[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 133 (Thursday, July 13, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32287-32294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-14748]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R08-OAR-2017-0298; FRL-9964-84-Region 8]
Approval and Promulgation; State of Utah; Salt Lake County and
Utah County Nonattainment Area Coarse Particulate Matter State
Implementation Plan Revisions to Control Measures for Point Sources
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve certain state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by
Utah on January 4, 2016, and certain revisions submitted on January 19,
2017, for the coarse particulate matter (PM10) national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in the Salt Lake County and Utah
County PM10 nonattainment areas. The revisions that the EPA
is proposing to approve are located in Utah Division of Administrative
Rule (DAR) R307-110-17 and SIP Subsection IX.H.1-4, and establish
emissions limits for PM10, nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur
dioxide (SO2) for certain stationary sources in the
nonattainment areas. These actions are being taken under section 110 of
the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 14, 2017.
[[Page 32288]]
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2017-0298 at http://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: James Hou, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, 303-312-6210,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
a. Submitting Confidential Business Information (CBI). Do not
submit CBI to the EPA through www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For
CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the
outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically
within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as
CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain
the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
b. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
2. Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. Background
Under the 1990 amendments to the CAA, Salt Lake and Utah Counties
were designated nonattainment for PM10 and classified as
moderate areas by operation of law as of November 15, 1990 (56 FR
56694, 56840; November 6, 1991). The air quality planning requirements
for moderate PM10 nonattainment areas are set out in
subparts 1 and 4, part D, Title I of the Act. As described in section
110 and 172 of the Act, areas designated nonattainment based on failure
to meet the PM10 NAAQS are required to develop SIPs with
sufficient control measures to expeditiously attain and maintain the
NAAQS.
On July 8, 1994, the EPA approved the PM10 SIP for Salt
Lake and Utah Counties (59 FR 35036). The SIP included a demonstration
of attainment and various control measures, including emission limits
at stationary sources. Because emissions of SO2 and
NOX contribute significantly to the PM10 problem
in the area, the SIP included limits on emissions of SO2 and
NOX in addition to emissions of PM10.
On September 26, 1995, the EPA designated Ogden City as
nonattainment for PM10 and classified the area as moderate
under section 107(d)(3) of the Act (60 FR 38726; July 28, 1995).
Subsequently, the EPA approved a clean data determination for the Ogden
City nonattainment area on January 7, 2013 (78 FR 885), suspending
obligations to submit certain requirements of part D, subparts 1 and 4
of the Act for so long as the area continues to attain.
On July 3, 2002 Utah submitted SIP revisions adopting rule R307-
110-10, which incorporated revisions to portions of Utah's SIP Section
IX, Part A, and rule R307-110-17, which incorporated revisions to
portions of Utah's SIP Section IX Part H. These revisions were approved
by the EPA on December 23, 2002 (67 FR 78181). The revisions to Utah's
SIP Section IX Part H removed several stationary sources subject to
reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements from the
initial list of RACT sources in the Utah County nonattainment area,
based on SIP threshold limits for PM10, NOx, and
SO2 of 100 tpy, 200 tpy, and 250 tpy, respectively. In doing
so, the number of major stationary sources included in the SIP for the
Utah County nonattainment area was reduced from 14 sources to 5
sources. Notably, one of the sources retained in Utah's 2002 SIP was
Geneva Steel, which underwent a protracted closure and had largely
ceased operations by 2004. In 2005, the PacifiCorp--Lake Side Power
Plant was constructed on a portion of the former Geneva Steel facility,
utilizing banked emission credits from Geneva Steel's closure.
On January 4, 2016, Utah submitted SIP revisions to R307-110-17
titled ``Section IX, Control Measures for Area and Point Sources, Part
H, Emission Limits'' and revisions to Subsection IX.H.1-4. The titles
for Subsection IX.H.1-4 include: (1) General Requirements: Control
Measures for Area and Point Sources, Emission Limits and Operating
Practices, PM10 Requirements; (2) Source Specific Emission
Limitations in Salt Lake County PM10 Nonattainment/
Maintenance Area; (3) Source Specific Emission Limitations in Utah
County PM10 Nonattainment/Maintenance Area; and (4) Interim
Emission Limits and Operating Practices. Additionally, on January 19,
2017, Utah submitted revisions to Subsection IX.H.1-4. Further
discussion of the revisions to R307-110-17 and Subsection IX.H.1-4 can
be found below.
III. EPA's Evaluation of Utah's SIP
A. R307-110-17
1. Section R307-110-17 incorporates the amendments to Section IX.H
into state rules, thereby making them effective as a matter of state
law. This is a ministerial provision and does not by itself include any
control measures.
B. Subsection IX.H.1-4
1. Subsection IX.H.1. General Requirements: Control Measures for
Area and Point Sources, Emission Limits and Operating Practices,
PM10 Requirements. This section establishes general
requirements for record keeping,
[[Page 32289]]
reporting, and monitoring for the stationary sources subject to
emissions limits under subsections IX.H.2-4. Additionally, this section
establishes general refinery requirements, addressing limitations on
emitting units common to the refineries in the nonattainment areas.
These general refinery requirements include limits at fluid catalytic
cracking units, limits on refinery fuel gas, restrictions on liquid
fuel oil consumption, requirement for sulfur removal units, and
requirements for hydrocarbon flares.
2. Subsection IX.H.2. Source Specific Emission Limitations in Salt
Lake County PM10 Nonattainment/Maintenance Area. This
section establishes specific emission limitations for 14 sources. These
sources are Big West Oil Refinery; Bountiful City Light and Power;
Central Valley Reclamation Facility; Chevron Products Company; Hexcel
Corporation; Holly Refining and Marketing Company; Kennecott Utah
Copper (KUC): Bingham Canyon Mine; KUC: Copperton Concentrator; KUC:
Power Plant and Tailings Impoundment; KUC: Smelter and Refinery;
PacifiCorp Energy: Gadsby Power Plant; Tesoro Refining & Marketing
Company; University of Utah; and West Valley Power Holdings, LLC. Major
stationary sources were identified based on their potential to emit
(PTE) of 100 tons per year (tpy) or more of PM10, NOx, or
SO2. A summary of the current emission limits, for retained
sources, is outlined in Table 1 below, and a summary of the proposed
new emission limits is outlined in Table 2 below.
Table 1--Current Source Specific Emission Limitations in the Salt Lake County PM10 Nonattainment Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concentration based Alternative emission
Source Pollutant Process unit Mass based limits limits limits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amoco Oil Company \1\.............. PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 113 tpy.
NOX................... Facility Wide......... 688 tpy..............
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 2,013 tpy............
Bountiful City Light and Power..... PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 1.06 tpy.
NOX................... Facility Wide......... 250 tpy..............
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 5.97.................
Central Valley Water Reclamation PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 0.67 tpy.
Facility. NOX................... Facility Wide......... 203.7 tpy............
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 3.95 tpy.............
Chevron Products Company........... PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 175 tpy.
NOX................... Facility Wide......... 1,022 tpy............
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 2,578 tpy.
Flying J \2\....................... PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 22 tpy.
NOX................... Facility Wide......... 278.7 tpy.
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 864.6 tpy.
Hercules Aerospace Company--Plant ...................... ...................... ..................... ..................... 175 MMscf natural gas
#3 \3\. per year.
10.8 MM pounds of
carbon fiber
produced per year.
Holly Refining and Marketing PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 0.416 tpd.
Company. NOX................... Facility Wide......... 2.09 tpd.............
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 0.31 tpd.
Kennecott Utah Copper: Bingham ...................... ...................... ..................... ..................... Maximum of 30,000
Canyon Mine. daily miles for
waste haul trucks.
Fugitive road dust
emission controls.
Kennecott Utah Copper: Power Plant. PM10.................. Total Power Plant..... 257 tpy.
NOX................... Total Power Plant..... 5085 tpy.............
SO2................... Total Power Plant..... 6219 tpy.
Kennecott Utah Copper: Tailings ...................... ...................... ..................... ..................... Fugitive dust
Impoundment. maintenance program
and mitigation
procedures.
Kennecott Utah Copper: Smelter..... PM10.................. Main Stack............ 400 lb/hr.
SO2 (daily avg)....... Main Stack............ 5,700 lb/hr..........
SO2................... Acid Plant Tail Gas... 1200 lb/hr........... 650 ppmvd.
NOX................... Smelter Powerhouse.... 20.8 lb/hr........... 80/9 ppmdv.
PM10.................. Rotary Concentrate 4.2 lb/hr.
Dryer Stack.
NOX................... Rotary Concentrate 7.1 lb/hr............ 67 ppmdv.
Dryer Stack.
Kennecott Utah Copper: Refinery.... PM10.................. Total Refinery........ 51.9 tpy.
SO2................... Total Refinery........ 162.6 tpy............
NOX................... Total Refinery........ 121 tpy.
University of Utah................. PM10.................. Source wide........... 74.3 tpy.
NOX................... Source wide........... 245.8 tpy.
SO2................... Source wide........... 219.3 tpy.
Utah Power and Light--Gadsby \4\... PM10.................. Source Wide........... 61.3 tpy.
NOX................... Source wide........... 2,983 tpy............
[[Page 32290]]
SO2................... Source wide........... 67.7 tpy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Amoco Oil Company facility corresponds with the Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company in the proposed emission limits of Table 2.
\2\ The Flying J refinery corresponds with the Big West Oil facility in the proposed emission limits of Table 2.
\3\ The Hercules Aerospace Company--Plant #3 corresponds with the Hexcel Corporation in the proposed emission limits of Table 2.
\4\ Utah Power and Light--Gadsby, corresponds with PacifiCorp--Gadsby in the proposed emission limits of Table 2.
Table 2--Proposed Source Specific Emission Limitations in the Salt Lake County PM10 Nonattainment Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concentration based Alternative emission
Source Pollutant Process unit Mass based limits limits limits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big West Oil....................... PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 1.037 tons per day
NOX................... Facility Wide......... (tpd).
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 0.8 tpd..............
0.6 tpd..............
Bountiful City Light and Power..... NOX................... GT#1.................. 0.6 g NOX/kW-hr.
NOX................... GT#2 and GT#3......... 7.5 lb NOX/hr........
Central Valley Water Reclamation NOX................... Facility Wide......... 0.648 tpd.
Facility.
Chevron Products Company........... PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 0.715 tpd.
NOX................... Facility Wide......... 2.1 tpd..............
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 1.05 tpd.............
Hexcel Corporations................ ...................... ...................... ..................... ..................... 5.50 MMscf natural
gas per day.
0.061 MM pounds of
carbon fiber
produced per day.
Holly Refining and Marketing PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 0.416 tpd.
Company. NOX................... Facility Wide......... 2.09 tpd.............
SO2................... 0.31 tpd.............
Kennecott Utah Copper: Bingham ...................... ...................... ..................... ..................... Maximum of 30,000
Canyon Mine. miles for waste haul
trucks per day.
Fugitive road dust
emission control
requirements.
Kennecott Copperton Concentrator... ...................... ...................... ..................... ..................... Requirement to
operate a gas
scrubber operated in
accordance with
parametric
monitoring.
Kennecott Utah Copper:............. PM10.................. Power Plant Unit #5... 18.8 lb/hr.
Power Plant and NOX................... Power Plant Unit #5... ..................... 2.0 ppmdv (15% O2
dry).
Tailings Impoundment NOX................... Power Plant Unit #5 395 lb/hr.
Startup/Shutdown.
PM10 (Filterable)..... Units #1, #2, #3, and 0.004 grains/dscf.
#4, Nov 1-Feb 28/29.
PM10 (Filterable + Units #1,# 2, #3, and 0.03 grains/dscf.
Condensable). #4, Nov 1-Feb 28/29.
NOX................... Units #1,# 2, and #3, ..................... 336 ppmdv (3% O2).
Nov 1-Feb 28/29.
NOX................... Unit #4, Nov 1-Feb 28/ ..................... 336 ppmdv (3% O2).
29.
PM10 (Filterable)..... Units #1,# 2, and #3, 0.029 grains/dscf.
Mar 1-Oct 1.
PM10 (Filterable + Units #1,# 2, and #3, 0.29 grains/dscf.
Condensable). Mar 1-Oct 1.
PM10 (Filterable)..... Unit #4, Mar 1-Oct 1.. 0.029 grains/dscf.
NOX................... Units #1,# 2, and #3, ..................... 426.5 ppmdv (3% O2)..
Mar 1-Oct 1.
NOX................... Unit #4, Mar 1-Oct 1.. ..................... 384 ppmdv (3% O2)....
Kennecott Utah Copper: Smelter and PM10 (Filterable)..... Main Stack............ 89.5 lb/hr...........
Refinery.
PM10 (Filterable + Main Stack............ 439 lb/hr............
Condensable).
SO2 (3-hr rolling avg) Main Stack............ 552 lb/hr............
SO2 (daily avg)....... Main Stack............ 422 lb/hr............
NOX (daily avg)....... Main Stack............ 154 lb/hr............
NOX................... Refinery: Sum of 2 9.5 lb/hr............
tank house boilers.
NOX................... Refinery: Combined 5.96 lb/hr...........
Heat Plant.
NOX................... Molybdenum Autoclave 5.01 lb/hr...........
Project: Combined
Heat Plant.
PacifiCorp Energy: Gadsby Power NOX................... Steam Unit #1......... 179 lb/hr............
Plant.
[[Page 32291]]
NOX................... Steam Unit #2......... 204 lb/hr............
...................... Steam Unit #3......... 142 lb./hr (Nov 1-Feb
NOX................... 28/29).
NOX................... Steam Unit #3......... 203 lb/hr (Mar 1-Oct
31).
Tesoro Refining and Marketing PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 2.25 tpd.
Company. NOX................... Facility Wide......... 1.988 tpd............
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 3.1 tpd.
University of Utah................. NOX................... Boiler #3............. ..................... 9 ppmdv (3% O2 Dry).
Boiler #4a & #4b...... ..................... 9 ppmdv (3% O2 Dry).
Boiler #5a & #5b...... ..................... 9 ppmdv (3% O2 Dry).
Turbine............... ..................... 9 ppmdv (3% O2 Dry).
Turbine and WHRU Duct ..................... 15 ppmdv (3% O2 Dry).
burner.
West Valley Power \5\.............. NOX................... Sum of all five 1,050 lb/day.
turbines.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ West Valley Power was not a listed source in the 1994 SIP for the Salt Lake County PM10 NAA.
3. Subsection IX.H.3. Source Specific Emission Limitations in Utah
County PM10 Nonattainment/Maintenance Area. This section
establishes specific emission limitations for 6 sources. These sources
are Brigham Young University (BYU); Geneva Nitrogen Inc.; PacifiCorp
Energy: Lake Side Power Plant; Payson City Corporation: Payson City
Power; Provo City Power: Power Plant; and Springville City Corporation:
Whitehead Power Plant. Major stationary sources were identified based
on their PTE of 100 tons per year (tpy) or more for PM10,
NOX, and SO2. It is important to note that the
SIP threshold of 100 tpy for all three pollutants is less than the
previous SIP major stationary source thresholds Utah established in its
2002 SIP revision. The 2002 SIP revision had established major
stationary source thresholds for PM10, NOX, and
SO2 at 100 tpy, 200 tpy, and 250 tpy, respectively. By
lowering the SIP threshold to 100 tpy for all three pollutants, three
sources are now added into the SIP. These sources are BYU, Payson City
Power and PacifiCorp Energy--Lake Side Power Plant. PacifiCorp Energy--
Lake Side Power Plant sits on a portion of the former Geneva Steel
site. A summary of the current emission limits, for retained sources,
is outlined in Table 3 below, and a summary of the proposed new
emission limits are outlined in Table 4 below.
Table 3--Current Source Specific Emission Limitations in the Utah County PM10 Nonattainment Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concentration based Alternative emission
Source Pollutant Process unit Mass based limits limits limits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geneva Nitrogen Inc: Geneva Plant.. PM10.................. Prill Tower........... 0.24 tpd.............
NOX................... Montecatini Plant..... 0.389 tpd............
NOX................... Weatherly Plant....... 0.233 tpd............
Provo City Power: Power Plant...... NOX................... All engines combined.. 2.45 tpd.............
Springville City Corporation: NOX................... All engines combined.. 1.68 tpd.............
Whitehead Power Plant.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4--Proposed Source Specific Emission Limitations in the Utah County PM10 Nonattainment Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concentration based Alternative emission
Source Pollutant Process unit Mass based limits limits limits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brigham Young University........... NOX................... Unit #1 \6\........... 9.55 lb/hr........... 95 ppmdv (7% O2 Dry).
NOX................... Unit #2............... 37.4 lb/hr........... 331 ppmdv (7% O2
Dry).
SO2................... Unit #2............... 56.0 lb/hr........... 597 ppmdv (7% O2
Dry).
NOX................... Unit #3............... 37.4 lb/hr........... 331 ppmdv (7% O2
Dry).
SO2................... Unit #3............... 56.0 lb/hr........... 597 ppmdv (7% O2
Dry).
NOX................... Unit #4 \7\........... 19.2 lb/hr........... 127 ppmdv (7% O2
Dry).
NOX................... Unit #5............... 74.8 lb/hr........... 331 ppmdv (7% O2
Dry).
SO2................... Unit #5............... 112.07 lb/hr......... 597 ppmdv (7% O2
Dry).
[[Page 32292]]
NOX................... Unit #6 \7\........... 19.2 lb/hr........... 127 ppmdv (7% O2
Dry).
Geneva Nitrogen Inc.: Geneva Plant. PM10.................. Prill Tower........... 0.236 tpd............
PM2.5................. Prill Tower........... 0.196 tpd.
NOX................... Montecatini Plant..... 30.8 lb/hr.
NOX................... Weatherly Plant....... 18.4 lb/hr.
PacifiCorp Energy: Lakeside Power NOX................... Block #1 Turbine/HRSG 14.9 lb/hr.
Plant. Stacks.
NOX................... Block #2 Turbine/HRSG 18.1 lb/hr.
Stacks.
Payson City Corporation: Payson NOX................... All engines combined.. 1.54 tpd.
City Power.
Provo City Power: Power Plant...... NOX................... All engines combined.. 2.45 tpd.
Springville City Corporation: NOX................... All engines combined.. 1.68 tpd.
Whitehead Power Plant.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The NOX limit for Unit #1 is 95 ppm (9.55 lb/hr) until it operates for more than 300 hours during a rolling 12-month period, then the limit will be
36 ppm (5.44 lb/hr). This will be accomplished through the installation of low NOX burners with Flue Gas Recirculation.
\7\ The NOX limit for Units #4 and #6 is 127 ppm (38.5 lb/hr) until December 31, 2018, at which time the limit will then be 36 ppm (19.2 lb/hr).
4. Subsection IX.H.4. Interim Emission Limits and Operating
Practices. R307-110-17 Section IX, Control Measures for Area and Point
Sources, Part H, Emission Limits. This section establishes interim
emission limits for sources whose new emission limits under Subsections
IX.H.2 and 3 are based on controls that are not currently installed,
with the provision that all necessary controls needed to meet the
emission limits under Subsection IX.H.2 and IX.H.3 shall be installed
by January 1, 2019. A summary of the proposed interim emission limits
is outlined in Table 5 below.
Table 5--Proposed Interim Emission Limits and Operating Practices
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concentration based Alternative emission
Source Pollutant Process unit Mass based limits limits limits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big West Oil....................... PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 0.377 tpd Oct 1-March
31.
0.407 tpd April 1-
Sept 30.
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 2.764 tpd Oct 1-March
31.
3.639 tpd April 1-
Sept 30.
NOX................... Facility Wide......... 1.027 tpd Oct 1-Mar
31.
1.145 tpd Apr 1-Sep
30.
Chevron Products Company........... PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 0.234 tpd.
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 0.5 tpd.
NOX................... Facility Wide......... 2.52 tpd.
Holly Refining and Marketing PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 0.44 tpd.
Company.
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 4.714 tpd.
NOX................... Facility Wide......... 2.20 tpd.
Tesoro Refining and Marketing PM10.................. Facility Wide......... 0.261 tpd.
Company.
SO2................... Facility Wide......... 3.699 tpd Nov 1-Feb
28/29.
4.374 tpd Mar 1-Oct
31.
NOX................... Facility Wide......... 1.988 tpd.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 32293]]
IV. Consideration of Section 110(l) of the CAA
Under section 110(l) of the CAA, the EPA cannot approve a SIP
revision if the revision would interfere with any applicable
requirements concerning attainment and reasonable further progress
(RFP) toward attainment of the NAAQS, or any other applicable
requirement of the Act. In addition, section 110(l) requires that each
revision to an implementation plan submitted by a state shall be
adopted by the state after reasonable notice and public hearing.
The Utah SIP revisions that the EPA is proposing to approve do not
interfere with any applicable requirements of the Act. The DAR section
R307-110-17 and Subsection IX.H.1-4, submitted January 4, 2016, and
January 19, 2017 are intended to strengthen the SIP. Therefore, CAA
section 110(l) requirements are satisfied.
Specifically, the proposed emission limits for the retained sources
in the Salt Lake County nonattainment area will result in a reduction
of PM10, SO2, and NOX emissions by
10.64 tpd, 12.87 tpd and 29.97 tpd, respectively, when compared to the
limits established in the original PM10 SIP. Given the large
net decrease in emissions from the retained major stationary sources in
the Salt Lake County nonattainment area, the proposed action will
enhance the area's ability to attain or maintain the NAAQS.
The proposed emissions from Geneva Nitrogen, Provo City Power
Plant, and the Springville City Corporation--Whitehead Power Plant are
consistent with the 2002 SIP revisions for Utah County. Additionally,
this proposed action adds three sources--BYU, Payson City Power and
PacifiCorp Energy--Lake Side Power Plant. Both BYU and Payson City
Power have been in existence since the original 1994 SIP, and BYU was
initially included as a source in the original 1994 SIP, but was
removed in 2002. The inclusion of these two sources do not reflect an
increase in emissions into the Utah County nonattainment area airshed,
but rather reflect a change in the approach of how stationary sources
are included into the SIP. PacifiCorp Energy--Lake Side Power Plant is
also being added into the SIP, but its addition does not reflect an
emissions increase to the nonattainment area because the facility was
required to use offsetting emissions, largely made available through
the closure of the Geneva Steel facility. The closing of Geneva Steel
resulted in the removal of approximately 1,700 tpy PM10,
1,400 tpy SO2, and 4,200 tpy NOX from the Utah
County airshed. These emission reductions were banked and made
available for purchase for future major source construction and
modifications. In order to construct the Lakeside Power Plant, banked
emission credits were purchased and used at an offset ratio of 1.2:1
(e.g. For every 1.0 tpy of emissions allowed at the Lakeside Power
Plant, 1.2 tpy of banked emission credits must be spent from the Utah
emissions credit offset registry.). In total the Lakeside Power Plant
utilized banked emission credits for PM10, SO2,
and NOX in the amounts of 257 tpy, 66 tpy, and 337 tpy,
respectively. Given the offset ratio required for the construction of
the Lakeside Power Plant, the inclusion of this source into the SIP
does not result in any emissions increase to the Utah County airshed,
and actually reflects a net decrease from the 2002 SIP. As a result of
the decreased emissions from the closure of the Geneva Steel facility,
and the offsetting ratio required to construct the Lake Side Power
Plant, the proposed revision to the Utah County PM10 SIP
will enhance the area's ability to attain or maintain the NAAQS.
V. Summary of Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
The EPA is proposing approval and requesting public comment on
revisions to Administrative Rule R307-110-17 and revisions to
Subsection IX.H.1-4 as submitted by the State of Utah on January 4,
2016, and January 19, 2017. These revisions establish emissions
limitations and related requirements for certain stationary sources of
PM10, NOX and SO2, and will therefore
serve to continue progress towards attainment and maintenance of the
PM10 NAAQS in the nonattainment areas. The proposed
revisions reflect more stringent emission levels for total emissions of
PM10, SO2, and NOX for each of the
affected facilities, as well as updates the inventory of major
stationary sources to accurately reflect the current sources in both
the Salt Lake County and Utah County nonattainment areas (e.g.,
removing sources which no longer exist, or are now covered under an
area source rule). The updated list of sources and revised emission
limits for the major stationary sources in the two nonattainment areas
will serve to enhance both area's ability to attain or maintain the
NAAQS.
VI. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the DAQ PM10 SIP revisions as discussed in section
III of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make,
these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or
at the EPA Region 8 Office (please contact the person identified in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more
information).
VII. 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 beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
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 (Public Law 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).
[[Page 32294]]
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, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur dioxide, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 30, 2017.
Debra H. Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2017-14748 Filed 7-12-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P