3620 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 13 / Friday, January 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

1Primary standards provide public health 

protection, including protecting the health of 

‘‘sensitive’’ populations such as asthmatics, 

children, and the elderly. Secondary standards 

provide public welfare protection, including 

protection against decreased visibility and damage 

to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. 

www.regulations.gov or via email to 

leslie.michael@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 

https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emily Crispell, Control Strategies 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8512, 

crispell.emily@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: In the 

Rules and Regulations section of this 

issue of the Federal Register, EPA is 

approving the state’s SIP submittal as a 

direct final rule without prior proposal 

because the Agency views this as a 

noncontroversial submittal and 

anticipates no adverse comments. A 

detailed rationale for the approval is set 

forth in the direct final rule. If no 

relevant adverse comments are received 

in response to this rule, no further 

activity is contemplated. If EPA receives 

such comments, the direct final rule 

will be withdrawn and all public 

comments received will be addressed in 

a subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Any parties 

interested in commenting on this action 

should do so at this time. Please note 

that if EPA receives adverse comment 

on an amendment, paragraph, or section 

of this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

EPA may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. For additional 

information, see the direct final rule 

which is located in the Rules section of 

this issue of the Federal Register. 

Dated: January 10, 2024. 

Debra Shore, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2024–00789 Filed 1–18–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2022–0714; FRL 11587–01– 

R2] 

Approval of Source-Specific Air 

Quality Implementation Plan; New 

York; Finch Paper LLC 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the State of New York’s State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for the ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS) related to a Source-specific 

SIP (SSSIP) revision for Finch Paper 

LLC, located at 1 Glen Street, Glens 

Falls, New York (Facility). The control 

options in this SSSIP revision address 

nitrogen oxide (NOX) Reasonably 

Available Control Technology (RACT) 

for the Facility sources identified as four 

power boilers, a wood waste boiler, and 

four recovery boilers. The intended 

effect of this SSSIP revision is to 

approve NOX RACT for the Facility 

sources required for implementation of 

the 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS. This 

proposed action will not interfere with 

ozone NAAQS requirements and meets 

all applicable requirements of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 19, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket Number EPA–R02– 

OAR–2022–0714, at https://

www.regulations.gov. Although listed in 

the index, some information is not 

publicly available, e.g., 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 electronically 

through http://www.regulations.gov. 

Follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or 

withdrawn. 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, such as 

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: 

Linda Longo, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007– 

1866, (212) 637–3565, or by email at 

longo.linda@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

additional information on regulatory 

background and the EPA’s technical 

findings relating to the Facility RACT, 

the reader can refer to the Technical 

Support Document (TSD) that is 

contained in the EPA docket assigned to 

this Federal Register document. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. The EPA’s evaluation of New York’s SSSIP 

revision 

III. Environmental Justice Considerations 

IV. Proposed action 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

Ground Level Ozone Formation 

Ground level ozone is predominantly 

a secondary air pollutant created by 

chemical reactions that occur when 

ozone precursors, including nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) and volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs), chemically react in 

the presence of sunlight.1 Emissions 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 13 / Friday, January 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules 3621 

2The New York Metro Area is part of the greater 

nonattainment area: New York-N. New Jersey-Long 

Island, NY-NJ-CT. 

3The DAR–20 cost threshold was $3000 in 1994 

dollars. State of New York relies on the U.S. 

Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 

inflationary calculator to adjust the RACT economic 

feasibility threshold over time for inflation. See 

https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm. 

from industrial facilities are some of the 

human-caused sources of ozone 

precursors. The potential for groundlevel ozone formation tends to be 

highest during months with warmer 

temperatures and stagnant air masses. 

Ozone levels are thus generally higher 

during the summer months, which are 

often referred to as ‘‘the ozone season’’. 

In New York, the ozone season takes 

place between April 15 and October 15, 

while the non-ozone season takes place 

between October 16 and April 14. 

Ozone Nonattainment 

Nonattainment for ground level ozone 

is defined as a geographic area of the 

United States that is not meeting the 

primary or secondary National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for 

ozone. Nonattainment areas are 

classified as either marginal, moderate, 

serious, severe, or extreme. Currently, 

the EPA has two ozone NAAQS in 

effect. First, on March 12, 2008, the EPA 

promulgated a revision to the ozone 

NAAQS, lowering both the primary and 

secondary standards to 75 parts per 

million (ppm) averaged over an 8-hour 

time frame (2008 8-hour Ozone 

Standard). See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 

2008). Second, on October 1, 2015, the 

EPA lowered these standards once more 

to 70 ppm averaged over an 8-hour time 

frame (2015 8-hour Ozone Standard). 

See 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015). 

The State of New York has two ozone 

nonattainment areas: (1) Jamestown, and 

(2) the New York Metro Area 2 for the 

Bronx County, Kings County, Nassau 

County, New York County, Queens 

County, Richmond County, Rockland 

County, Suffolk County, Westchester 

County. The State of New York is also 

located within the Ozone Transport 

Region (OTR) that triggers statewide 

RACT requirements. Although the 

Facility is not located in one of the two 

nonattainment areas, because it is in the 

OTR, the Facility is subject to RACT 

requirements. 

Federal RACT Requirements 

RACT is defined as the lowest 

emission limit that a source is capable 

of meeting by the application of control 

technology that is reasonably available 

considering technological and economic 

feasibility. The CAA section 182, Plan 

Submissions and Requirements, 

requires states with ozone 

nonattainment areas to include in their 

statewide SIPs, among other things, 

provisions to require the 

implementation of RACT. The State of 

New York is located within the OTR, 

which triggers the statewide RACT 

requirements. The CAA section 184(a) 

addresses RACT requirements for 

nonattainment areas located in the OTR 

and the CAA section 176A sets forth 

requirements to establish control 

measures for NOX RACT for major 

sources located in the OTR. The EPA 

has not generally prescribed RACT 

requirements. The EPA has provided 

that RACT for a particular source is 

determined on a case-by-case basis, 

considering the technological and 

economic circumstances of the 

individual source. 

NYSDEC RACT Requirements 

The New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) 

RACT regulations require applicable 

facilities to meet presumptive RACT 

requirements. The presumptive 

requirements may include, but are not 

limited to, emission limits, control 

efficiency requirements, specific control 

technologies, averaging plans, and fuel/ 

raw material switching. In some 

instances, the presumptive RACT 

requirements may not be achievable and 

a source-specific RACT determination 

can be granted by the state and 

submitted to the EPA as a SSSIP. The 

SSSIP will include the facility’s RACT 

plan that demonstrates how RACT 

might be achievable. The SSSIP will 

also include CAA title V operating 

permit conditions for the RACT 

requirements. These permit conditions 

for the facility will become Federally 

enforceable upon EPA approval of the 

SSSIP. 

The RACT determination required 

under existing NYSDEC RACT 

regulations assess all technologically 

feasible control options that meet the 

state’s cost threshold. The cost 

threshold for NYSDEC RACT 

requirements is found under the 

NYSDEC 2013 policy, ‘‘DAR–20 

Economic and Technical Analysis for 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT).’’ Under this policy, 

facilities must consider in their RACT 

determinations technologies that 

achieve a dollar amount per ton of NOX

removed which includes an inflationadjusted economic threshold.3

II. The EPA’s Evaluation of New York’s 

SSSIP Revision 

This action relates to a SSSIP revision 

that concerns a Facility that produces 

paper products. The paper 

manufacturing processes include pulp 

preparation, paper machines, acid 

recovery, bleaching operations, and 

wastewater facilities. The sources at 

issue in this action are the Facility’s 

four power boilers, one wood-waste 

boiler, and four recovery boilers. 

NYSDEC RACT regulations establish 

presumptive RACT requirements for 

these sources in (1) 6 NYCRR part 227, 

‘‘Stationary Combustion Installations’’, 

subpart 227–2, ‘‘Reasonably Available 

Control Technology for Major Facilities 

of Oxides of Nitrogen’’, last approved by 

the EPA on July 12, 2013. See 78 FR 

41846 (July 12, 2013); and (2) 6 NYCRR 

part 212, ‘‘Process Operations’’, subpart 

212–3, ‘‘Reasonably Available Control 

Technology for Major Facilities’’, last 

approved by the EPA on October 1, 

2021. See 87 FR 54375 (October 1, 

2021). However, the State regulations 

allow determination of source-specific 

RACT if the presumptive RACT 

requirements are not achievable; such a 

determination must be submitted to the 

EPA as a SSSIP. 

This SSSIP was submitted by 

NYSDEC on May 24, 2022, and it 

replaces and withdraws the SSSIP that 

was submitted by the State on 

September 16, 2008. As to this more 

recent SSSIP submittal, the EPA has 

reviewed the RACT determination for 

the four power boilers, one wood-waste 

boiler, and four recovery boilers for 

consistency with the CAA and the EPA 

regulations, as interpreted through EPA 

actions and guidance. 

The intended effect of this Sourcespecific SIP revision is to establish: (1) 

Source-specific emission limits and 

RACT control options for four large 

power boilers where the presumptive 

NOX limit is not technologically and 

economically feasible; (2) a case-by-case 

NOX emission limit for the wood waste 

boiler’s biomass fuel; and (3) NOX

emission limits for four recovery boilers 

that are not covered by other New York 

RACT regulations, and therefore must 

follow 6 NYCRR part 212 as a process 

operation. 

The EPA is proposing to determine 

through this SSSIP action that the NOX

emission limits submitted by the State 

in this SSSIP for the Facility’s boilers 

are the lowest emission limits with the 

application of control technology that 

are reasonably available given the 

technological and economic feasibility 

considerations. These NOX RACT 

emission limits are contained in the 

Facility’s title V operating permit, 5– 

5205–00005/00059, under Condition 1– 

1, Condition 47, and Condition 60 

respectively. This operating permit was 

issued by the State on December 20, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
3622 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 13 / Friday, January 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

4Refer to Technical Support Document (TSD) for 

description of periods of required shutdown of 

Finch Paper boilers. See TSD section VI.a, 

‘‘Scheduled shutdowns for boilers: 4 power, 1 wood 

waste, 4 recovery.’’ 

5A third generation LNB has more technology 

than a second generation LNB. 

2021, modified on January 12, 2022, and 

expires on December 19, 2026. The 

Facility submitted a RACT re-evaluation 

for these emission limits and the 

NYSDEC reviewed and approved the 

emission limits as being RACT for the 

sources. NYSDEC then submitted the 

Source-specific SIP revision at issue in 

this action. The next step is this current 

source-specific SIP revision process that 

the EPA is proposing to approve to 

make the emission limits Federally 

enforceable. 

The following is a summary of the 

EPA’s analysis of how the proposed 

NOX emission limits comprise RACT for 

the power boilers, wood waste boiler 

and the recovery boilers. 

Power Boilers, Permit Condition 1–1, 

Emission Unit 3–00000 

The Facility’s power boilers are 

subject to the presumptive limit of 0.15 

pounds NOX per million Btu (lb/ 

MMBtu) and 1-hour compliance 

averaging time found in NYSDEC RACT 

regulations under 6 NYCRR subpart 

227–2.4(b) because they are categorized 

as large boilers that burn gas/oil. The 

NYSDEC determined that the 

presumptive limit in 6 NYCRR subpart 

227–2.4(b) is not technologically and 

economically feasible for the power 

boilers. Therefore, the Facility is 

allowed under 6 NYCRR 227–2.4(b)(2) 

to request a case-by-case higher 

emission limit. Such a case-by-case 

higher limit can be approved if 

supported by a RACT analysis, and then 

must be submitted to EPA for review as 

a SIP revision. The Facility provided a 

RACT analysis dated February 2019 and 

a RACT re-analysis dated May 2021 that 

includes, among other control 

considerations, the use of fuel switching 

and the use of a system averaging plan 

which are required under 6 NYCCR 

subpart 227–2.5(c). The Facility’s RACT 

analysis suggests a series of higher 

limits to meet RACT for the power 

boilers based on time of year (ozone and 

non-ozone season) and measured with a 

30-day/24-hour compliance average, 

and not the presumptive 1-hour 

compliance average. 

NYSDEC reviewed the case-by-case 

analysis and determined that the 

submitted emission limits did comprise 

RACT for the power boilers. 

Specifically, NYSDEC approved the 

following source specific emission 

limits after determining they comprised 

RACT for this source: (1) Compliance 

measured using predictive emission 

monitoring system (PEMS) for 0.225 

NOX lb/MMBtu during the April 15 

through October 15 ozone season with 

a 30-day average; (2) compliance 

measured using PEMS for 0.275 NOX lb/ 

MMBtu during the October 16 through 

April 14 non-ozone season with a 30- 

day average; and (3) compliance 

measured using PEMS for 0.378 NOX lb/ 

MMBtu during the October 16 through 

April 14 non-ozone season when 

recovery boilers are not burning liquor 

or the wood waste boiler is down with 

a 24-hour block average. The permit 

conditions for the three emission limits 

will be calculated daily based on boiler 

steaming rates and emission rate curves 

developed for each power boiler. These 

permit conditions allow the facility to 

determine compliance with the alternate 

NOX emission limits with averaging 

methods of 30-day, 24-hour block, that 

differ from those imposed by 6 NYCRR 

227–2.6(b)(3)(i)(c) for 1-hour. 

EPA is proposing to also determine 

that these limits comprise RACT for this 

source because: (1) The analysis 

developed by the source and approved 

by the State demonstrate that the 

presumptive RACT limits cannot be 

met; (2) the RACT analysis showed that 

no control technology beyond what is 

currently used at the power boilers is 

technically and economically feasible; 

(3) The power boilers do not operate at 

all times because they are swing boilers 

that operate only when the supporting 

boiler networks (wood waste and 

recovery) are operating close to load 

capacity or when the boiler networks 

not in operation; the power boilers are 

used to maintain steam rates for the 

paper operations; (4) compliance will be 

determined using PEMS which has been 

determined to be the equivalent to 

continuous emission monitoring system 

(CEMS) for this source; (5) compliance 

will be based on a daily calculation of 

the boiler steaming rates and emission 

rate curves developed for each boiler 

averaged monthly; while the 30-day 

average is a deviation from the 

presumptive 1-hour average, this is 

supported to be RACT for this source as 

demonstrated in the case-by-case 

justification. Further details explaining 

how EPA made these determinations is 

provided in the TSD available in the 

docket for this rulemaking. 

Swing Function 

The 4 power boilers (boiler Nos. 2, 3, 

4, and 5) produce steam during cold 

weather (non-ozone season) and have a 

non-ozone season load limit with 0.375 

lb/mmBtu NOX that does not apply 

during the ozone season. In addition, 

the swing function of the power boilers 

picks up the steam load when the wood 

waste boilers and the recovery boilers 

operate close to their load capacity or 

when these boilers are down for 

maintenance.4 The result is that the 

power boilers operate below their load 

capacity during the ozone season 

because the demand for steam to heat 

the paper process is low due to the 

warmer temperatures in the summer 

months. The swing function helps 

maintain the NOX emission limits by 

preventing power boilers from reaching 

high loads. 

30-Day Averaging Time 

The 30-day average is a deviation 

from the presumptive 1-hour averaging 

time under subpart 227–2.4(b). Because 

of the ‘‘swing’’ function of the power 

boilers, the 1-hour averaging is not 

economically or technologically 

feasible. As explained in the prior 

section and in the TSD available in the 

docket for this rulemaking, based on the 

case-by-case RACT analysis provided by 

the source, NYSDEC has determined, 

and EPA is herein proposing to approve, 

the use of PEMS instead of CEMS for the 

boilers. A PEMS calculates NOX on a 

daily basis based on boiler steam rates 

and emission steam rate curves 

developed for each boiler. Because the 

Facility demonstrated through a RACT 

analysis that the prescribed 1-hour 

averaging time is not RACT for the 

power boilers because they operate in a 

swing capacity, the NYSDEC added a 

permit condition that allows the Facility 

to determine compliance using PEMS 

based on averaging rates that differ from 

the regulation’s presumptive 1-hour 

method. The NYSDEC published an 

Environmental Notice Bulletin on 

March 30, 2022, for this action that 

provided the public an opportunity to 

comment and no public comments were 

received. 

Summary of RACT Controls 

The power boilers No. 2 and No. 3 

have been retrofitted with Low NOX

Burner (LNB) control technology. Power 

boilers No. 4 and No. 5 currently have 

been upgraded to second generation 

LNB. While the Facility has considered 

the application of a third generation 

LNB for power boiler No. 4 and No 5, 

the third generation LNB would not 

provide consistent or acceptable NOX

reductions without major retrofits to 

other mechanical aspects of the boiler 

system.5 The geometry and 

configuration of the power boilers 

would likely preclude any contractor 

from providing a warrantable guarantee 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 13 / Friday, January 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules 3623 

6The RBLC contains case-specific information on 

the best available air pollution technologies that 

have been required to reduce the emission of air 

pollutants from stationary sources. See https://

cfpub.epa.gov/rblc/ 

index.cfm?action=Search.BasicSearch&lang=en. 

that the power boiler retrofit to third 

generation LNB would provide 

satisfactory NOX reduction. 

In order to determine what NOX

control technologies could potentially 

be considered as economically and 

technologically achievable for the power 

boilers, the EPA reviewed the 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology/Best Available Control 

Technology/Lowest Achievable 

Emission Rate Clearinghouse (RBLC).6

The EPA’s review of the RBLC reveals 

that two similar U.S. facilities, one each 

in Arizona and Pennsylvania, have NOX

controls that the Facility at issue in this 

action either already implemented (i.e., 

pollution prevention: decommission 

boiler, fuel switch) or are not achievable 

based on the Facility boiler 

configurations (i.e., retrofit limitations, 

vertical profile limitations). The EPA 

confirms that there can be a wide range 

in performance and emission levels due 

to differences in boiler design, capacity, 

and burner type. Furthermore, the EPA 

confirms that the Facility’s current 

boiler room and outside roof 

configuration would not sustain 

additional boiler equipment such that 

would be required for add on 

technology (e.g., high temperature fans 

and ductwork) without major retrofits 

that have been demonstrated in the 

RACT analysis to be over the regulatory 

cost threshold. For details on cost 

analysis, refer to the TSD available in 

the docket for this rulemaking. 

Wood Waste Boiler, Condition 47, 

Emission Unit 3–10000 

The Facility operates one wood waste 

boiler, identified as boiler No. 9, that 

primarily combusts wood waste and can 

fire natural gas. The wood waste boiler 

is subject to 6 NYCRR subpart 227– 

2.4(b)(2). Wood is not one of the 

approved fuel types under 6 NYCRR 

subpart 227–2.4(b)(1)(ii) (i.e., gas, gas/ 

oil, pulverized coal, or coal), so a caseby-case RACT emission limit is needed 

for this source. In addition, subpart 

227–2.6(a) requires the operator to 

verify NOX emissions by performing 

applicable testing (i.e., test method 7E) 

to ensure the boiler continues to meet 

the appropriate emission limit. Here, 

stack testing from 2020 established an 

emission limit of 0.28 lbs of NOX

emissions per MMBtu. 

NYSDEC determined that the 

following emission limits comprise 

RACT for the wood waste boiler: 0.28 

lbs of NOX emissions per MMBtu that 

emit through a separate stack. Emission 

testing to demonstrate compliance will 

be performed pursuant to the 

requirements under the boiler 

Maximum Achievable Control 

Technology (MACT) testing occurs 

(every 3 years). The last MACT test was 

conducted by the Facility in 2020. For 

this specific emission unit, MACT is 

more stringent regarding emission 

control than RACT. Emission testing 

will use test Method 7E for large boilers, 

Nitrogen Oxide Instrumental Analyzer. 

Reporting requirement is twice a year. 

The wood waste boiler No. 9 emits 

through a separate stack on the east side 

of the Facility’s power house building. 

EPA believes that the proposed limit 

for the wood waste boiler comprises 

RACT because the re-evaluated RACT 

analysis demonstrated that no new 

control technologies have become 

available that would be economically 

and technologically achievable for this 

boiler. Further detail on this analysis is 

available in the TSD available in the 

docket for this rulemaking. 

Recovery Boilers, Condition 60, 

Emission Unit 3–20000 

The Facility operates four recovery 

boilers (boiler IO, and Nos. 6, 7, 8) that 

have a primary purpose to burn spent 

sulfite cooking liquor from the paper 

pulping process to recover sulfur 

dioxide and reuse it to make more 

cooking liquor. The recovery boilers are 

subject to Federally approved RACT 

regulations under 6 NYCRR part 212 

because they are a process source unlike 

the Facility’s power boilers or wood 

waste boiler which are combustion 

sources subject to part 227–2. 

NYSDEC determined that the 

following emission limits comprise 

RACT for the four recovery boilers: 464 

parts per million (corrected to 7% 

oxygen) that emit through a single 

common stack. The emission limit is 

calculated on a monthly block average. 

NOX and oxygen are monitored 

continuously with CEMS to calculate a 

NOX emission rate. The recovery boilers 

currently have technically feasible 

control strategies to minimize NOX

formation which include daily 

monitoring for opacity, a system wide 

NOX limit, and a CEMS. In addition, the 

recovery boilers currently have emission 

control equipment alternatives, 

absorbers, and mist eliminators. 

EPA believes that the proposed limit 

for the recovery boilers comprises RACT 

because the re-evaluated RACT analysis 

demonstrated that costs for adding 

additional controls are beyond what is 

considered economically feasible for 

purposes of RACT. Further detail on 

this analysis is available in the TSD 

available in the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

III. Environmental Justice 

Considerations 

The CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require an environmental 

justice evaluation and so the State of 

New York did not evaluate 

environmental justice considerations as 

part of its SSSIP submittal. The EPA 

performed an environmental justice 

analysis for the purpose of transparency 

about this rulemaking to the public and 

the analysis is not provided for the basis 

of this action. The EPA created a 

Community Report (Report) using its EJ 

Screen, Version 2.2. The Report is 

contained in the EPA docket assigned to 

this Federal Register document. 

The Report represents a 1-mile ring 

centered at the Facility. All thirteen EJ 

Screen environmental indexes were 

considered for the Report: (1) Particulate 

matter; (2) ozone; (3) diesel particulate 

matter; (4) air toxics cancer risks; (5) air 

toxics respiratory health index; (6) 

toxics releases to air; (7) traffic 

proximity; (8) lead paint; (9) superfund 

proximity; (10) risk management plan 

(RMP) facility proximity; (11) hazardous 

waste proximity; (12) underground 

storage tanks; and (13) wastewater 

discharge. Both the EJ Indexes and the 

Supplemental Indexes were verified 

using the thirteen environmental 

indexes. The difference between the EJ 

and Supplemental indexes is that the EJ 

Indexes combine data on low income 

and people of color populations and the 

Supplemental Indexes combine data on 

percent low-income, percent 

linguistically isolated, percent less than 

high school education, percent 

unemployed, and low life expectancy. 

We analyze both EJ Indexes and 

Supplemental Indexes because they 

offer different perspectives on 

community level vulnerability based on 

different factors. We also consider all 

environmental indexes since the effects 

of different forms of pollution might 

accumulate upon each other. The EPA 

uses the National percentile for the 

Report results and not the State 

percentile since this SSSIP action is a 

Federal action. The EPA brings to your 

attention any environmental index 

result that is 80 percentile or greater 

because environmental indexes at this 

level are relatively high compared to the 

United States population. The 

‘‘percentile’’ is what EJ Screen uses to 

compare the area of study to national 

figures. 

The Report results in no National EJ 

Indexes above 80th percentile. The 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
3624 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 13 / Friday, January 19, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

Report indicates the following National 

Supplemental Indexes above 80th 

percentile: Superfund proximity is at 

the 83rd percentile; and RMP facility 

proximity is at the 81st percentile. To 

understand the indexes that are over the 

80th percentile, refer to docket assigned 

to this Federal Register document. 

IV. Proposed Action 

The EPA is proposing that the current 

Source-specific SIP revision is 

approvable because the limits included 

in the SSSIP are demonstrated to be 

RACT for the power boilers, wood waste 

boiler and the recovery boilers. Based 

on a thorough RBLC review of similar 

sources, consultation with NYSDEC and 

an analysis of this Source-specific SIP 

revision, the EPA proposes to approve 

Finch Paper LLC’s operation under the 

NYSDEC approved NOX emission limits 

for emission unit 3–00000 power 

boilers, emission unit 3–10000 wood 

waste boiler, and emission unit 3–20000 

recovery boilers. 

Specifically, the EPA proposes to 

approve the following: (1) Emission unit 

3–00000, four power boilers, at 0.225 

NOX lb/MMBtu during ozone season 

(April 15 through October 15) and at 

0.275 NOX lb/MMBtu during non-ozone 

season (October 16 through April 14) 

and at 0.378 NOX lb/MMBtu when 

recovery boilers are not burning liquor 

or when the wood waste boiler is down 

during non-ozone season; (2) emission 

unit 3–10000, No. 9 wood waste boiler, 

at 0.28 NOX lb/MMBtu; and (3) emission 

unit 3–20000, recovery boilers, at 464 

parts per million (corrected to 7% 

oxygen) system wide. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, the EPA is 

proposing to include regulatory text that 

includes incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, the EPA is proposing to 

incorporate by reference revisions to 

Finch Paper LLC title V operating 

permit conditions 1–1, 47, and 60 as 

described in section II. 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 2 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, the 

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); 

• 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 

this action does not involve technical 

standards. 

In addition, the SIP is not proposing 

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 rule does not have 

Tribal implications and it 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). 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies 

to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on minority populations 

and low-income populations to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. EPA defines 

environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of all people regardless of race, color, 

national origin, or income with respect 

to the development, implementation, 

and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further 

defines the term fair treatment to mean 

that ‘‘no group of people should bear a 

disproportionate burden of 

environmental harms and risks, 

including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ resulting from the negative 

environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ 

The New York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation did not 

evaluate environmental justice 

considerations as part of its SSSIP 

submittal; the CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require such an evaluation. 

The EPA performed an environmental 

justice analysis, as is described above in 

the section titled, ‘‘Environmental 

Justice Considerations.’’ The analysis 

was done for the purpose of providing 

additional context and information 

about this rulemaking to the public, not 

as a basis of the action. In addition, 

there is no information in the record 

upon which this decision is based 

inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 

12898 of achieving environmental 

justice for people of color, low-income 

populations, and Indigenous peoples. 

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Lisa Garcia, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2024–00748 Filed 1–18–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MB Docket No. 24–4; RM–11974; DA 24– 

30; FR ID 196932] 

Television Broadcasting Services 

Waynesboro, Virginia 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1