13256 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

extent consistent with requirements 

imposed by Federal law,’’ any person 

making a voluntary disclosure of 

information to a state agency regarding 

a violation of an environmental statute, 

regulation, permit, or administrative 

order is granted immunity from 

administrative or civil penalty. The 

Attorney General’s January 12, 1998 

opinion states that the quoted language 

renders this statute inapplicable to 

enforcement of any Federally authorized 

programs, since ‘‘no immunity could be 

afforded from administrative, civil, or 

criminal penalties because granting 

such immunity would not be consistent 

with Federal law, which is one of the 

criteria for immunity.’’ 

Therefore, EPA has determined that 

Virginia’s Privilege and Immunity 

statutes will not preclude the 

Commonwealth from enforcing its 

program consistent with the Federal 

requirements. In any event, because 

EPA has also determined that a state 

audit privilege and immunity law can 

affect only state enforcement and cannot 

have any impact on Federal 

enforcement authorities, EPA may at 

any time invoke its authority under the 

CAA, including, for example, sections 

113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the 

requirements or prohibitions of the state 

plan, independently of any state 

enforcement effort. In addition, citizen 

enforcement under section 304 of the 

CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or 

any, state audit privilege or immunity 

law. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the unredacted portions of Virginia 

stationary source permit to operate, 

registration number 20132, issued to 

Roanoke Electric Steel (D/B/A Steel 

Dynamics, Inc.) on December 22, 2004, 

and revised on March 25, 2020. EPA has 

made, and will continue to make, these 

materials generally available through 

https://www.regulations.gov and at the 

EPA Region III Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land as defined 

in 18 U.S.C. 1151 or in any other area 

where EPA or an Indian tribe has 

demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, this rule pertaining to source 

specific NOX limits at SDI 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, Ozone, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: February 18, 2021. 

Diana Esher, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2021–04705 Filed 3–5–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2020–0732, FRL–10020– 

07–Region 10] 

Air Plan Approval; WA; Regional Haze 

Best Available Retrofit Technology 

Revision for TransAlta Centralia 

Generation Plant 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

source-specific State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 

Washington State Department of 

Ecology (Ecology) on December 18, 

2020. The SIP revision makes changes to 

nitrogen oxide control requirements for 

the TransAlta Centralia Generation 

Plant (TransAlta). These requirements 

were established in an order issued to 

TransAlta by the state to satisfy the 

Clean Air Act Best Available Retrofit 

Technology Requirements (BART) put 

in place by Congress to reduce regional 

haze and restore visibility in national 

parks and wilderness areas. The changes 

submitted by the state are intended to 

improve the operation of pollution 

control equipment at TransAlta while 

continuing to meet BART requirements. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 7, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2020–0732 at https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from 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 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 13257 

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 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff 

Hunt, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue—Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101, 

at (206) 553–0256, or hunt.jeff@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is 

intended to refer to the EPA. 

I. Background 

Visibility and Regional Haze 

Regional haze is air pollution that 

impairs visibility, including visual 

range and/or colorization, across a broad 

geographic area. The air pollution 

sources that contribute to regional haze 

include but are not limited to: Industrial 

sources; cars, trucks and other mobile 

sources; and area sources. These source 

categories emit fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5), in addition to precursor gases 

such as sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) that form secondary 

aerosols in the atmosphere. 

Atmospheric sulfate, nitrate, organic 

carbon compounds, elemental carbon, 

soil dust, and other compounds impair 

visibility by scattering and absorbing 

light, and reduces clarity, color, and 

visual range of visual scenes. 

Clean Air Act Requirements 

In 1977, Congress added section 169A 

to the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) 

creating a program to protect visibility 

in the nation’s national parks and 

wilderness areas (Class I areas). This 

section of the CAA establishes national 

visibility goals in Class I areas as those 

goals relate to manmade air pollution. 

See CAA section 169A(a)(1). On 

December 2, 1980, the EPA 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). 

These RAVI regulations represented the 

first phase in addressing visibility 

impairment. 

In 1990, Congress added section 169B 

to the CAA to address regional haze 

issues. The EPA promulgated a rule to 

implement this statutory requirement on 

July 1, 1999 (64 FR 35713) (the Regional 

Haze Rule or RHR). The RHR revised the 

existing visibility regulations to 

integrate regional haze provisions and to 

establish a comprehensive visibility 

protection program for Class I areas. The 

requirements for regional haze, found at 

40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309, are included 

in the EPA’s visibility protection 

regulations at 40 CFR part 51, subpart P, 

which were most recently updated on 

January 10, 2017 (82 FR 3078). 

Pollution Controls 

With respect to this proposed action, 

section 169A of the CAA directs states 

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 to revise their 

SIPs to contain such measures as may be 

necessary to make reasonable progress 

towards 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 state. States are 

directed to conduct BART 

determinations for such sources that 

may be anticipated to cause or 

contribute to any visibility impairment 

in a Class I area. 

To assist states in determining which 

sources are subject to BART 

requirements and what emission limits 

are appropriate for each subject source, 

the EPA published the Guidelines for 

BART Determinations Under the 

Regional Haze Rule at Appendix Y to 40 

CFR part 51 (hereinafter referred to as 

‘‘BART Guidelines’’) (70 FR 39104, July 

6, 2005). In making a BART 

applicability determination for existing 

sources (such as TransAlta) that fall into 

certain categories, e.g., fossil fuel-fired 

electric generating plants with total 

generating capacity in excess of 750 

megawatts, a state must use the 

specified approach set forth in the 

BART Guidelines. A state is encouraged, 

but not required, to follow the BART 

Guidelines in making BART 

determinations for other types of 

sources. Regardless of source size or 

type however, a state must meet the 

CAA and regulatory requirements for 

selection of BART, and the state’s BART 

analysis and determination must be 

reasonable in light of the overarching 

purpose of the regional haze program. 

States must address all visibility 

impairing pollutants emitted by a source 

in the BART determination process. The 

most significant visibility-impairing 

pollutants are NOX, SO2, and particulate 

matter. The regional haze SIP must 

include source-specific BART emission 

limits and compliance schedules for 

each source subject to BART. 

TransAlta Centralia Generation Plant 

TransAlta is a coal-fired electric 

generation plant located in Centralia, 

Washington. The plant, which operates 

two identical coal-fired utility steam 

generating units (BW21 and BW22), has 

a total generating capacity in excess of 

750 megawatts and is subject to CAA 

BART requirements to control emissions 

of visibility-impairing pollutants. On 

June 11, 2003, the EPA approved a 

revision to the Washington SIP for 

visibility which included controls for 

NOX, SO2, and particulate matter for 

TransAlta (68 FR 34821). In the action, 

the EPA determined that the prescribed 

controls satisfied BART requirements 

for both SO2 and particulate matter. We 

note that the 2003 BART determinations 

for SO2 and particulate matter are not at 

issue in this proposed action, which 

focuses only on BART for NOX. 

In our 2003 action, the EPA 

determined that the NOX controls 

established for TransAlta, while better 

than prior controls, did not represent 

BART. Subsequently, Ecology issued an 

administrative order to TransAlta that, 

among other things, established a NOx 

emission limit of 0.24 pounds per 

million British thermal units (lb/ 

MMBtu) on the coal-fired units and coal 

quality requirements (June 18, 2010, 

BART Order 6426). Ecology revised the 

June 18, 2010 BART Order 6426 on 

December 13, 2011 (First Revised BART 

Order 6426), to incorporate provisions 

of a 2011 Memorandum of Agreement 

(2011 MOA) between TransAlta and the 

Governor of the State of Washington. 

The First Revised BART Order 6426 and 

the 2011 MOA are included in the 

docket for this action. 

The 2011 MOA was negotiated under 

the statutory provisions of Revised Code 

of Washington (RCW) 80.80.100 and 

focused on greenhouse gas emission 

performance standards. 

While the greenhouse gas 

performance standards are outside the 

scope of the SIP (which is primarily 

focused on the control of criteria 

pollutants such as particulate matter, 

NOX, and SO2), several of the provisions 

negotiated the 2011 MOA were 

incorporated into the First Revised 

BART Order 6426 because they provide 

significant regional haze benefit. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
13258 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

1On December 31, 2020, as scheduled, TransAlta 

shut down and ceased combustion of coal at BW21 

(a.k.a. Unit #1). As noted by TransAlta, BW21 is 

retired from service. See December 31, 2020 email 

in the docket. 

Specifically, the First Revised BART 

Order 6426 required selective 

noncatalytic reduction (SNCR) to be 

installed by January 1, 2013. The First 

Revised BART Order 6426 also provided 

that one coal unit must cease burning 

coal by December 31, 2020, and the 

other coal unit cease burning coal by 

December 31, 2025, unless Ecology 

determines that state or federal law 

requires selective catalytic reduction 

(SCR) to be installed on either unit.1

Due to the installation of SNCR, among 

other controls, Ecology’s First Revised 

BART Order 6426 established a more 

stringent NOX emission limit of 0.21 lb/ 

MMBtu. Ecology submitted the First 

Revised BART Order 6426 as a revision 

to the regional haze SIP on December 

29, 2011. On December 6, 2012, the EPA 

approved Ecology’s First Revised BART 

Order 6426 as meeting CAA BART 

requirements for NOX control at 

TransAlta and approved this order in 

the Washington SIP (77 FR 72742). 

II. Electrostatic Precipitator Fouling 

and Installation of Combustion 

Optimization System With Neural 

Network 

In January 2020, TransAlta requested 

a change to the First Revised BART 

Order 6426 to mitigate fouling of the 

electrostatic precipitators at the plant 

that are used to control particulate 

matter emissions. TransAlta stated that 

the fouling was being caused by 

ammonia slip from the SNCR used to 

control NOX emissions. In the 

submission Ecology explained, ‘‘In the 

summer of 2019, TransAlta experienced 

emission opacity readings that would 

have exceeded the opacity limits if 

TransAlta had not reduced plant 

capacity to compensate. During a 

maintenance shut-down of the facility, 

the electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) 

were examined. The ESPs had a visual 

fouling of all interior components, 

which dramatically reduced their 

efficiency. Samples of the material in 

the ESPs were analyzed and identified 

as ammonia sulfate. The source of 

ammonia in the system was from the 

reactions of urea in the SNCR system.’’ 

In coordination with Southwest Clean 

Air Agency (the local clean air 

authority) and Ecology, TransAlta 

installed a computerized emission 

control system called a Combustion 

Optimization System with Neural 

Network program (Neural Net) to 

decrease the ammonia slip in the SNCR. 

At the end of calendar year 2019, 

TransAlta had enough data to 

demonstrate that use of the Neural Net 

system would enable TransAlta to meet 

a more stringent 0.18 lb/MMBtu 

emission standard than the 0.21 lb/ 

MMBtu required under the First Revised 

BART Order 6426 for the unit that 

remains operational after 2020 (BW21 

ceased burning coal on December 31, 

2020 and is now retired from service. 

Therefore, this requirement applies to 

the only remaining unit, BW22). 

III. Summary of Revisions to the First 

Revised BART Order 6426 

In response to TransAlta’s request, 

Ecology amended the First Revised 

BART Order 6426 on July 29, 2020 in 

three primary ways: (1) Reducing the 

NOX emission limit for the unit 

equipped with the Neural Network (2) 

eliminating unnecessary requirements 

to prevent further ESP fouling, and (3) 

revising the language to align with a 

2017 amendment to the 2011 MOA 

signed between the Governor of 

Washington and TransAlta. Because the 

Neural Net enables TransAlta to 

maintain a more stringent NOX emission 

standard, Ecology eliminated several 

requirements from the First Revised 

BART Order 6426 that were either no 

longer necessary or were causing 

problems with the ESP control device. 

Specifically, Ecology: (1) Removed the 

requirement of a specific urea injection 

rate to allow TransAlta to inject urea as 

needed to meet the new emission 

standard; (2) removed the requirement 

to analyze and report nitrogen and 

sulfur coal content, or mandate a 

specific source of coal, because the 

facility would have to meet NOX, SO2, 

and particulate matter emission 

standards regardless of the coal used, 

and (3) changed the requirement for 

ammonia emission monitoring to 

require monitoring only when using a 

urea injection rate of greater than 1.5 

gallons per minute. Ecology retained the 

requirement for TransAlta to determine 

compliance with the NOX emission 

limitation by use of a continuous 

emission monitoring system meeting the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 75. As 

discussed further in this document, the 

EPA has reviewed these changes and we 

have determined they are reasonable 

and consistent with BART and other 

CAA requirements. 

Ecology also updated the First 

Revised BART Order 6426 to reflect a 

July 13, 2017 amendment to the 2011 

MOA signed between TransAlta and the 

Governor, included in the docket for 

this action (2017 MOA). The 2017 

amendment states that TransAlta shall, 

‘‘permanently cease coal-fired power 

generation operations of one Boiler in 

2020 and the other Boiler in 2025, 

which dates are prior to the 2035 end 

of their expected useful lives, in each 

case pursuant to the terms and subject 

to the conditions of this MOA.’’ This 

text is now mirrored in the Schedule for 

Compliance section of the second 

revised BART Order 6426 (2020 BART 

Order 6426). The 2017 MOA makes 

clear that TransAlta is not precluded 

from the possibility of retrofitting the 

facility to natural gas, or other non-coal 

energy source, as long as it meets the 

statutory requirements of Chapter 80.80 

RCW. 

IV. Evaluation of the Washington SIP 

Submission 

EPA proposes to approve the 2020 

BART Order 6426 as meeting BART for 

NOX for TransAlta. The 2020 BART 

Order 6426 is consistent with the 

requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(e) and 

40 CFR part 51, subpart Y. Specifically, 

Ecology either retained or strengthened 

the NOX emissions limits. Ecology also 

justified the removal of certain 

parametric monitoring and 

demonstrated that the 2020 BART Order 

6426 remains enforceable as a practical 

matter. Finally, the revision to the 

Schedule for Compliance section does 

not substantively change TransAlta’s 

compliance obligations as compared to 

the First Revised BART Order 6426. As 

with the First Revised BART Order 

6426, the 2020 BART Order 6426 will 

have the practical effect of prohibiting 

coal burning beyond the specified 

schedule. 

Regarding future repowering of 

TransAlta with fuels other than coal, in 

the submission, Ecology stated with 

respect to regional haze that, ‘‘If 

TransAlta decides to switch to non-coal 

power generation, a Notice of 

Construction application would need to 

be submitted to Southwest Clean Air 

Agency by the company. Ecology would 

require the company to do, at a 

minimum, emissions modeling that 

would be required under the BART 

process to quantify the visibility 

impacts resulting from the operation as 

a natural gas boiler plant (EGU). This is 

similar to what we would require of a 

new power plant to determine if it 

meets the requirements of WAC 173– 

400–117, special protection 

requirements for federal Class I areas.’’ 

Ecology further explained, ‘‘Since 

TransAlta has not requested repowering 

at this time, this issue will not be 

addressed in this BART order revision.’’ 

The EPA agrees that any non-coal 

repowering, should TransAlta submit a 

Notice of Construction application in 

the future, is outside the scope of this 

current action focused on the improved 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 13259 

2 In the Matter of an Administrative Order 

Against, TransAlta Centralia Generation LLC, 

Second Revision: Order No. 6426, except the 

undesignated introductory text, the section titled 

‘‘Findings,’’ and the undesignated text following 

condition 9, state effective July 29, 2020. 

3 In the Matter of an Administrative Order 

Against, TransAlta Centralia Generation LLC, First 

Revision: Order No. 6426, except the undesignated 

introductory text, the section titled ‘‘Findings,’’ and 

the undesignated text following condition 13, state 

effective December 13, 2011. 

NOX controls. Any future ‘‘new source’’ 

as defined in the SIP-approved 

provisions of Southwest Clean Air 

Agency (SWCAA) 400–030(77), would 

need to meet all CAA requirements for 

protection of the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) and 

regional haze. Specifically, SWCAA 

400–030(77) states: 

‘‘New source’’ means one or more of 

the following: 

(a) The construction or modification 

of a ‘‘stationary source’’ that increases 

the amount of any air contaminant 

emitted by such ‘‘stationary source’’ or 

that results in the emission of any air 

contaminant not previously emitted; 

(b) Any other project that constitutes 

a ‘‘new source’’ under the Federal Clean 

Air Act; 

(c) Restart of a ‘‘stationary source’’ 

after permanent shutdown; 

(d) The installation or construction of 

a new ‘‘emission unit’’; 

(e) Relocation of a ‘‘stationary source’’ 

to a new location, except in the case of 

portable sources operating under a valid 

permit as provided in SWCAA 400– 

110(6); 

(f) Replacement or modification of the 

burner(s) in a combustion source; or 

(g) Modification of a combustion 

source to fire a fuel that the source was 

not previously capable of firing. 

Any ‘‘new source’’ as described by the 

requirements above would require a 

separate action, subject to public 

participation requirements, under the 

SIP-approved new source review 

permitting provisions of SWCAA 400 or 

Chapter 173–400 Washington 

Administrative Code (WAC) for 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) provisions implemented directly 

by Ecology. 

V. Proposed Action 

The EPA proposes to approve and 

incorporate by reference into the 

Washington SIP the 2020 BART Order 

6426 for the TransAlta Centralia 

Generation Plant, state effective July 29, 

2020.2 The EPA is also proposing to 

remove from incorporation by reference 

the First Revised BART Order 6426 for 

the TransAlta Centralia Generation 

Plant, state effective December 13, 

2011.3 The EPA proposes to find that 

the changes are designed to improve the 

operation of pollution controls at the 

plant and are consistent with regional 

haze and other CAA requirements. 

VI. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, the EPA is 

proposing to include in a final 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 2020 BART 

Order 6246 to TransAlta Centralia 

Generation Plant, state effective July 29, 

2020, as described in Section III of this 

preamble. Also, in this document, the 

EPA is proposing to remove, 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 remove 

the incorporation by reference of the 

first revised BART Order 6246 to 

TransAlta Centralia Generation Plant, 

state-effective December 13, 2011, as 

described in Section V of this preamble. 

The EPA has made, and will continue 

to make, these documents generally 

available through https://

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region 10 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 Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air 

Act. Accordingly, this proposed action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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 the requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

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). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land in 

Washington except as specifically noted 

below and is also not approved to apply 

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). 

Washington’s SIP is approved to apply 

on non-trust land within the exterior 

boundaries of the Puyallup Indian 

Reservation, also known as the 1873 

Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe 

of Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25 

U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly 

provided state and local agencies in 

Washington authority over activities on 

non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey 

Area. Consistent with EPA policy, the 

EPA provided a consultation 

opportunity to the Puyallup Tribe, and 

other tribes located in Washington, in a 

letter dated September 4, 2020. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
13260 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 43 / Monday, March 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

1 35 IAC 225.230 contains Illinois’ mercury 

emission standards for EGUs and is not part of the 

federally approved SIP. 

Dated: February 19, 2021. 

Michelle L. Pirzadeh, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2021–03988 Filed 3–5–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2020–0115; FRL–10020– 

88–Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Illinois; MultiPollutant Standards Rule, Control of 

Emissions From Large Combustion 

Sources 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Illinois State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) to amend 

requirements applicable to certain coalfired electric generating units (EGUs) in 

the Illinois Administrative Code (IAC), 

also known as the Multi-Pollutant 

Standards Rule. On January 23, 2020, 

the Illinois Environmental Protection 

Agency (IEPA) submitted a request to 

amend the provisions of the MultiPollutant Standards Rule in the Illinois 

regional haze SIP. EPA is proposing to 

approve the revision because it will 

result in a significant decrease in 

emissions of NOX and SO2, meets the 

applicable requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA), and does not interfere with 

any applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 7, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2020–0115 at http://

www.regulations.gov or via email to 

blakley.pamela@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. For 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: 

Charles Hatten, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6031, 

hatten.charles@epa.gov. The EPA 

Region 5 office is open from 8:30 a.m. 

to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding Federal holidays and facility 

closures due to COVID–19. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. 

I. What is the background for this 

action? 

On June 24, 2011, IEPA submitted to 

EPA rules to address the visibility 

protection requirements of section 169A 

of the CAA and regional haze, as 

codified in 40 CFR 51.308. The 

submission included the provisions 

contained in 35 IAC Part 225 (Part 225): 

Section 225.233 Multi-Pollutant 

Standards (MPS) (hereafter the ‘‘MPS 

Rule’’). On July 6, 2012, EPA approved 

subsections (a), (b), (e), and (g) of 

Section 225.233 into the Illinois SIP. 

See 77 FR 39943. 

The MPS Rule establishes control 

requirements and emission standards 

for oxides of nitrogen (NOX), sulfur 

dioxide (SO2), and emissions of 

mercury. The MPS Rule provides the 

owner of certain EGUs an alternative 

means to demonstrate compliance with 

the emission standards in 35 IAC 

225.230(a).1

The owner of one or more EGUs are 

identified or referred to as a ‘‘MPS 

Group’’ in the MPS Rule. There are 

currently two MPS groups in Illinois: 

The Dynegy MPS Group and the 

Ameren MPS Group. The Dynegy MPS 

Group included EGUs at the following 

facilities: Baldwin Power Station, 

Havana Power Station, Hennepin Power 

Station, Vermillion Power Station, and 

Wood River Power Station. The Ameren 

MPS Group included EGUs at the 

following facilities: The Coffeen Power 

Station, Duck Creek Power Station, E.D. 

Edwards Power Station, Joppa Power 

Station, Newton Power Station, 

Hutsonville Power Station, and the 

Meredosia Power Station. 

MPS Rule NOX and SO2 Emission Rates 

The Dynegy MPS Group is required to 

comply with NOX and SO2 emission 

standards for the EGUs in section 

225.233(e)(1) and (2). The MPS Rule 

requires the EGUs in the Dynegy MPS 

Group to meet a fleet-wide annual and 

ozone season NOX emission rate of 0.10 

pound/million British thermal units (lb/ 

mmBtu), based on the greater stringency 

of a limit calculated from those units’ 

base annual and ozone season NOX rates 

beginning in 2012 and continuing in 

each calendar year thereafter. The MPS 

rule requires the EGUs in the Dynegy 

MPS Group to meet a fleet-wide annual 

SO2 emission rate of 0.25 lb/mmBtu or 

a rate equivalent to 35 percent of the 

base rate of SO2 emissions, whichever 

was more stringent, beginning in the 

2015 calendar year. The Dynegy MPS 

Group is currently required to meet a 

fleet-wide annual SO2 emission rate of 

0.19 lb/mmBtu, which was calculated as 

35 percent of the units’ base rate of SO2

emissions. 

The Ameren MPS Group is required 

to comply with NOX and SO2 emission 

standards for the EGUs in section 

225.233(e)(3). The MPS Rule requires 

the EGUs in the Ameren MPS Group to 

meet a fleet-wide annual NOX emission 

rate of 0.14 lb/mmBtu and ozone season 

NOX emission of 0.11 lb/mmBtu 

beginning in 2010. These units were 

then required to meet an annual NOX

emission rate of 0.11 lb/mmBtu 

beginning in 2012 and continuing in 

each calendar year thereafter. Beginning 

in the calendar year 2017, the Ameren 

MPS Group was required to meet a fleetwide annual SO2 emission rate of 0.23 

lb/mmBtu. 

MPS Group Changes Due to Change of 

Ownership 

In 2013, the operating EGUs in the 

Ameren MPS Group were purchased by 

Illinois Power Holdings, LLC (IPH), a 

wholly owned, indirect subsidiary of 

Dynegy, Inc. (Dynegy). Dynegy 

purchased the EGUs at the Coffeen, 

Duck Creek, E.D. Edwards, Joppa, and 

Newton facilities. The EGUs at the 

Meredosia and Hutsonville facilities 

were transferred to AmerenEnergy 

Medina Valley Cogen LLC. 

The following EGUs were 

permanently retired with this purchase: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS