductions through 
the following control measures: conversion of the unit to natural gas 
firing, installation of new low-NOX gas burners and FGR for 
NOX control, and a limit on annual heat input equal to 40 
percent of the maximum design heat input (when burning coal), or 
12,964,800 MMBtu/year. The SIP revision includes an analysis of the 
projection emissions and emissions reductions associated with these 
alternative control measures as reproduced in Tables 4 and 5 below.

 Table 4--Naughton Unit 3 Emission Limits When Converted to Natural Gas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Permitted controls               NOX                   PM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New LNB, FGR..................  0.12 lb/MMBtu (30- 0.008 lb/MMBtu.
                                 day rolling).     30 lb/hr.
                                250 lb/hr (30-day  52 tons/yr.
                                 rolling).
                                519 tons/yr......
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                       Table 5--Naughton Unit 3 Emission Comparison When Converted to Natural Gas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                NOX                                             PM
               Fuel                  Permitted controls  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             lb/MMbtu          lb/hr          tons/yr        lb/MMbtu          lb/hr          tons/yr
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coal..............................  SCR, Fabric Filter..            0.07             259           1,134           0.015              56             243
Natural Gas.......................  New LNB, FGR, heat              0.12             250             519           0.008              30              52
                                     input limit.
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional Reduction..............  ....................  ..............               9             615           0.007              26             191
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Here we note that Wyoming calculated the annual emission reductions 
achievable through BART based on a potential-to-emit (i.e., allowable) 
emissions basis. For example, Wyoming calculated the annual emissions 
for NOX under the BART scenario by multiplying the unit's 
maximum hourly heat input when

[[Page 55662]]

combusting coal of 3,700 MMbtu/hr by the emission limit of 0.07 lb/
MMBtu (30-day rolling average). Wyoming then converted the resulting 
value of 259 lb/hr to a tons/yr basis (3700 MMBtu/hr x 0.07 lb/MMBtu x 
8760 hr/yr x 1 ton/2000 lb = 1,134 tons/yr). Wyoming's calculation for 
BART assumes that the unit would be operated at the maximum design heat 
input of 3,700 MMBtu/hr for the entire year (8,760 hours), yielding an 
annual heat input of 32,412,000 MMBtu. We disagree with the calculation 
methodology Wyoming used to calculate the annual emission reductions 
achievable with BART because they were based on a potential-to-emit 
basis. By contrast, in our analysis of NOX BART associated 
with the 2011 SIP, consistent with the BART Guidelines,\40\ we 
calculated the projected emissions with SCR based on past actual 
practice rather than the potential-to-emit. Our calculations reflected 
the actual operation of Naughton Unit 3 during the baseline period of 
2001-2003 during which the heat input of the unit was 24,856,366 
MMBtu.\41\ In addition, as opposed to using the 30-day rolling average 
emission limit of 0.07 lb/MMBtu, the EPA used the anticipated annual 
emission rate with SCR of 0.05 lb/MMbtu.\42\ Since that time, the 0.05 
lb/MMBtu annual emission rate has been demonstrated at other PacifiCorp 
EGUs in Wyoming that have been retrofitted with SCR and that burn 
similar coal to Naughton Unit 3.\43\ The result is that the EPA 
calculated that the projected actual annual NOX emissions 
with SCR would be 621 tons/year \44\ (as opposed to 1,134 tons/year 
calculated by Wyoming). Because the value of 621 tons/year was 
calculated consistent with the procedures outlined in the BART 
Guidelines, and reflects the projected actual emissions that would have 
been achieved with SCR, it sets the appropriate benchmark for making 
the better-than-BART comparison. To ensure an apples-to-apples 
comparison, it is also appropriate to calculate the projected annual 
emissions anticipated with the BART alternative in a commensurate 
manner to that for BART (i.e., based on projected actual rather than 
allowable emissions). Nonetheless, even if annual emissions for the 
BART alternative are calculated based on an allowable emissions basis 
as Wyoming has done, the allowed annual emissions for the BART 
alternative of 519 tons/year is lower than the EPA's estimate for BART 
(SCR) of 621 tons/year. Therefore, regardless of whether the emission 
reductions achievable with the BART alternative are assessed on a 
projected actual or allowable emissions basis, the anticipated 
NOX emissions are lower under the BART alternative than they 
are under BART. The same conclusion holds true for PM. Therefore, while 
we disagree with the State's potential-to-emit (allowable) methodology, 
we propose to agree with the State's conclusion that the emissions 
reductions achievable through the alternative measure are better-than-
BART. 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ In general, for the existing sources subject-to-BART, you 
will estimate the anticipated annual emissions based upon actual 
emissions from a baseline period. 70 FR 39167 (July 5, 2005, 
emphasis added).
    \41\ Heat input data was obtained from the EPA Air Markets 
Program Data.
    \42\ 79 FR 5043, Table 14 (January 30, 2014); 79 FR 5167 
(January 30, 2014).
    \43\ Refer to the EPA Air Markets Program Data for Jim Bridger 
Power Plant Units 3 and 4 where SCR was installed in 2015 and 2016, 
respectively.
    \44\ Andover Technology Partners, ``Cost of NOX 
Controls on Wyoming EGUs'', October 28, 2013; ``Wyoming EGU BART and 
Reasonable Progress Cost,'' 10/28/2013. Docket ID EPA-R08-OAR-2012-
0026-0241.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Determination That the Alternative Achieves Greater Reasonable 
Progress Than Would Be Achieved Through the Installation and Operation 
of BART
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(E), the SIP revision must 
provide a determination under 40 CFR 51.308(e)(3) or otherwise based on 
the clear weight of evidence that the alternative achieves greater 
reasonable progress than BART. Two different tests for determining 
whether the alternative achieves greater reasonable progress than BART 
are outlined in 40 CFR 51.308(e)(3). Under the first test, if the 
distribution of emissions is not substantially different than under 
BART, and the alternative measure results in greater emission 
reductions, then the alternative measure may be deemed to achieve 
greater reasonable progress. Under the second test, if the distribution 
of emissions is significantly different, then dispersion modeling must 
be conducted to determine differences between BART and the BART 
alternative for each impacted Class I area for the worst and best 20 
percent days. The modeling would demonstrate ``greater reasonable 
progress'' if both of the following criteria are met: (1) Visibility 
does not decline in any Class I area; and (2) there is an overall 
improvement in visibility, determined by comparing the average 
differences between BART and the alternative over all affected Class I 
areas. This modeling test is sometimes referred to as the ``two-prong 
test.''
    As stated in the SIP revision, the emissions reductions under 
PacifiCorp's BART alternative will occur at the same unit, and 
therefore the distribution of emissions under BART and the better-than-
BART alternative are not substantially different. Accordantly, if the 
BART alternative results in greater emission reductions, then it may be 
deemed to achieve greater reasonable progress. The SIP revision 
includes an analysis of the emission reductions achievable with the 
BART alternative as compared to BART which indicates that the BART 
alternative achieves greater emission reductions. As indicated in 
section E. above, the BART alternative will achieve additional 
NOX reductions and additional PM reductions that are greater 
than achieved by BART.\45\ Therefore, we propose to find that Wyoming's 
conclusion that the BART alternative achieves greater reasonable 
progress than would be achieved through the installation and operation 
of BART is appropriate. 40 CFR 51.308((e)(2)(i)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ These values are based on a comparison of allowable 
emissions. See discussion regarding allowable versus actual 
emissions in preceding section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. A Requirement That All Necessary Emissions Reductions Take Place 
During the Period of the First Long-Term Strategy for Regional Haze
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iii), all necessary emission 
reductions must take place during the period of the first long-term 
strategy for regional haze. The RHR further provides that, to meet this 
requirement, a detailed description of the alternative measure, 
including schedules for implementation, the emission reductions 
required by the program, all necessary administrative and technical 
procedures for implementing the program, rules for accounting and 
monitoring emissions, and procedures for enforcement.
    The SIP revision requires PacifiCorp to cease firing coal at 
Naughton Unit 3 no later than January 30, 2019.\46\ Because no 
emissions will occur between the date that PacifiCorp must cease firing 
coal, and when the unit is converted to fire natural gas, the SIP 
revision achieves emission reductions before the original BART 
compliance date of March 4, 2019. As a result, we do not find that it 
is appropriate to disapprove this aspect of the BART alternative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Appendix B, p. 2 (PDF p. 187). The associated emission and 
operational limits apply upon conversion of Naughton Unit 3 to fire 
natural gas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Wyoming has included the relevant implementation 
schedules, monitoring, reporting and record keeping requirements in the 
SIP revision as presented in section VI of this action. Accordingly, we 
propose to

[[Page 55663]]

find that the BART alternative meets the requirements of 40 CFR 
51.308(e)(2)(iii).
3. Demonstration That Emissions Reductions From the Alternative Measure 
Will Be Surplus
    Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iv), the SIP must demonstrate that 
the emissions reductions resulting from the BART alternative measure 
will be surplus to those reductions resulting from measures adopted to 
meet requirements of the CAA as of the baseline date of the SIP. The 
baseline date for regional haze SIPs is 2002. All the NOX 
and PM emission reductions required by the BART alternative will occur 
in the future and are surplus to reductions resulting from SIP measures 
applicable to Naughton Unit 3 as of 2002. Therefore, we propose to find 
that the BART alternative complies with 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iv).
    In sum, we propose to find that the BART alternative meets all the 
applicable requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2).

IV. Clean Air Act Section 110(l)

    Under CAA section 110(l), the 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.'' \47\ The previous sections of the action explain how 
the SIP revision will comply with applicable regional haze requirements 
and general implementation plan requirements such as enforceability. 
With respect to requirements concerning attainment and reasonable 
further progress, the Wyoming Regional Haze SIP, as revised by this 
action, will result in a significant reduction in emissions compared to 
current levels. Moreover, the SIP revision will result in decreased 
future NOX and PM emissions as compared to the prior SIP, 
and will therefore achieve greater reasonable progress than the prior 
SIP. In addition, the area where the Naughton Unit 3 is located has not 
been designated nonattainment for any National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS). Thus, the revisions will ensure a significant 
reduction in NOX and PM emissions compared to current levels 
in an area that has not been designated nonattainment for the relevant 
NAAQS at those current levels. Accordingly, we propose to find that 
these revisions satisfy section 110(l).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ Note that ``reasonable further progress'' as used in CAA 
section 110(l) is a reference to that term as defined in section 
301(a) (i.e., 42 U.S.C. 7501(a)), and as such means reductions 
required to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(NAAQS) set for criteria pollutants under section 109. This term as 
used in section 110(l) (and defined in section 301(a)) is not 
synonymous with ``reasonable progress'' as that term is used in the 
regional haze program. Instead, section 110(l) provides that the EPA 
cannot approve plan revisions that interfere with regional haze 
requirements (including reasonable progress requirements) insofar as 
they are ``other applicable requirement[s]'' of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Consultation With FLMs

    There are seven Class I areas in the State of Wyoming. The United 
States Forest Service (USFS) manages the Bridger Wilderness, 
Fitzpatrick Wilderness, North Absaroka Wilderness, Teton Wilderness and 
Washakie Wilderness. The National Park Service (NPS) manages the Grand 
Teton National Park and Yellowstone National Park. The RHR grants the 
FLMs a special role in the review of regional haze implementation 
plans, summarized in section II.E of this preamble.
    Under 40 CFR 51.308(i)(2), Wyoming was obligated to provide the 
USFS and the NPS with an opportunity for consultation in development of 
the State's proposed SIP revision no less than 60 days prior to the 
associated public hearing or public comment opportunity. The SIP 
revision does not describe whether this consultation occurred. 
Nonetheless, Wyoming made the SIP revision for Naughton Unit 3 
available to the public on June 5, 2017. The State's SIP submittal does 
not include any comments from the FLMs on its SIP revision for Naughton 
Unit 3 during the public comment period. Additionally, the FLMs will 
have an opportunity to comment during the public comment period for 
this action. We propose to find that while Wyoming did not state in its 
proposed SIP revision that it fully met its obligation to provide the 
FLMs with an opportunity for consultation in development of the SIP 
revision, the FLMs will have nevertheless been provided with two 
opportunities to comment.

VI. The EPA's Proposed Action

    In this action, the EPA is proposing to approve Wyoming's SIP 
revision for the Alternative to BART for NOX and PM for 
PacifiCorp Naughton Unit 3, including the associated emission and 
operational limitations, compliance dates, and monitoring, record 
keeping, and reporting requirements. Specifically, the EPA is proposing 
to approve the following federally enforceable elements of the SIP 
revision for Naughton Unit 3:
     The NOX and PM emission limits found in Wyoming 
air quality permits MD-15946 (condition 5, lb/hr and tons/year) and 
P0021110 (condition 7, lb/MMbtu).
     The operational limit on annual heat input of 12,964,800 
MMBtu (based on 12-month rolling average of hourly heat input values) 
found in Wyoming air quality permit P0021110 (condition 18).
     The compliance dates found in Wyoming air quality permit 
P0021110; specifically including that PacifiCorp shall (1) remove the 
coal pulverizers from service (cease firing coal) by January 30, 2019 
(P0021110, condition 19), (2) comply with the NOX and PM 
emission limits in lb/MMBtu upon conversion to natural gas firing 
(P0021110, condition 7), and (3) comply with the heat input limit by 
January 30, 2019 (P0021110, condition 18).
     The compliance dates found in Wyoming air quality permit 
MD-15946 (conditions 5 and 6), requiring that PacifiCorp comply with 
the NOX and PM emission limits in lb/hr and tons/year upon 
completion of the initial performance tests.
     The monitoring, record keeping, and reporting requirements 
found in air quality permit P0021110 (NOX CEMs, conditions 8 
and 9; heat input, condition 18; PM stack testing, condition 10; 
reporting, conditions 4, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19; record keeping, condition 
17; notification, conditions 4 and 6; good practice, condition 21; 
credible evidence, condition 24).

VII. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include regulatory text in an 
EPA final rule that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference the SIP amendments described in section VI. of this preamble. 
The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally 
available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 8 Office 
(please contact the person identified in the ``For Further Information 
Contact'' section of this preamble for more information).

VIII. 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. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the 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

[[Page 55664]]

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);
     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 the 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).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe 
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 
Indian country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and 
will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or 
preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 
November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate 
matter, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: November 2, 2018.
Douglas Benevento,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 8.

    40 CFR part 52 is proposed to be amended 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.

Subpart ZZ--Wyoming

0
2. Section 52.2620 is amended by adding in paragraph (d), the entry 
``Naughton Unit 3'' at the end of the table; and by adding in paragraph 
(e), in numerical order, the entry ``(32) XXXII'' to read as follows:


Sec.  52.2620   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                          Final rule citation/
            Regulation                     Rule title         State effective date   EPA effective date           date                  Comments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Naughton Unit 3..................  Air Quality SIP Permits    November 28, 2017...  December 7, 2018....  [Federal Register     Only the following
                                    containing BART                                                        citation] November    permit provisions: NOX
                                    Alternative                                                            7, 2018.              and PM emission limits
                                    requirements, MD-15946                                                                       (P0021110, condition 7;
                                    and P0021110.                                                                                MD-15946, condition 5);
                                                                                                                                 emission limit
                                                                                                                                 compliance dates
                                                                                                                                 (P0021110, condition 7;
                                                                                                                                 MD-15946, conditions 5
                                                                                                                                 and 6); heat input
                                                                                                                                 limit and compliance
                                                                                                                                 date (P0021110,
                                                                                                                                 condition 18);
                                                                                                                                 compliance date for
                                                                                                                                 coal pulverizers to be
                                                                                                                                 removed from service
                                                                                                                                 (P0021110, condition
                                                                                                                                 19); and associated
                                                                                                                                 monitoring,
                                                                                                                                 recordkeeping, and
                                                                                                                                 reporting requirements
                                                                                                                                 (P0021110, conditions
                                                                                                                                 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
                                                                                                                                 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 21,
                                                                                                                                 and 24).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) * * *

[[Page 55665]]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           Final rule citation
             Rule No.                      Rule title         State effective date   EPA effective date           date                  Comments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
(32) XXXII.......................  Wyoming State              November 28, 2017...  December 7, 2018....  [Federal Register     Only includes Appendix
                                    Implementation Plan 5-                                                 citation], November   B: Alternative to BART
                                    Year Progress Report for                                               7, 2018.              for NOX and PM for
                                    Regional Haze, Appendix                                                                      PacifiCorp Naughton
                                    B: Alternative to BART                                                                       Unit 3.
                                    for NOX and PM for
                                    PacifiCorp Naughton Unit
                                    3.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. Section 52.2636 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1)(vii) and 
amending paragraph(c)(1) by revising Table 1 to Sec.  52.2636 to read 
as follows:


Sec.  52.2636   Implementation plan for regional haze.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (vii) PacifiCorp Naughton Power Plant Units 1 and 2 (PM and 
NOX); and
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *

                        Table 1 to Sec.   52.2636
 [Emission limits for BART units for which EPA approved the State's BART
                 and Reasonable Progress determinations]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          NOX emission
                                       PM emission      limits--lb/MMBtu
       Source name/BART unit         limits--lb/MMBtu   (30-day rolling
                                                            average)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMC Westvaco Trona Plant/Unit NS-                0.05               0.35
 1A...............................
FMC Westvaco Trona Plant/Unit NS-                0.05               0.35
 1B...............................
TATA Chemicals Partners (General                 0.09               0.28
 Chemical) Green River Trona Plant/
 Boiler C.........................
TATA Chemicals Partners (General                 0.09               0.28
 Chemical) Green River Trona Plant/
 Boiler D.........................
Basin Electric Power Cooperative                 0.03                N/A
 Laramie River Station/Unit 1.....
Basin Electric Power Cooperative                 0.03                N/A
 Laramie River Station/Unit 2.....
Basin Electric Power Cooperative                 0.03                N/A
 Laramie River Station/Unit 3.....
PacifiCorp Dave Johnston Power                  0.015                N/A
 Plant/Unit 3.....................
PacifiCorp Dave Johnston Power                  0.015               0.15
 Plant/Unit 4.....................
PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant/              0.03          0.26/0.07
 Unit 1\1\........................
PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant/              0.03          0.26/0.07
 Unit 2\1\........................
PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant/              0.03          0.26/0.07
 Unit 3\1\........................
PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant/              0.03          0.26/0.07
 Unit 4\1\........................
PacifiCorp Naughton Power Plant/                 0.04               0.26
 Unit 1...........................
PacifiCorp Naughton Power Plant/                 0.04               0.26
 Unit 2...........................
PacifiCorp Wyodak Power Plant/Unit              0.015                N/A
 1................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The owners and operators of PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Units 1, 2, 3,
  and 4 shall comply with the NOX emission limit for BART of 0.26 lb/
  MMBtu and PM emission limit for BART of 0.03 lb/MMBtu and other
  requirements of this section by March 4, 2019. The owners and
  operators of PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 shall comply
  with the NOX emission limit for reasonable progress of 0.07 lb/MMBtu
  by: December 31, 2022, for Unit 1, December 31, 2021, for Unit 2,
  December 31, 2015, for Unit 3, and December 31, 2016, for Unit 4.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-24372 Filed 11-6-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P



                                                55656               Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Proposed Rules

                                                the instructions issued with respect                     for the proposed rule until December 10,              ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
                                                thereto. * * *                                           2018.                                                 the EPA.
                                                *     *    *     *     *                                 DATES: Written comments must be                          On October 11, 2018 (83 FR 51403),
                                                                                                         received on or before December 10,                    we published in the Federal Register a
                                                § 53.6071–1      [Amended]                               2018.                                                 proposed rule pertaining to revisions to
                                                ■  Par. 4. Section 53.6071–1 is amended                                                                        the regional haze SIP and FIP for
                                                                                                         ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
                                                by:                                                                                                            Wyoming and requested comment by
                                                                                                         identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
                                                ■ 1. Redesignating paragraph (i) as                                                                            November 13, 2018. Specifically, the
                                                                                                         OAR–2018–0606, to the Federal
                                                paragraph (j).                                                                                                 SIP revisions modify the sulfur dioxide
                                                                                                         Rulemaking Portal: https://
                                                ■ 2. Adding new paragraphs (i) and                                                                             (SO2) emissions reporting requirements
                                                                                                         www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
                                                (j)(3).                                                                                                        for Laramie River Station Units 1 and 2.
                                                                                                         instructions for submitting comments.
                                                   The additions read as follows:                                                                              The revisions to the FIP revise the
                                                                                                         Once submitted, comments cannot be
                                                                                                                                                               nitrogen oxides (NOX) best available
                                                § 53.6071–1      Time for filing returns.                edited or removed from
                                                                                                                                                               retrofit technology (BART) emission
                                                                                                         www.regulations.gov. The EPA may
                                                *      *    *     *     *                                                                                      limits for Laramie River Units 1—3 and
                                                                                                         publish any comment received to its
                                                  (i) Taxes under section 4960, 4966,                                                                          establish a SO2 emission limit averaged
                                                                                                         public docket. Do not submit
                                                4967, or 4968. A person (including a                                                                           annually across both Laramie River
                                                                                                         electronically any information you
                                                governmental entity) required by                                                                               Station Units 1 and 2.
                                                                                                         consider to be Confidential Business
                                                § 53.6011–1(b) to file a return for a tax                                                                         We received a request from several
                                                                                                         Information (CBI) or other information
                                                imposed by section 4960(a), 4966(a),                                                                           organizations to extend the comment
                                                                                                         whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
                                                4967(a), or 4968(a) in a taxable year                                                                          period and, in response, we are
                                                                                                         Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
                                                must file the Form 4720 on or before the                                                                       extending the comment period to
                                                                                                         etc.) must be accompanied by a written
                                                15th day of the fifth month after the end                                                                      December 10, 2018.1
                                                                                                         comment. The written comment is
                                                of the person’s taxable year (or, if the                 considered the official comment and                   List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
                                                person has not established a taxable                     should include discussion of all points
                                                year for Federal income tax purposes,                                                                            Environmental protection, Air
                                                                                                         you wish to make. The EPA will                        pollution control, Incorporation by
                                                the person’s annual accounting period).                  generally not consider comments or
                                                  (j) * * *                                                                                                    reference, Intergovernmental relations,
                                                                                                         comment contents located outside of the               Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,
                                                  (3) Paragraph (i) of this section                      primary submission (i.e., on the web,
                                                applies on and after the date of                                                                               Sulfur oxides.
                                                                                                         cloud, or other file sharing system). For
                                                publication of the Treasury decision                     additional submission methods, the full                 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
                                                adopting these rules as final regulations                EPA public comment policy,                              Dated: November 2, 2018.
                                                in the Federal Register.                                 information about CBI or multimedia                   Douglas Benevento,
                                                Kirsten Wielobob,                                        submissions, and general guidance on                  Regional Administrator, Region 8.
                                                Deputy Commissioner for Services and                     making effective comments, please visit               [FR Doc. 2018–24366 Filed 11–6–18; 8:45 am]
                                                Enforcement.                                             http://www.epa.gov/dockets/                           BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
                                                [FR Doc. 2018–24285 Filed 11–5–18; 4:15 pm]              commenting-epa-dockets.
                                                                                                            Docket: All documents in the docket
                                                BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
                                                                                                         are listed in the www.regulations.gov                 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
                                                                                                         index. Although listed in the index,                  AGENCY
                                                                                                         some information is not publicly
                                                ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION                                 available, e.g., CBI or other information             40 CFR Part 52
                                                AGENCY                                                   whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
                                                                                                                                                               [EPA–R08–OAR–2018–0607; FRL–9986–03–
                                                                                                         Certain other material, such as
                                                40 CFR Part 52                                                                                                 Region 8]
                                                                                                         copyrighted material, will be publicly
                                                [EPA–R08–OAR–2018–0606; FRL–9986–09–                     available only in hard copy. Publicly                 Approval and Promulgation of Air
                                                Region 8]                                                available docket materials are available              Quality Implementation Plans;
                                                                                                         either electronically in                              Wyoming; Revisions to Regional Haze
                                                Approval and Promulgation of Air                         www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at                State Implementation Plan
                                                Quality Implementation Plans;                            the Air Program, Environmental
                                                Wyoming; Revisions to Regional Haze                      Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,                    AGENCY:  Environmental Protection
                                                State Implementation Plan; Revisions                     1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado                 Agency (EPA).
                                                to Regional Haze Federal                                 80202–1129. The EPA requests that, if at              ACTION: Proposed rule.
                                                Implementation Plan                                      all possible, you contact the individual
                                                                                                                                                               SUMMARY:   The Environmental Protection
                                                AGENCY:  Environmental Protection                        listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
                                                                                                                                                               Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
                                                Agency (EPA).                                            CONTACT section to view the hard copy
                                                                                                                                                               source-specific revision to the Wyoming
                                                                                                         of the docket. You may view the hard
                                                ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of                                                                            State Implementation Plan (SIP) that
                                                                                                         copy of the docket Monday through
                                                comment period.                                                                                                provides an alternative to Best Available
                                                                                                         Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding
                                                                                                                                                               Retrofit Technology (BART) for Unit 3 at
                                                SUMMARY:   On October 11, 2018, the                      federal holidays.
                                                                                                                                                               the Naughton Power Plant (‘‘the SIP
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)                    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                      revision’’) that is owned and operated
                                                published in the Federal Register a                      Jaslyn Dobrahner, Air Program, EPA,                   by PacifiCorp. The EPA proposes to find
                                                proposed rule pertaining to revisions to                 Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595                        that the BART alternative for Naughton
                                                the regional haze State Implementation                   Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado,                     Unit 3 would provide greater reasonable
                                                Plan (SIP) and Federal Implementation                    80202–1129, (303) 312–6252,                           progress toward natural visibility
                                                Plan (FIP) for Wyoming and requested                     dobrahner.jaslyn@epa.gov.
                                                comments by November 13, 2018. The                       SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                              1 A copy of the letter requesting the extension

                                                EPA is extending the comment period                      Throughout this document wherever                     appears in the docket for this action.



                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014    17:02 Nov 06, 2018   Jkt 247001   PO 00000   Frm 00014   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM   07NOP1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Proposed Rules                                                        55657

                                                conditions than BART in accordance                      I. General Information                                  www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
                                                with the requirements of section 110 of                                                                         the Air Program, Environmental
                                                                                                        A. Definitions
                                                the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the EPA’s                                                                           Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
                                                Regional Haze Rule (RHR). The SIP                         For the purpose of this document, we                  1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
                                                revision was submitted by the State of                  are giving meaning to certain words or                  80202–1129. The EPA requests that if at
                                                Wyoming on November 28, 2017.                           acronyms as follows:                                    all possible, you contact the individual
                                                  The SIP revision for Naughton Unit 3                    • The words Wyoming and State                         listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
                                                was submitted along with Wyoming’s 5-                   mean the State of Wyoming.                              CONTACT section to view the hard copy
                                                year progress report, which is required                   • The word Naughton refers to the                     of the docket. You may view the hard
                                                under the Regional Haze Rule. However,                  Naughton Plant.                                         copy of the docket Monday through
                                                the EPA is not proposing to act on the                    • The initials BART mean or refer to                  Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding
                                                5-year progress report in this                          Best Available Retrofit Technology.                     federal holidays.
                                                rulemaking.                                               • The term Class I area refers to a
                                                                                                        mandatory Class I federal area.1                        II. Background
                                                DATES: Written comments must be                           • The initials CAA mean or refer to                   A. Requirements of the Clean Air Act
                                                received on or before December 7, 2018.                 the Clean Air Act.                                      and the EPA’s Regional Haze Rule
                                                                                                          • The initials CBI mean or refer to
                                                ADDRESSES:   Submit your comments,                                                                                 In section 169A of the 1977
                                                                                                        Confidential Business Information.
                                                identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–                                                                            Amendments to the CAA, Congress
                                                                                                          • The initials EGU mean or refer to
                                                OAR–2018–0607, to the Federal                                                                                   created a program for protecting
                                                                                                        Electric Generating Unit.
                                                Rulemaking Portal: https://                                                                                     visibility in the nation’s national parks
                                                                                                          • The words EPA, we, us, or our mean
                                                www.regulations.gov. Follow the online                                                                          and wilderness areas. This section of the
                                                                                                        or refer to the United States
                                                instructions for submitting comments.                                                                           CAA establishes ‘‘as a national goal the
                                                                                                        Environmental Protection Agency.
                                                Once submitted, comments cannot be                                                                              prevention of any future, and the
                                                                                                          • The initials FGR mean flue gas
                                                edited or removed from                                                                                          remedying of any existing, impairment
                                                                                                        recirculation.
                                                www.regulations.gov. The EPA may                                                                                of visibility in mandatory Class I
                                                                                                          • The initials FIP mean or refer to
                                                publish any comment received to its                                                                             Federal areas which impairment results
                                                                                                        Federal Implementation Plan.
                                                public docket. Do not submit                                                                                    from manmade air pollution.’’ 2
                                                                                                          • The initials LNB mean or refer to                      The EPA promulgated a rule to
                                                electronically any information you                      low-NOX burners.
                                                consider to be Confidential Business                                                                            address regional haze on July 1, 1999.3
                                                                                                          • The initials MMBtu mean or refer to                 The RHR revised the existing visibility
                                                Information (CBI) or other information                  million British thermal units.
                                                whose disclosure is restricted by statute.                                                                      regulations 4 to integrate provisions
                                                                                                          • The initials NAAQS mean or refer                    addressing regional haze and
                                                Multimedia submissions (audio, video,                   to National Ambient Air Quality
                                                etc.) must be accompanied by a written                                                                          established a comprehensive visibility
                                                                                                        Standards.                                              protection program for Class I areas. The
                                                comment. The written comment is                           • The initials NOX mean or refer to
                                                considered the official comment and                                                                             requirements for regional haze, found at
                                                                                                        nitrogen oxides.                                        40 CFR 51.308 and 40 CFR 51.309, are
                                                should include discussion of all points                   • The initials OFA mean or refer to
                                                you wish to make. The EPA will                                                                                  included in the EPA’s visibility
                                                                                                        over fire air.                                          protection regulations at 40 CFR 51.300
                                                generally not consider comments or                        • The initials PM mean or refer to                    through 40 CFR 51.309. The EPA
                                                comment contents located outside of the                 Particulate Matter, which is inclusive of
                                                primary submission (i.e., on the web,                                                                           revised the RHR on January 10, 2017.5
                                                                                                        PM10 (particulate matter less than or                      The CAA requires each state to
                                                cloud, or other file sharing system). For               equal to 10 micrometers) and PM2.5
                                                additional submission methods, the full                                                                         develop a SIP to meet various air quality
                                                                                                        (particulate matter less than or equal to
                                                EPA public comment policy,                              2.5 micrometers).                                          2 42 U.S.C. 7491(a). Areas designated as
                                                information about CBI or multimedia                       • The initials SCR mean or refer to                   mandatory Class I Federal areas consist of national
                                                submissions, and general guidance on                    Selective Catalytic Reduction.                          parks exceeding 6,000 acres, wilderness areas and
                                                making effective comments, please visit                   • The initials SIP mean or refer to                   national memorial parks exceeding 5,000 acres, and
                                                                                                                                                                all international parks that were in existence on
                                                http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/                            State Implementation Plan.                              August 7, 1977. 42 U.S.C. 7472(a). In accordance
                                                commenting-epa-dockets.                                   • The initials SO2 mean or refer to                   with section 169A of the CAA, the EPA, in
                                                                                                        Sulfur Dioxide.                                         consultation with the Department of Interior,
                                                FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                                                                                promulgated a list of 156 areas where visibility is
                                                Aaron Worstell, Air Program, EPA,                       B. Docket                                               identified as an important value. 44 FR 69122
                                                Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595                                                                                  (November 30, 1979). The extent of a mandatory
                                                Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado                           All documents in the docket are listed               Class I area includes subsequent changes in
                                                                                                        in the www.regulations.gov index.                       boundaries, such as park expansions. 42 U.S.C.
                                                80202–1129, (303) 312–6073,                                                                                     7472(a). Although states and tribes may designate
                                                worstell.aaron@epa.gov.                                 Although listed in the index, some                      as Class I additional areas whose visibility they
                                                                                                        information is not publicly available,                  consider to be an important value, the requirements
                                                SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                              e.g., CBI or other information whose                    of the visibility program set forth in section 169A
                                                Throughout this document wherever                       disclosure is restricted by statute.                    of the CAA apply only to ‘‘mandatory Class I
                                                ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean                                                                     Federal areas.’’ Each mandatory Class I Federal area
                                                                                                        Certain other material, such as                         is the responsibility of a ‘‘Federal Land Manager.’’
                                                the EPA.                                                copyrighted material, will be publicly                  42 U.S.C. 7602(i). When we use the term ‘‘Class I
                                                                                                        available only in hard copy. Publicly                   area’’ in this section, we mean a ‘‘mandatory Class
                                                Table of Contents
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                                                                                                                                I Federal area.’’
                                                                                                        available docket materials are available                   3 64 FR 35714, 35714 (July 1, 1999) (codified at
                                                I. General Information                                  either electronically in
                                                II. Background                                                                                                  40 CFR part 51, subpart P).
                                                                                                                                                                   4 The EPA had previously promulgated
                                                III. The SIP Revision for Naughton Unit 3                 1 Although states and tribes may designate as         regulations to address visibility impairment in Class
                                                IV. Clean Air Action Section 110(l)                     Class I additional areas which they consider to have    I areas that is ‘‘reasonably attributable’’ to a single
                                                V. Consultation With FLMs                               visibility as an important value, the requirements of   source or small group of sources, i.e., reasonably
                                                VI. The EPA’s Proposed Action                           the visibility program set forth in section 169A of     attributable visibility impairment (RAVI). 45 FR
                                                VII. Incorporation by Reference                         the CAA apply only to ‘‘mandatory Class I Federal       80084, 80084 (December 2, 1980).
                                                VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews             areas.’’                                                   5 82 FR 3078 (January 10, 2017).




                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:02 Nov 06, 2018   Jkt 247001   PO 00000   Frm 00015   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM     07NOP1


                                                55658               Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Proposed Rules

                                                requirements, including protection of                   51.308(e)(2) and (e)(3). These                            Generally, a SIP addressing regional
                                                visibility.6 Regional haze SIPs must                    requirements for alternative programs                  haze must include emission limits and
                                                assure reasonable progress toward the                   relate to the ‘‘better-than-BART’’ test                compliance schedules for each source
                                                national goal of achieving natural                      and fundamental elements of any                        subject to BART. In addition to the
                                                visibility conditions in Class I areas. A               alternative program.                                   RHR’s requirements, general SIP
                                                state must submit its SIP and SIP                          In order to demonstrate that the                    requirements mandate that the SIP
                                                revisions to the EPA for approval. Once                 alternative program achieves greater                   include all regulatory requirements
                                                approved, a SIP is enforceable by the                   reasonable progress than source-specific               related to monitoring, recordkeeping,
                                                EPA and citizens under the CAA; that                    BART, a state must demonstrate that its                and reporting for the alternative’s
                                                is, the SIP is federally enforceable. If a              SIP meets the requirements in 40 CFR                   enforceable requirements. See CAA
                                                state elects not to make a required SIP                 51.308(e)(2)(i) through (v). The state or              section 110(a); 40 CFR part 51, subpart
                                                submittal, fails to make a required SIP                 the EPA must conduct an analysis of the                K.
                                                submittal or if we find that a state’s                  best system of continuous emission
                                                required submittal is incomplete or not                                                                        D. Reasonable Progress Requirements
                                                                                                        control technology available and the
                                                approvable, then we must promulgate a                   associated reductions for each source                     In addition to BART requirements, as
                                                Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to fill               subject to BART covered by the                         mentioned previously, each regional
                                                this regulatory gap.7                                   alternative program, termed a ‘‘BART                   haze SIP must contain measures as
                                                                                                        benchmark.’’ Where the alternative                     necessary to make reasonable progress
                                                B. Best Available Retrofit Technology
                                                                                                        program has been designed to meet                      towards the national visibility goal.
                                                (BART)
                                                                                                        requirements other than BART,                          Finally, the SIP must establish
                                                   Section 169A of the CAA directs                      simplifying assumptions may be used to                 reasonable progress goals (RPGs) for
                                                states as part of their SIPs to evaluate                establish a BART benchmark.                            each Class I area within the state for the
                                                the use of retrofit controls at certain                                                                        plan implementation period (or
                                                                                                           Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(E),
                                                larger, often uncontrolled, older                                                                              ‘‘planning period’’), based on the
                                                                                                        the state or the EPA, must also provide
                                                stationary sources in order to address                                                                         measures included in the long-term
                                                                                                        a determination that the alternative
                                                visibility impacts from these sources.                                                                         strategy.11 If an RPG provides for a
                                                                                                        program achieves greater reasonable
                                                Specifically, section 169A(b)(2)(A) of                                                                         slower rate of improvement in visibility
                                                                                                        progress than BART under 40 CFR
                                                the CAA requires states’ implementation                                                                        than the rate under which the national
                                                                                                        51.308(e)(3) or otherwise based on the
                                                plans to contain such measures as may                                                                          goal of no anthropogenic visibility
                                                be necessary to make reasonable                         clear weight of evidence. 40 CFR
                                                                                                        51.308(e)(3), in turn, provides specific               impact would be attained by 2064, the
                                                progress toward the natural visibility                                                                         SIP must demonstrate, based on the four
                                                goal, including a requirement that                      tests applicable under specific
                                                                                                        circumstances for determining whether                  reasonable progress factors, why that
                                                certain categories of existing major                                                                           faster rate is not reasonable and the
                                                stationary sources built between 1962                   the alternative achieves greater
                                                                                                        reasonable progress than BART. If the                  slower rate provided for by the SIP’s
                                                and 1977 procure, install, and operate                                                                         state-specific RPG is reasonable.12
                                                the ‘‘Best Available Retrofit                           distribution of emissions for the
                                                Technology’’ as determined by the states                alternative program is not substantially               E. Consultation With Federal Land
                                                through their SIPs. Under the RHR,                      different than for BART, and the                       Managers (FLMs)
                                                states (or the EPA) are directed to                     alternative program results in greater
                                                                                                                                                                 The RHR requires that a state consult
                                                conduct BART determinations for such                    emissions reductions, then the
                                                                                                                                                               with FLMs before adopting and
                                                ‘‘BART-eligible’’ sources that may                      alternative program may be deemed to
                                                                                                                                                               submitting a required SIP or SIP
                                                reasonably be anticipated to cause or                   achieve greater reasonable progress. If
                                                                                                                                                               revision.13 Further, the EPA, or state
                                                contribute to any visibility impairment                 the distribution of emissions is
                                                                                                                                                               when considering a SIP revision, must
                                                in a Class I area.8 Rather than requiring               significantly different, the differences in
                                                                                                                                                               include in its proposal a description of
                                                source-specific BART controls, states                   visibility between BART and the
                                                                                                                                                               how it addressed any comments
                                                also have the flexibility to adopt an                   alternative program, must be
                                                                                                                                                               provided by the FLMs.
                                                emissions trading program or other                      determined by conducting dispersion
                                                alternative program as long as the                      modeling for each impacted Class I area                F. Requirements for Regional Haze SIPs
                                                alternative provides greater reasonable                 for the best and worst 20 percent of                   Submitted Under 40 CFR 51.309
                                                progress towards improving visibility                   days. This modeling demonstrates                         The EPA’s RHR provides two paths to
                                                than BART.9                                             ‘‘greater reasonable progress’’ if both of             address regional haze. One is 40 CFR
                                                                                                        the two following criteria are met: (1)                51.308, requiring states to perform
                                                C. BART Alternatives                                    Visibility does not decline in any Class               individual point source BART
                                                  An alternative program to BART must                   I area; and (2) there is overall                       determinations and evaluate the need
                                                meet requirements under 40 CFR                          improvement in visibility when                         for other control strategies. The other
                                                                                                        comparing the average differences                      method for addressing regional haze is
                                                  6 42 U.S.C. 7410(a), 7491, and 7492(a); CAA           between BART and the alternative                       through 40 CFR 51.309, and is an option
                                                sections 110(a), 169A, and 169B.                        program across all the affected Class I
                                                  7 42 U.S.C. 7410(c)(1).                                                                                      for nine states termed the ‘‘Transport
                                                  8 40 CFR 51.308(e). The EPA designed the
                                                                                                        areas. Alternatively, pursuant to 40 CFR               Region States,’’ which include: Arizona,
                                                Guidelines for BART Determinations Under the            51.308(e)(2), states may show that the                 California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada,
                                                Regional Haze Rule (Guidelines) 40 CFR Appendix         alternative achieves greater reasonable                New Mexico, Oregon, Utah and
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                Y to part 51 ‘‘to help States and others (1) identify   progress than the BART benchmark                       Wyoming. By meeting the requirements
                                                those sources that must comply with the BART            ‘‘based on the clear weight of evidence’’
                                                requirement, and (2) determine the level of control                                                            under 40 CFR 51.309, a Transport
                                                technology that represents BART for each source.’’      determinations. Specific RHR                           Region State can be deemed to be
                                                Guidelines, Section I.A. Section II of the Guidelines   requirements for alternative programs                  making reasonable progress toward the
                                                describes the four steps to identify BART sources,      are discussed in more detail in Section
                                                and Section III explains how to identify BART
                                                sources (i.e., sources that are ‘‘subject to BART’’).
                                                                                                        III.10                                                   11 40 CFR 51.308(d).
                                                  9 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2). WildEarth Guardians v.                                                                  12 40 CFR 51.308(d)(1)(ii).
                                                EPA, 770 F.3d 919 (10th Cir. 2014).                       10 40   CFR 51.308(e)(2).                              13 40 CFR 51.308(i).




                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:02 Nov 06, 2018   Jkt 247001   PO 00000   Frm 00016    Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM    07NOP1


                                                                   Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Proposed Rules                                                    55659

                                                national goal of achieving natural                      provisions. In CEED v. EPA, the D.C.                  Wyoming in its 2011 Regional Haze SIP
                                                visibility conditions for the 16 Class I                Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the                  (discussed below).
                                                areas on the Colorado Plateau.14                        EPA approval of the WRAP annex.19 In
                                                   Section 309 requires those Transport                                                                       2. 2011 Wyoming Regional Haze SIP
                                                                                                        response to the court’s decision, the
                                                Region States that choose to participate                EPA vacated the annex requirements                      Wyoming submitted its SIP revision
                                                to adopt regional haze strategies that are              adopted under 40 CFR 51.309(h), but                   to the EPA on January 12, 2011, to
                                                based on recommendations from the                       left in place the stationary source                   address the requirements of section
                                                Grand Canyon Visibility Transport                       requirements in 40 CFR 51.309(d)(4).20                309(g) of the RHR. On June 10, 2013, the
                                                Commission (GCVTC) for protecting the                   The requirements under 40 CFR                         EPA proposed to approve portions of
                                                16 Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau.               51.309(d)(4) contain general                          the Wyoming Regional Haze SIP,
                                                The purpose of the GCVTC was to assess                  requirements pertaining to stationary                 including the State’s NOX and PM
                                                information about the adverse impacts                   sources and market trading, and allow                 BART determinations for Naughton Unit
                                                on visibility in and around the 16 Class                states to adopt alternatives to the point             3.23 Specifically, we proposed to
                                                I areas on the Colorado Plateau and to                  source application of BART.                           approve: (1) Wyoming’s NOX BART
                                                provide policy recommendations to the                                                                         emission limit of 0.07 lb/MMBtu (30-
                                                EPA to address such impacts. The                           Thus, rather than requiring source-                day rolling average), reflecting the
                                                GCVTC determined that all Transport                     specific BART controls as explained                   existing LNBs plus OFA and the
                                                Region States could potentially impact                  previously in Section II.B., states have              installation of selective catalytic
                                                the Class I areas on the Colorado                       the flexibility to adopt an emissions                 reduction (SCR), and (2) Wyoming’s PM
                                                Plateau. The GCVTC submitted a report                   trading program or other alternative                  BART emission limit of 0.015 lb/
                                                to the EPA in 1996 for protecting                       program if the alternative provides                   MMBtu, reflecting installation of a new
                                                visibility for the Class I areas on the                 greater reasonable progress than would                full-scale fabric filter.24 25 We also
                                                Colorado Plateau, and the EPA codified                  be achieved by the application of BART                proposed to approve the associated
                                                these recommendations as an option                      pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2). Under                compliance dates that required that
                                                available to states as part of the RHR.15               40 CFR 51.309, states can satisfy the SO2             PacifiCorp comply with the NOX and
                                                   The EPA determined that the GCVTC                    BART requirements by adopting SO2                     PM BART emission limits within 5
                                                strategies would provide for reasonable                 emissions milestones and a backstop                   years from the effective date of our final
                                                progress in mitigating regional haze if                 trading program. Under this approach,                 rule (that is, by March 4, 2019).
                                                supplemented by an annex containing                     states must establish declining SO2                     During the public comment period for
                                                quantitative emission reduction                         emissions milestones for each year of                 the EPA’s proposed rule, PacifiCorp
                                                milestones and provisions for a trading                 the program through 2018. The                         submitted comments indicating that, in
                                                program or other alternative measure.16                 milestones must be consistent with the                place of installing SCR on Naughton
                                                In September 2000, the Western                          GCVTC’s goal of 50 to 70 percent                      Unit 3 to meet the NOX BART emission
                                                Regional Air Partnership (WRAP),                        reduction in SO2 emissions by 2040.                   limit of 0.07 lb/MMbtu (30-day rolling
                                                which is the successor organization to                  The backstop trading program would be                 average), it planned to convert the unit
                                                the GCVTC, submitted an annex to the                    implemented if a milestone is exceeded                to natural gas firing by the end of 2018.
                                                EPA. The annex contained SO2                            and the program is triggered.21                       On July 5, 2013, at the request of
                                                emissions reduction milestones and
                                                                                                        G. History of NOX and PM BART                         PacifiCorp, Wyoming issued air quality
                                                detailed provisions of a backstop trading
                                                                                                        Determinations for Naughton Unit 3                    permit MD–14506 26 to modify the
                                                program to be implemented
                                                                                                                                                              Naughton Power Plant by converting
                                                automatically if voluntary measures                     1. PacifiCorp Naughton Unit 3                         Unit 3 to fire natural gas. In a meeting
                                                failed to achieve the SO2 milestones.
                                                The EPA codified the annex on June 5,                                                                         with PacifiCorp held on October 31,
                                                                                                          The PacifiCorp Naughton Power                       2013, the company clarified to the EPA
                                                2003 at 40 CFR 51.309(h).17                             Plant, located in Lincoln County,
                                                   Five western states, including                                                                             that its comments were a request that
                                                                                                        Wyoming, is comprised of three                        the EPA establish emission limits
                                                Wyoming, submitted implementation                       pulverized coal-fired units with a total
                                                plans under section 309 in 2003.18 The                                                                        reflecting conversion to natural gas
                                                                                                        net generating capacity of 700                        through a FIP. In response to
                                                EPA was challenged by the Center for                    megawatts (MW). All three boilers are
                                                Energy and Economic Development                                                                               PacifiCorp’s request, in our final rule
                                                                                                        tangentially fired and burn                           the EPA indicated that while we
                                                (CEED) on the validity of the annex                     subbituminous coal. Naughton Unit 3                   tentatively supported PacifiCorp’s
                                                  14 The Colorado Plateau is a high, semi-arid
                                                                                                        generates a nominal 330 MW and                        planned conversion of Naughton Unit 3
                                                tableland in southeast Utah, northern Arizona,          commenced operation in 1971.                          to burn natural gas, we were unable to
                                                northwest New Mexico, and western Colorado. The         Naughton Unit 3 is currently equipped                 impose the associated emission limits
                                                16 mandatory Class I areas are: Grand Canyon            with low-NOX burners (LNB) and
                                                National Park, Mount Baldy Wilderness, Petrified
                                                Forest National Park, Sycamore Canyon Wilderness,
                                                                                                        overfire air (OFA) to control NOX,                      23 78 FR 34738 (June 10, 2013); 78 FR 34760 (June

                                                Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park              sodium-based wet flue gas                             10, 2013).
                                                Wilderness, Flat Tops Wilderness, Maroon Bells          desulfurization to control SO2, and an                  24 The BART requirement is met through

                                                Wilderness, Mesa Verde National Park, Weminuche         electrostatic precipitator and flue gas               compliance with the specified emission limit, and
                                                Wilderness, West Elk Wilderness, San Pedro Park                                                               may be achieved through measures other than the
                                                Wilderness, Arches National Park, Bryce Canyon          conditioning to control PM.22 All three               referenced control technology.
                                                National Park, Canyonlands National Park, Capital       units are within the statutory definition               25 Wyoming’s 2011 SIP also contained NO
                                                                                                                                                                                                            X
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                Reef National Park and Zion National Park.              of BART-eligible units, and were                      emission limits of 259 lb/hr (30-day rolling average)
                                                  15 64 FR 35714, 35749 (July 1, 1999).
                                                                                                        determined to be subject to BART by                   and 1,134 tons/year, and PM emission limits of 56
                                                  16 64 FR 35714, 35749, 35756 (July 1, 1999).                                                                lb/hr and 243 tons/year. These hourly and annual
                                                  17 68 FR 33764, 33767 (June 5, 2003).                                                                       limits are the product of the respective lb/MMBtu
                                                                                                          19 Ctr. for Energy & Econ. Dev. v. EPA, 398 F.3d
                                                  18 Five states—Arizona, New Mexico, Oregon,                                                                 emission limit and the design heat input for an hour
                                                Utah and Wyoming—and Albuquerque-Bernalillo             653, 654 (D.C. Cir. 2005).                            or year. However, EPA’s SIP approval only included
                                                                                                          20 71 FR 60612 (October 13, 2006).
                                                County, New Mexico, initially exercised this option                                                           the lb/MMBtu emission limits.
                                                                                                          21 40 CFR 51.309(d)(4)(v).                            26 The emission limits and other requirements
                                                by submitting plans to the EPA in December 2003.
                                                                                                          22 PM includes both PM
                                                Oregon elected to cease participation in 2006, and                                 10 and PM2.5. See          associated with the BART alternative were
                                                Arizona elected to cease participation in 2010.         Definitions.                                          superseded by subsequent permits.



                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:02 Nov 06, 2018   Jkt 247001   PO 00000   Frm 00017   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM   07NOP1


                                                55660              Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Proposed Rules

                                                through a FIP.27 We found no basis to                   heat input values 33) equal to 40 percent             alternative measure will achieve greater
                                                disapprove Wyoming’s SIP requirement                    of the maximum design heat input when                 reasonable progress than would have
                                                for Naughton Unit 3 and were therefore                  firing coal.34 Collectively, these control            resulted from the installation and
                                                obligated to approve them. Accordingly,                 measures will significantly reduce NOX                operation of BART at all sources subject
                                                in a final rule dated January 30, 2014,                 and PM emissions. The SIP revision                    to BART in the state and covered by the
                                                the EPA approved Wyoming’s NOX and                      includes the associated compliance                    alternative program. For a source-
                                                PM emission limits for Naughton Unit 3                  deadlines, monitoring, recordkeeping                  specific BART alternative, the critical
                                                that reflected the installation of SCR and              and reporting requirements. Finally, the              elements of this demonstration are:
                                                a new full-scale fabric filter baghouse.28              SIP revision includes a determination                    • A list of all BART-eligible sources
                                                At the time, we acknowledged that                       that the Naughton Unit 3 BART                         within the state;
                                                Wyoming intended to submit a revision                   alternative is ‘‘better than BART’’ based                • A list of all BART-eligible sources
                                                to its regional haze SIP for Naughton                   on a demonstration that it fulfills the               and all BART source categories covered
                                                Unit 3 that would reflect conversion to                 requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2) for               by the alternative program;
                                                natural gas. We indicated that we would                 a BART alternative. More information                     • An analysis of BART and associated
                                                act on the SIP revision in an expedited                 regarding Wyoming’s analysis of the                   emission reductions;
                                                timeframe.                                              BART alternative is set forth below,                     • An analysis of projected emissions
                                                   Though we approved Wyoming’s NOX                     along with the EPA’s evaluation of the                reductions achievable through the
                                                and PM BART 29 emission limits for                      analysis.                                             BART alternative; and
                                                Naughton Unit 3, we disapproved the                                                                              • A determination that the alternative
                                                                                                        B. The EPA’s Evaluation of the SIP                    achieves greater reasonable progress
                                                monitoring, record-keeping, and                         Revision
                                                reporting requirements in the SIP for all                                                                     than would be achieved through the
                                                BART sources, and promulgated federal                      The RHR establishes the requirements               installation and operation of BART.
                                                requirements in their place for the                     for BART alternatives. Three of the                      We summarize the SIP revision with
                                                reasons stated in our January 30, 2014                  requirements are of relevance to our                  respect to each of these elements and
                                                final rule and June 10, 2013 proposed                   evaluation of the Naughton Unit 3                     provide our evaluation in the
                                                rule.30                                                 BART alternative. We evaluate the                     proceeding sections.
                                                                                                        proposed alternative to the NOX and PM                • A List of All BART-Eligible Sources
                                                3. Wyoming Regional Haze SIP Revision                   BART requirements in the SIP revision
                                                for Naughton Unit 3                                                                                           Within the State
                                                                                                        with respect to each of these following
                                                   On November 28, 2017, Wyoming                        elements:                                                Table 1 shows a list of all BART-
                                                submitted a revision to the Wyoming                        • A demonstration that the emissions               eligible sources in the State of
                                                Regional Haze SIP (‘‘SIP revision’’) that               trading program or other alternative                  Wyoming.
                                                provides an alternative to NOX and PM                   measure will achieve greater reasonable
                                                BART for Naughton Unit 3 (‘‘Naughton                    progress than would have resulted from                 TABLE 1—WYOMING BART-ELIGIBLE
                                                Unit 3 BART Alternative’’). This SIP                    the installation and operation of BART                           SOURCES
                                                revision is in Appendix B to Wyoming’s                  at all sources subject to BART in the
                                                                                                        state and covered by the alternative                           Company                          Facility
                                                5-year progress report, titled Alternative
                                                to BART for NOX and PM for PacifiCorp                   program.35
                                                                                                           • A requirement that all necessary                 PacifiCorp ..................     Jim Bridger.
                                                Naughton Unit 3, and includes five air                                                                        Basin Electric ............       Laramie River.
                                                quality permits for the Naughton Power                  emissions reductions take place during                PacifiCorp ..................     Dave Johnston.
                                                Plant.31 The SIP revision is the subject                the period of the first long-term strategy            PacifiCorp ..................     Naughton.
                                                of this proposal.                                       for regional haze.36                                  PacifiCorp ..................     Wyodak.
                                                                                                           • A demonstration that the emissions               FMC ..........................    Westvaco.
                                                III. The SIP Revision for Naughton                      reductions resulting from the alternative             General Chemical .....            Green River.
                                                Unit 3                                                  measure will be surplus to those                      Black Hills .................     Neil Simpson 1.
                                                                                                        reductions resulting from the measures                Sinclair ......................   Sinclair Refinery.
                                                A. Summary of the SIP Revision                                                                                Sinclair ......................   Casper Refinery.
                                                                                                        adopted to meet requirements of the
                                                   The November 28, 2017 SIP revision                   CAA as of the baseline date of the SIP.37             FMC ..........................    Granger.
                                                requires that PacifiCorp cease firing coal                                                                    Dyno Nobel ...............        Dyno Nobel.
                                                                                                           Our evaluation draws from Appendix
                                                at Naughton Unit 3 no later than January                                                                      OCI Wyoming ............          OCI Wyoming.
                                                                                                        B of the SIP submittal: Alternative to                P4 Production ...........         P4 Production.
                                                30, 2019.32 The SIP revision establishes                BART for NOX and PM for PacifiCorp
                                                NOX and PM emission limits that reflect                 Naughton Unit 3.
                                                firing natural gas, installation of new                                                                       • A List of All BART-Eligible Sources
                                                low-NOX gas burners along with a boiler                 1. Demonstration That the Alternative                 and All BART Source Categories
                                                flue gas recirculation system (FGR) for                 Measure Will Achieve Greater                          Covered by the BART Alternative
                                                NOX control, and a limit on annual heat                 Reasonable Progress                                   Program
                                                input of 12,964,800 MMBtu/year (based                      Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i), a                 Table 2 shows a list of all the BART-
                                                on 12-month rolling average of hourly                   state must demonstrate that the                       eligible sources covered by the BART
                                                  27 79 FR 5045 (January 30, 2014).                     Wyoming for the Naughton Power Plant. Permit          for each month, and that these monthly values are
                                                  28 79 FR 5220, 5221 (January 30, 2014).               Nos. P0021110 (March 7, 2017), PDF pp. 194–198;       then averaged on a rolling 12-month basis.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                  29 Separately, under 40 CFR 51.309, Wyoming           P0021918 (November 18, 2016), PDF pp. 199–200;          34 The State’s SIP explains that ‘‘. . . PacifiCorp

                                                submitted a SIP satisfying BART requirements for        MD–15946 (March 20, 2014), PDF pp. 201–205;           will no longer operate the unit as a base-load
                                                SO2 by adopting SO2 emission milestones and a           MD–14506 (July 5, 2013), PDF pp. 206–215; and         Electric Generating Unit (EGU). Instead it will be
                                                backstop trading program. We finalized approval of      MD–6042A2 (March 7, 2012), PDF pp. 216–220.           operated as a peaking unit with a maximum annual
                                                Wyoming’s 309 program for SO2 on December 12,             32 The coal pulverizers will be removed from
                                                                                                                                                              heat input factor of 40%, or 12,964,800 MMBtu
                                                2012. 77 FR 73926 (December 12, 2012).                                                                        based on 12-month rolling average of hourly heat
                                                  30 79 FR 5221, 5222 (January 30, 2014).
                                                                                                        service.                                              input values.’’ SIP Appendix B at p. 3.
                                                                                                          33 The EPA understands the ‘‘12-month rolling         35 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i).
                                                  31 Appendix B to the SIP contains the State’s

                                                better than BART demonstration (PDF pp. 184–193)        average heat input of hourly heat input values’’ to     36 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iii).

                                                and five air quality permits issued by the State of     mean that the hourly heat input values are summed       37 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iv).




                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:02 Nov 06, 2018   Jkt 247001   PO 00000   Frm 00018   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM    07NOP1


                                                                        Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Proposed Rules                                                                                          55661

                                                alternative program along with the
                                                BART source category.

                                                                                TABLE 2—WYOMING SUBJECT-TO-BART SOURCES COVERED BY THE ALTERNATIVE
                                                                  Company                                                   Facility                                Subject-to-BART units                                      Source category

                                                PacifiCorp ......................................      Naughton Power Plant .................              Unit 3 ............................................    Electrical generating units.



                                                • Analysis of BART and Associated                                        Wyoming’s NOX BART emission limit of                                  Wyoming’s PM BART emission limit of
                                                Emission Reductions                                                      0.07 lb/MMBtu (30-day rolling average)                                0.015 lb/that reflected installation of a
                                                  Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(C),                                 for Naughton Unit 3 that reflected                                    new full-scale fabric filter.39 In addition
                                                the SIP must include an analysis of                                      existing LNBs plus OFA with the                                       to the PM BART emission limit of 0.015
                                                BART and associated emission                                             installation of SCR.38 In addition to the                             lb/MMBtu approved by the EPA, the
                                                reductions at Naughton Unit 3. As noted                                  NOX BART emission limit of 0.07 lb/                                   2011 SIP included PM emission limits
                                                above, Wyoming’s BART analyses and                                       MMBtu approved by the EPA, the 2011                                   of 56 lb/hr and 243 tons/year. These
                                                determinations for Naughton Unit 3                                       SIP included NOX emission limits of                                   BART determinations are shown in the
                                                were included in the 2011 Wyoming                                        259 lb/hr (30-day rolling average) and                                SIP revision, and are summarized in
                                                Regional Haze SIP. The EPA approved                                      1,134 tons/year. We also approved                                     Table 3 below.

                                                                  TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF WYOMING’S NOX AND PM BART DETERMINATIONS FOR NAUGHTON UNIT 3
                                                                               Permitted controls                                                                                      NOX                                                         PM

                                                SCR, New Fabric Filter Baghouse ............................................                 0.07 lb/MMBtu (30-day rolling) .................................................                0.015 lb/MMBtu.
                                                                                                                                             259 lb/hr (30-day rolling) ..........................................................           56 lb/hr.
                                                                                                                                             1,134 tons/yr .............................................................................     243 tons/yr.



                                                  We propose to find that Wyoming has                                    • Analysis of Projected Emissions                                     firing, installation of new low-NOX gas
                                                met the requirement for an analysis of                                   Reductions Achievable Through the                                     burners and FGR for NOX control, and
                                                BART and associated emission                                             BART Alternative                                                      a limit on annual heat input equal to 40
                                                reductions achievable at Naughton Unit                                      Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(D),                             percent of the maximum design heat
                                                3 under 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(C). Note                                  the SIP must include an analysis of                                   input (when burning coal), or
                                                that the emission reductions associated                                  projected emissions reductions                                        12,964,800 MMBtu/year. The SIP
                                                with BART, when expressed in tons                                        achievable through the BART                                           revision includes an analysis of the
                                                reduced per year, are shown in the                                       alternative. The BART alternative                                     projection emissions and emissions
                                                section that follows.                                                    achieves emission reductions through                                  reductions associated with these
                                                                                                                         the following control measures:                                       alternative control measures as
                                                                                                                         conversion of the unit to natural gas                                 reproduced in Tables 4 and 5 below.

                                                                               TABLE 4—NAUGHTON UNIT 3 EMISSION LIMITS WHEN CONVERTED TO NATURAL GAS
                                                                               Permitted controls                                                                                      NOX                                                         PM

                                                New LNB, FGR .........................................................................       0.12 lb/MMBtu (30-day rolling) .................................................                0.008 lb/MMBtu.
                                                                                                                                             250 lb/hr (30-day rolling) ..........................................................           30 lb/hr.
                                                                                                                                             519 tons/yr ................................................................................    52 tons/yr.


                                                                         TABLE 5—NAUGHTON UNIT 3 EMISSION COMPARISON WHEN CONVERTED TO NATURAL GAS
                                                                                                                                               NOX                                                                           PM
                                                           Fuel                Permitted controls
                                                                                                                     lb/MMbtu                  lb/hr                   tons/yr                 lb/MMbtu                      lb/hr                tons/yr

                                                Coal .......................   SCR, Fabric Filter                                 0.07                  259                    1,134                     0.015                          56                  243
                                                Natural Gas ...........        New LNB, FGR,                                      0.12                  250                      519                     0.008                          30                   52
                                                                                 heat input limit.

                                                Additional Reduc-              ...............................   ........................                   9                     615                    0.007                          26                  191
                                                  tion.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                  Here we note that Wyoming                                              based on a potential-to-emit (i.e.,                                   annual emissions for NOX under the
                                                calculated the annual emission                                           allowable) emissions basis. For                                       BART scenario by multiplying the unit’s
                                                reductions achievable through BART                                       example, Wyoming calculated the                                       maximum hourly heat input when

                                                  38 79   FR 5045 (January 30, 2014).                                       39 Ibid.




                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014       17:02 Nov 06, 2018         Jkt 247001       PO 00000        Frm 00019   Fmt 4702      Sfmt 4702      E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM              07NOP1


                                                55662               Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Proposed Rules

                                                combusting coal of 3,700 MMbtu/hr by                    with the BART alternative in a                        unit, and therefore the distribution of
                                                the emission limit of 0.07 lb/MMBtu                     commensurate manner to that for BART                  emissions under BART and the better-
                                                (30-day rolling average). Wyoming then                  (i.e., based on projected actual rather               than-BART alternative are not
                                                converted the resulting value of 259 lb/                than allowable emissions). Nonetheless,               substantially different. Accordantly, if
                                                hr to a tons/yr basis (3700 MMBtu/hr ×                  even if annual emissions for the BART                 the BART alternative results in greater
                                                0.07 lb/MMBtu × 8760 hr/yr × 1 ton/                     alternative are calculated based on an                emission reductions, then it may be
                                                2000 lb = 1,134 tons/yr). Wyoming’s                     allowable emissions basis as Wyoming                  deemed to achieve greater reasonable
                                                calculation for BART assumes that the                   has done, the allowed annual emissions                progress. The SIP revision includes an
                                                unit would be operated at the maximum                   for the BART alternative of 519 tons/                 analysis of the emission reductions
                                                design heat input of 3,700 MMBtu/hr for                 year is lower than the EPA’s estimate for             achievable with the BART alternative as
                                                the entire year (8,760 hours), yielding an              BART (SCR) of 621 tons/year. Therefore,               compared to BART which indicates that
                                                annual heat input of 32,412,000 MMBtu.                  regardless of whether the emission                    the BART alternative achieves greater
                                                We disagree with the calculation                        reductions achievable with the BART                   emission reductions. As indicated in
                                                methodology Wyoming used to                             alternative are assessed on a projected               section E. above, the BART alternative
                                                calculate the annual emission                           actual or allowable emissions basis, the              will achieve additional NOX reductions
                                                reductions achievable with BART                         anticipated NOX emissions are lower                   and additional PM reductions that are
                                                because they were based on a potential-                 under the BART alternative than they                  greater than achieved by BART.45
                                                to-emit basis. By contrast, in our                      are under BART. The same conclusion                   Therefore, we propose to find that
                                                analysis of NOX BART associated with                    holds true for PM. Therefore, while we                Wyoming’s conclusion that the BART
                                                the 2011 SIP, consistent with the BART                  disagree with the State’s potential-to-               alternative achieves greater reasonable
                                                Guidelines,40 we calculated the                         emit (allowable) methodology, we                      progress than would be achieved
                                                projected emissions with SCR based on                   propose to agree with the State’s                     through the installation and operation of
                                                past actual practice rather than the                    conclusion that the emissions                         BART is appropriate. 40 CFR
                                                potential-to-emit. Our calculations                     reductions achievable through the                     51.308((e)(2)(i)(E).
                                                reflected the actual operation of                       alternative measure are better-than-
                                                                                                                                                              2. A Requirement That All Necessary
                                                Naughton Unit 3 during the baseline                     BART. 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(D).
                                                                                                                                                              Emissions Reductions Take Place
                                                period of 2001–2003 during which the
                                                                                                        • Determination That the Alternative                  During the Period of the First Long-
                                                heat input of the unit was 24,856,366
                                                                                                        Achieves Greater Reasonable Progress                  Term Strategy for Regional Haze
                                                MMBtu.41 In addition, as opposed to
                                                                                                        Than Would Be Achieved Through the                       Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iii),
                                                using the 30-day rolling average
                                                                                                        Installation and Operation of BART                    all necessary emission reductions must
                                                emission limit of 0.07 lb/MMBtu, the
                                                EPA used the anticipated annual                            Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(i)(E),             take place during the period of the first
                                                emission rate with SCR of 0.05 lb/                      the SIP revision must provide a                       long-term strategy for regional haze. The
                                                MMbtu.42 Since that time, the 0.05 lb/                  determination under 40 CFR                            RHR further provides that, to meet this
                                                MMBtu annual emission rate has been                     51.308(e)(3) or otherwise based on the                requirement, a detailed description of
                                                demonstrated at other PacifiCorp EGUs                   clear weight of evidence that the                     the alternative measure, including
                                                in Wyoming that have been retrofitted                   alternative achieves greater reasonable               schedules for implementation, the
                                                with SCR and that burn similar coal to                  progress than BART. Two different tests               emission reductions required by the
                                                Naughton Unit 3.43 The result is that the               for determining whether the alternative               program, all necessary administrative
                                                EPA calculated that the projected actual                achieves greater reasonable progress                  and technical procedures for
                                                annual NOX emissions with SCR would                     than BART are outlined in 40 CFR                      implementing the program, rules for
                                                be 621 tons/year 44 (as opposed to 1,134                51.308(e)(3). Under the first test, if the            accounting and monitoring emissions,
                                                tons/year calculated by Wyoming).                       distribution of emissions is not                      and procedures for enforcement.
                                                Because the value of 621 tons/year was                  substantially different than under                       The SIP revision requires PacifiCorp
                                                calculated consistent with the                          BART, and the alternative measure                     to cease firing coal at Naughton Unit 3
                                                procedures outlined in the BART                         results in greater emission reductions,               no later than January 30, 2019.46
                                                Guidelines, and reflects the projected                  then the alternative measure may be                   Because no emissions will occur
                                                actual emissions that would have been                   deemed to achieve greater reasonable                  between the date that PacifiCorp must
                                                achieved with SCR, it sets the                          progress. Under the second test, if the               cease firing coal, and when the unit is
                                                appropriate benchmark for making the                    distribution of emissions is significantly            converted to fire natural gas, the SIP
                                                better-than-BART comparison. To                         different, then dispersion modeling                   revision achieves emission reductions
                                                ensure an apples-to-apples comparison,                  must be conducted to determine                        before the original BART compliance
                                                it is also appropriate to calculate the                 differences between BART and the                      date of March 4, 2019. As a result, we
                                                projected annual emissions anticipated                  BART alternative for each impacted                    do not find that it is appropriate to
                                                                                                        Class I area for the worst and best 20                disapprove this aspect of the BART
                                                  40 In general, for the existing sources subject-to-   percent days. The modeling would                      alternative.
                                                BART, you will estimate the anticipated annual          demonstrate ‘‘greater reasonable                         In addition, Wyoming has included
                                                emissions based upon actual emissions from a
                                                baseline period. 70 FR 39167 (July 5, 2005,
                                                                                                        progress’’ if both of the following                   the relevant implementation schedules,
                                                emphasis added).                                        criteria are met: (1) Visibility does not             monitoring, reporting and record
                                                  41 Heat input data was obtained from the EPA Air      decline in any Class I area; and (2) there            keeping requirements in the SIP
                                                Markets Program Data.                                   is an overall improvement in visibility,              revision as presented in section VI of
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                  42 79 FR 5043, Table 14 (January 30, 2014); 79 FR
                                                                                                        determined by comparing the average                   this action. Accordingly, we propose to
                                                5167 (January 30, 2014).
                                                  43 Refer to the EPA Air Markets Program Data for      differences between BART and the
                                                Jim Bridger Power Plant Units 3 and 4 where SCR         alternative over all affected Class I areas.             45 These values are based on a comparison of

                                                was installed in 2015 and 2016, respectively.           This modeling test is sometimes referred              allowable emissions. See discussion regarding
                                                  44 Andover Technology Partners, ‘‘Cost of NO                                                                allowable versus actual emissions in preceding
                                                                                                   X    to as the ‘‘two-prong test.’’                         section.
                                                Controls on Wyoming EGUs’’, October 28, 2013;              As stated in the SIP revision, the
                                                ‘‘Wyoming EGU BART and Reasonable Progress                                                                       46 Appendix B, p. 2 (PDF p. 187). The associated

                                                Cost,’’ 10/28/2013. Docket ID EPA–R08–OAR–              emissions reductions under PacifiCorp’s               emission and operational limits apply upon
                                                2012–0026–0241.                                         BART alternative will occur at the same               conversion of Naughton Unit 3 to fire natural gas.



                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:02 Nov 06, 2018   Jkt 247001   PO 00000   Frm 00020   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM   07NOP1


                                                                    Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Proposed Rules                                         55663

                                                find that the BART alternative meets the                 (NAAQS). Thus, the revisions will                    year) and P0021110 (condition 7, lb/
                                                requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iii).                ensure a significant reduction in NOX                MMbtu).
                                                                                                         and PM emissions compared to current                    • The operational limit on annual
                                                3. Demonstration That Emissions                                                                               heat input of 12,964,800 MMBtu (based
                                                                                                         levels in an area that has not been
                                                Reductions From the Alternative                                                                               on 12-month rolling average of hourly
                                                                                                         designated nonattainment for the
                                                Measure Will Be Surplus                                                                                       heat input values) found in Wyoming
                                                                                                         relevant NAAQS at those current levels.
                                                   Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iv),                  Accordingly, we propose to find that                 air quality permit P0021110 (condition
                                                the SIP must demonstrate that the                        these revisions satisfy section 110(l).              18).
                                                emissions reductions resulting from the                                                                          • The compliance dates found in
                                                BART alternative measure will be                         V. Consultation With FLMs                            Wyoming air quality permit P0021110;
                                                surplus to those reductions resulting                      There are seven Class I areas in the               specifically including that PacifiCorp
                                                from measures adopted to meet                            State of Wyoming. The United States                  shall (1) remove the coal pulverizers
                                                requirements of the CAA as of the                        Forest Service (USFS) manages the                    from service (cease firing coal) by
                                                baseline date of the SIP. The baseline                   Bridger Wilderness, Fitzpatrick                      January 30, 2019 (P0021110, condition
                                                date for regional haze SIPs is 2002. All                 Wilderness, North Absaroka Wilderness,               19), (2) comply with the NOX and PM
                                                the NOX and PM emission reductions                       Teton Wilderness and Washakie                        emission limits in lb/MMBtu upon
                                                required by the BART alternative will                    Wilderness. The National Park Service                conversion to natural gas firing
                                                occur in the future and are surplus to                   (NPS) manages the Grand Teton                        (P0021110, condition 7), and (3) comply
                                                reductions resulting from SIP measures                   National Park and Yellowstone National               with the heat input limit by January 30,
                                                applicable to Naughton Unit 3 as of                      Park. The RHR grants the FLMs a                      2019 (P0021110, condition 18).
                                                2002. Therefore, we propose to find that                 special role in the review of regional                 • The compliance dates found in
                                                the BART alternative complies with 40                    haze implementation plans,                           Wyoming air quality permit MD–15946
                                                CFR 51.308(e)(2)(iv).                                    summarized in section II.E of this                   (conditions 5 and 6), requiring that
                                                   In sum, we propose to find that the                   preamble.                                            PacifiCorp comply with the NOX and
                                                BART alternative meets all the                             Under 40 CFR 51.308(i)(2), Wyoming                 PM emission limits in lb/hr and tons/
                                                applicable requirements of 40 CFR                        was obligated to provide the USFS and                year upon completion of the initial
                                                51.308(e)(2).                                            the NPS with an opportunity for                      performance tests.
                                                IV. Clean Air Act Section 110(l)
                                                                                                         consultation in development of the                     • The monitoring, record keeping,
                                                                                                         State’s proposed SIP revision no less                and reporting requirements found in air
                                                   Under CAA section 110(l), the EPA                     than 60 days prior to the associated                 quality permit P0021110 (NOX CEMs,
                                                cannot approve a plan revision ‘‘if the                  public hearing or public comment                     conditions 8 and 9; heat input,
                                                revision would interfere with any                        opportunity. The SIP revision does not               condition 18; PM stack testing,
                                                applicable requirement concerning                        describe whether this consultation                   condition 10; reporting, conditions 4,
                                                attainment and reasonable further                        occurred. Nonetheless, Wyoming made                  11, 12, 13, 14, 19; record keeping,
                                                progress (as defined in section 7501 of                  the SIP revision for Naughton Unit 3                 condition 17; notification, conditions 4
                                                this title), or any other applicable                     available to the public on June 5, 2017.             and 6; good practice, condition 21;
                                                requirement of this chapter.’’ 47 The                    The State’s SIP submittal does not                   credible evidence, condition 24).
                                                previous sections of the action explain                  include any comments from the FLMs
                                                how the SIP revision will comply with                    on its SIP revision for Naughton Unit 3              VII. Incorporation by Reference
                                                applicable regional haze requirements                    during the public comment period.                      In this rule, the EPA is proposing to
                                                and general implementation plan                          Additionally, the FLMs will have an                  include regulatory text in an EPA final
                                                requirements such as enforceability.                     opportunity to comment during the                    rule that includes incorporation by
                                                With respect to requirements                             public comment period for this action.               reference. In accordance with
                                                concerning attainment and reasonable                     We propose to find that while Wyoming                requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
                                                further progress, the Wyoming Regional                   did not state in its proposed SIP                    proposing to incorporate by reference
                                                Haze SIP, as revised by this action, will                revision that it fully met its obligation            the SIP amendments described in
                                                result in a significant reduction in                     to provide the FLMs with an                          section VI. of this preamble. The EPA
                                                emissions compared to current levels.                    opportunity for consultation in                      has made, and will continue to make,
                                                Moreover, the SIP revision will result in                development of the SIP revision, the                 these materials generally available
                                                decreased future NOX and PM emissions                    FLMs will have nevertheless been                     through www.regulations.gov and at the
                                                as compared to the prior SIP, and will                   provided with two opportunities to                   EPA Region 8 Office (please contact the
                                                therefore achieve greater reasonable                     comment.                                             person identified in the ‘‘For Further
                                                progress than the prior SIP. In addition,                                                                     Information Contact’’ section of this
                                                the area where the Naughton Unit 3 is                    VI. The EPA’s Proposed Action                        preamble for more information).
                                                located has not been designated                            In this action, the EPA is proposing to
                                                nonattainment for any National                           approve Wyoming’s SIP revision for the               VIII. Statutory and Executive Order
                                                Ambient Air Quality Standards                            Alternative to BART for NOX and PM                   Reviews
                                                                                                         for PacifiCorp Naughton Unit 3,                        Under the CAA, the Administrator is
                                                  47 Note that ‘‘reasonable further progress’’ as used
                                                                                                         including the associated emission and                required to approve a SIP submission
                                                in CAA section 110(l) is a reference to that term as
                                                defined in section 301(a) (i.e., 42 U.S.C. 7501(a)),     operational limitations, compliance                  that complies with the provisions of the
                                                and as such means reductions required to attain the      dates, and monitoring, record keeping,               Act and applicable federal regulations.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)           and reporting requirements.                          42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
                                                set for criteria pollutants under section 109. This                                                           Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the
                                                term as used in section 110(l) (and defined in
                                                                                                         Specifically, the EPA is proposing to
                                                section 301(a)) is not synonymous with ‘‘reasonable      approve the following federally                      EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
                                                progress’’ as that term is used in the regional haze     enforceable elements of the SIP revision             provided that they meet the criteria of
                                                program. Instead, section 110(l) provides that the       for Naughton Unit 3:                                 the CAA. Accordingly, this action
                                                EPA cannot approve plan revisions that interfere
                                                with regional haze requirements (including
                                                                                                           • The NOX and PM emission limits                   merely proposes to approve state law as
                                                reasonable progress requirements) insofar as they        found in Wyoming air quality permits                 meeting federal requirements and does
                                                are ‘‘other applicable requirement[s]’’ of the CAA.      MD–15946 (condition 5, lb/hr and tons/               not impose additional requirements


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:02 Nov 06, 2018   Jkt 247001   PO 00000   Frm 00021   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM   07NOP1


                                                55664              Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Proposed Rules

                                                beyond those imposed by state law. For                  safety risks subject to Executive Order                  reference, Intergovernmental relations,
                                                that reason, this action:                               13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);                     Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,
                                                   • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory                     • Is not a significant regulatory action              Sulfur oxides.
                                                action’’ subject to review by the Office                subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
                                                                                                                                                                     Dated: November 2, 2018.
                                                of Management and Budget under                          28355, May 22, 2001);
                                                Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,                       • Is not subject to requirements of                   Douglas Benevento,
                                                October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,                 section 12(d) of the National                            Regional Administrator, EPA Region 8.
                                                January 21, 2011);                                      Technology Transfer and Advancement
                                                                                                        Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because                   40 CFR part 52 is proposed to be
                                                   • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
                                                                                                        application of those requirements would                  amended as follows:
                                                FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
                                                action because SIP approvals are                        be inconsistent with the CAA; and
                                                                                                           • Does not provide the EPA with the                   PART 52—APPROVAL AND
                                                exempted under Executive Order 12866;                                                                            PROMULGATION OF
                                                   • Does not impose an information                     discretionary authority to address, as
                                                                                                        appropriate, disproportionate human                      IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
                                                collection burden under the provisions
                                                of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44                      health or environmental effects, using
                                                                                                        practicable and legally permissible                      ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
                                                U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
                                                                                                        methods, under Executive Order 12898                     continues to read as follows:
                                                   • Is certified as not having a
                                                                                                        (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).                             Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
                                                significant economic impact on a
                                                                                                           In addition, the SIP is not approved
                                                substantial number of small entities
                                                                                                        to apply on any Indian reservation land                  Subpart ZZ—Wyoming
                                                under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
                                                                                                        or in any other area where the EPA or
                                                U.S.C. 601 et seq.);                                    an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
                                                   • Does not contain any unfunded                                                                               ■ 2. Section 52.2620 is amended by
                                                                                                        tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of                adding in paragraph (d), the entry
                                                mandate or significantly or uniquely                    Indian country, the proposed rule does
                                                affect small governments, as described                                                                           ‘‘Naughton Unit 3’’ at the end of the
                                                                                                        not have tribal implications and will not
                                                in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act                                                                              table; and by adding in paragraph (e), in
                                                                                                        impose substantial direct costs on tribal
                                                of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);                                                                                         numerical order, the entry ‘‘(32) XXXII’’
                                                                                                        governments or preempt tribal law as
                                                   • Does not have federalism                           specified by Executive Order 13175 (65                   to read as follows:
                                                implications as specified in Executive                  FR 67249, November 9, 2000).                             § 52.2620      Identification of plan.
                                                Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
                                                1999);                                                  List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52                       *       *      *      *      *
                                                   • Is not an economically significant                   Environmental protection, Air                              (d) * * *
                                                regulatory action based on health or                    pollution control, Incorporation by

                                                                                                                 State effective         EPA effective          Final rule
                                                    Regulation                        Rule title                                                                                             Comments
                                                                                                                      date                  date              citation/date


                                                        *                       *                 *                                *                       *                       *                      *
                                                Naughton Unit 3 ..     Air Quality SIP Permits con-             November 28,           December 7,          [Federal Reg-         Only the following permit provi-
                                                                         taining BART Alternative re-             2017.                  2018.                ister citation]       sions: NOX and PM emission
                                                                         quirements, MD–15946 and                                                             November 7,           limits (P0021110, condition 7;
                                                                         P0021110.                                                                            2018.                 MD–15946, condition 5); emis-
                                                                                                                                                                                    sion limit compliance dates
                                                                                                                                                                                    (P0021110, condition 7; MD–
                                                                                                                                                                                    15946, conditions 5 and 6);
                                                                                                                                                                                    heat input limit and compli-
                                                                                                                                                                                    ance date (P0021110, condi-
                                                                                                                                                                                    tion 18); compliance date for
                                                                                                                                                                                    coal pulverizers to be re-
                                                                                                                                                                                    moved         from        service
                                                                                                                                                                                    (P0021110, condition 19); and
                                                                                                                                                                                    associated monitoring, record-
                                                                                                                                                                                    keeping, and reporting re-
                                                                                                                                                                                    quirements (P0021110, condi-
                                                                                                                                                                                    tions 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
                                                                                                                                                                                    14, 17, 18, 19, 21, and 24).



                                                   (e) * * *
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:51 Nov 06, 2018   Jkt 247001   PO 00000   Frm 00022   Fmt 4702     Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM    07NOP1


                                                                        Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 216 / Wednesday, November 7, 2018 / Proposed Rules                                                                   55665

                                                                                                                             State effective           EPA effective               Final rule
                                                      Rule No.                              Rule title                                                                                                           Comments
                                                                                                                                  date                    date                   citation date


                                                        *                            *                 *                                         *                            *                      *                   *
                                                (32) XXXII ...........       Wyoming State Implementation                  November 28,              December 7,               [Federal Reg-        Only includes Appendix B: Alter-
                                                                              Plan 5-Year Progress Report                   2017.                      2018.                     ister citation],     native to BART for NOX and
                                                                              for Regional Haze, Appendix                                                                        November 7,          PM for PacifiCorp Naughton
                                                                              B: Alternative to BART for                                                                         2018.                Unit 3.
                                                                              NOX and PM for PacifiCorp
                                                                              Naughton Unit 3.



                                                ■ 3. Section 52.2636 is amended by                                § 52.2636       Implementation plan for regional                     (vii) PacifiCorp Naughton Power Plant
                                                revising paragraph (a)(1)(vii) and                                haze.                                                              Units 1 and 2 (PM and NOX); and
                                                amending paragraph(c)(1) by revising                                  (a) * * *                                                      *     *     *    *    *
                                                Table 1 to § 52.2636 to read as follows:                              (1) * * *                                                        (c) * * *
                                                                                                                                                                                       (1) * * *

                                                                                                                                TABLE 1 TO § 52.2636
                                                                     [Emission limits for BART units for which EPA approved the State’s BART and Reasonable Progress determinations]

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      NOX emission
                                                                                                                                                                                                 PM emission        limits—lb/MMBtu
                                                                                                     Source name/BART unit                                                                     limits—lb/MMBtu        (30-day rolling
                                                                                                                                                                                                                         average)

                                                FMC Westvaco Trona Plant/Unit NS–1A ....................................................................................................                   0.05                  0.35
                                                FMC Westvaco Trona Plant/Unit NS–1B ....................................................................................................                   0.05                  0.35
                                                TATA Chemicals Partners (General Chemical) Green River Trona Plant/Boiler C ....................................                                           0.09                  0.28
                                                TATA Chemicals Partners (General Chemical) Green River Trona Plant/Boiler D ....................................                                           0.09                  0.28
                                                Basin Electric Power Cooperative Laramie River Station/Unit 1 ................................................................                             0.03                   N/A
                                                Basin Electric Power Cooperative Laramie River Station/Unit 2 ................................................................                             0.03                   N/A
                                                Basin Electric Power Cooperative Laramie River Station/Unit 3 ................................................................                             0.03                   N/A
                                                PacifiCorp Dave Johnston Power Plant/Unit 3 ............................................................................................                  0.015                   N/A
                                                PacifiCorp Dave Johnston Power Plant/Unit 4 ............................................................................................                  0.015                  0.15
                                                PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant/Unit 11 ................................................................................................                0.03             0.26/0.07
                                                PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant/Unit 21 ................................................................................................                0.03             0.26/0.07
                                                PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant/Unit 31 ................................................................................................                0.03             0.26/0.07
                                                PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Power Plant/Unit 41 ................................................................................................                0.03             0.26/0.07
                                                PacifiCorp Naughton Power Plant/Unit 1 ....................................................................................................                0.04                  0.26
                                                PacifiCorp Naughton Power Plant/Unit 2 ....................................................................................................                0.04                  0.26
                                                PacifiCorp Wyodak Power Plant/Unit 1 .......................................................................................................              0.015                   N/A
                                                  1 The owners and operators of PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Units 1, 2, 3, and 4 shall comply with the NO emission limit for BART of 0.26 lb/MMBtu
                                                                                                                                                     X
                                                and PM emission limit for BART of 0.03 lb/MMBtu and other requirements of this section by March 4, 2019. The owners and operators of
                                                PacifiCorp Jim Bridger Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 shall comply with the NOX emission limit for reasonable progress of 0.07 lb/MMBtu by: December 31,
                                                2022, for Unit 1, December 31, 2021, for Unit 2, December 31, 2015, for Unit 3, and December 31, 2016, for Unit 4.


                                                *       *        *       *        *                               Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),                                 and increase monitoring in the Atlantic
                                                [FR Doc. 2018–24372 Filed 11–6–18; 8:45 am]                       Commerce.                                                          herring fishery.
                                                BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
                                                                                                                        Proposed rule, request for
                                                                                                                  ACTION:                                                            DATES: Public comments must be
                                                                                                                  comments.                                                          received by December 24, 2018.
                                                                                                                                                                                     ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
                                                DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE                                            SUMMARY:   This action proposes                                    identified by NOAA–NMFS–2018–0109,
                                                                                                                  regulations to implement the New                                   by either of the following methods:
                                                National Oceanic and Atmospheric                                  England Fishery Management Council’s
                                                                                                                                                                                       • Electronic Submission: Submit all
                                                Administration                                                    Industry-Funded Monitoring Omnibus
                                                                                                                                                                                     electronic public comments via the
                                                                                                                  Amendment. The New England Council
                                                                                                                                                                                     Federal eRulemaking Portal.
                                                50 CFR Part 648                                                   is considering ways to increase
                                                                                                                  monitoring in certain fisheries to assess                            1. Go to www.regulations.gov/
                                                [Docket No. 170831847–8853–01]                                    the amount and type of catch and                                   #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-
                                                                                                                  reduce uncertainty around catch                                    0109;
                                                RIN 0648–BG91                                                     estimates. This amendment would                                      2. Click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                                                                                  implement a process to standardize                                 and complete the required fields; and
                                                Magnuson-Stevens Fishery                                                                                                               3. Enter or attach your comments.
                                                                                                                  future industry-funded monitoring
                                                Conservation and Management Act
                                                                                                                  programs in New England Council                                      • Mail: Submit written comments to
                                                Provisions; Fisheries of the
                                                                                                                  fishery management plans and industry-                             Michael Pentony, Regional
                                                Northeastern United States; Industry-
                                                                                                                  funded monitoring in the Atlantic                                  Administrator, National Marine
                                                Funded Monitoring
                                                                                                                  herring fishery. This action would                                 Fisheries Service, 55 Great Republic
                                                AGENCY:  National Marine Fisheries                                ensure consistency in industry-funded                              Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930. Mark the
                                                Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and                              monitoring programs across fisheries                               outside of the envelope, ‘‘Comments on


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014       17:51 Nov 06, 2018     Jkt 247001     PO 00000      Frm 00023     Fmt 4702      Sfmt 4702    E:\FR\FM\07NOP1.SGM          07NOP1



Document Created: 2018-11-07 00:05:16
Document Modified: 2018-11-07 00:05:16
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionProposed Rules
ActionProposed rule.
DatesWritten comments must be received on or before December 7, 2018.
ContactAaron Worstell, Air Program, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202- 1129, (303) 312-6073, [email protected]
FR Citation83 FR 55656 
CFR AssociatedEnvironmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Particulate Matter and Sulfur Oxides

2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR