[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 44 (Monday, March 7, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11668-11670]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-04751]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0592; FRL-9943-15-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Minnesota; Revision to Visibility Federal
Implementation Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is revising the
Minnesota Federal implementation plan (FIP) for visibility, to
establish emission limits for Northern States Power Company's (NSP's)
Sherburne County Generating Station (Sherco), pursuant to a settlement
agreement. The settlement
[[Page 11669]]
agreement, signed by representatives of EPA, NSP, and three
environmental groups, was for resolution of a lawsuit filed by the
environmental groups for EPA to address any contribution from Sherco to
reasonably attributable visibility impairment (RAVI) that the
Department of Interior (DOI) certified was occurring at Voyageurs and
Isle Royale National Parks.
DATE: This final rule is effective on April 6, 2016.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0592. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone John Summerhays,
Environmental Scientist, at (312) 886-6067 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Summerhays, Environmental
Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6067,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:
I. What events led to a settlement agreement regarding Sherco?
II. What comments did EPA receive on its proposed action?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.
I. What events led to a settlement agreement regarding Sherco?
Section 169A of the Clean Air Act provides for a visibility
protection program and sets forth 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.'' Pursuant to these statutory requirements,
EPA promulgated regulations entitled ``Visibility Protection'' in
subpart P of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR),
specifically in 40 CFR 51.300 et seq., which include separate
requirements addressing RAVI and regional haze. 45 FR 80084 (December
2, 1980).
Pursuant to these regulations, the Department of the Interior (DOI)
sent EPA a letter dated October 21, 2009, certifying the existence of
RAVI at Voyageurs and Isle Royale National Parks and citing modeling
results from Minnesota's regional haze plan in support of a view that
Sherco is a source of RAVI in these areas. After three years passed, a
group of three environmental groups filed a lawsuit alleging that EPA
had an obligation to evaluate whether Sherco was a source of this RAVI
and if so to promulgate requirements to address this RAVI. EPA, the
environmental groups, and NSP then held settlement discussions leading
to a settlement agreement that became final on July 24, 2015.
In the settlement agreement, EPA agreed to propose specific
emission limits, and propose to conclude that these limits addressed
the concern identified by DOI, such that no need existed for any review
of whether Sherco is a RAVI source or whether best available retrofit
technology (BART) at Sherco is warranted for addressing RAVI. On August
11, 2015, DOI wrote to EPA regarding the settlement agreement, stating
that ``the settlement achieves an outcome that addresses our visibility
concerns at Voyageurs and Isle Royale National Parks.'' EPA published
its notice of proposed rulemaking on October 27, 2015, at 80 FR 65675.
The notice provides further details regarding the RAVI regulations, the
background and history of settlement discussions for Sherco, and the
limits that EPA proposed.
II. What comments did EPA receive on its proposed action?
EPA received no comments on its proposed rule, and EPA has received
no new information that would warrant promulgating a rule differing in
any way from the proposed rule.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is promulgating the emission limits for Sherco that were
identified in the settlement agreement signed on May 15, 2015, by
representatives of EPA, three environmental groups, and NSP.
Specifically, EPA is promulgating the following limits:
--For stack SV001, serving Units 1 and 2, a limit on SO2
emissions of 0.050 lbs/MMBtu, as a 30-day rolling average, determined
as the ratio of pounds of emissions divided by the heat input in MMBtu,
both summed over 30 successive boiler-operating days, beginning on the
30-boiler-operating-day period ending September 30, 2015. For purposes
of this limit, a boiler operating day is defined as a day in which fuel
is combusted in either Unit 1 or Unit 2 (or both).
--For Unit 3, a limit on SO2 of 0.29 lbs/MMBtu, as a 30-day
rolling average, also determined as the ratio of pounds of emissions
divided by the heat input in MMBtu, both summed over 30 successive
boiler-operating days, beginning on the 30-boiler-operating-day period
ending May 31, 2017.
Additionally, in light of DOI's August 11, 2015, letter, EPA is
concluding that the incorporation of these SO2 emission
limits into the Minnesota visibility FIP satisfies any outstanding
obligation EPA has with respect to DOI's 2009 RAVI certification. EPA
intends to conduct no analysis of the magnitude or origins of
visibility impairment at Voyageurs or Isle Royale or review of
potential BART control options at Sherco in response to this
certification.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA. Because the FIP applies to just one facility, the Paperwork
Reduction Act does not apply. See 5 CFR 1320.3(c).
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. EPA's rule adds additional controls to a
certain source. The Regional Haze FIP revisions that EPA is
promulgating here would
[[Page 11670]]
impose Federal control requirements to resolve concerns that one power
plant in Minnesota is unduly affecting visibility at two national
parks. The power plant and its owners are not small entities. We have
therefore concluded that this action will have no net regulatory burden
for all directly regulated small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on
tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
rule. However, EPA did discuss this action in a July 16, 2015,
conference call with Michigan and Minnesota tribes, and EPA invited
further comment from tribes that may be interested in this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. However, to the extent this rule will limit emissions of
SO2, the rule will have a beneficial effect on children's
health by reducing air pollution.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income
or indigenous populations. We have determined that this rule will not
have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low-
income population.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This rule is exempt from the CRA because it is a rule of particular
applicability.
L. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 6, 2016. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Sulfur dioxide, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, visibility protection.
Dated: February 24, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
40 CFR part 52 is 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.
0
2. Section 52.1236 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1236 Visibility protection.
* * * * *
(e)(1) On and after the 30-boiler-operating-day period ending on
September 30, 2015, the owners and operators of the facility at 13999
Industrial Boulevard in Becker, Sherburne County, Minnesota, shall not
cause or permit the emission of SO2 from stack SV001
(serving Units 1 and 2) to exceed 0.050 lbs/MMBTU as a 30-day rolling
average.
(2) On and after the 30-boiler-operating-day period ending on May
31, 2017, the owners and operators of the facility at 13999 Industrial
Boulevard in Becker, Sherburne County, Minnesota, shall not cause or
permit the emission of SO2 from Unit 3 to exceed 0.29 lbs/
MMBTU as a 30-day rolling average.
(3) The owners and operators of the facility at 13999 Industrial
Boulevard in Becker, Sherburne County, Minnesota, shall operate
continuous SO2 emission monitoring systems in compliance
with 40 CFR 75, and the data from this emission monitoring shall be
used to determine compliance with the limits in this paragraph (e).
(4) For each boiler operating day, compliance with the 30-day
average limitations in paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of this section
shall be determined by summing total emissions in pounds for the period
consisting of the day and the preceding 29 successive boiler operating
days, summing total heat input in MMBTU for the same period, and
computing the ratio of these sums in lbs/MMBTU. Boiler operating day is
used to mean a 24-hour period between 12 midnight and the following
midnight during which any fuel is combusted at any time in the steam-
generating unit. It is not necessary for fuel to be combusted the
entire 24-hour period. A boiler operating day with respect to the
limitation in paragraph (e)(1) of this section shall be a day in which
fuel is combusted in either Unit 1 or Unit 2. Bias adjustments provided
for under 40 CFR 75 appendix A shall be applied. Substitute data
provided for under 40 CFR 75 subpart D shall not be used.
[FR Doc. 2016-04751 Filed 3-4-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P