*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

1 of 50

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 97

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491; FRL- ]

RIN 2060-AR35

Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce 

Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone: 

Part II

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on additional 

revisions to the final Transport Rule (Federal 

Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine 

Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP 

Approvals, 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). In the proposed 

Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce 

Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone, 

76 FR 63860 (October 14, 2011), EPA sought additional 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

2 of 50

comment on unit-level operational information similar to 

the information supporting the proposed revisions, which

specifically addressed post-combustion pollution control 

equipment and immediate-term operational requirements 

necessitating non-economic generation based on verifiable 

data. Based on comments received, EPA is finalizing

adjustments that result in revisions to 2012 and 2014 state

budgets in Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana,

Mississippi, Missouri, New York, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma,

South Carolina, and Texas, and revisions to new unit setasides in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Missouri.

1

DATES: This rule is effective on [INSERT DATE 90 DAYS FROM

THE DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER] without 

further notice, unless EPA receives significant adverse 

comments by [INSERT DATE 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF

PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. If we receive such 

comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID 

No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491, by one of the following methods:

 

1 Throughout this preamble, EPA refers to a state budget for 2012 and 

2013 as a “2012” state budget and refers to a state budget for 2014 and 

thereafter as a “2014” state budget. Therefore, any revision of a 2012 

state budget would apply to the state budget for 2012 and 2013, and any 

revision of a 2014 state budget would apply to the state budget for 

2014 and thereafter.
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

3 of 50

 http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments.

 Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20460.

 Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket, EPA West 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, 

Washington, D.C. 20460. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of 

operation, and special arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPAHQ-OAR-2009-0491. EPA's policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available online at 

http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 

information provided, unless the comment includes 

information claimed to be Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 

by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to 

be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov website is an 

“anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

4 of 50

your identity or contact information unless you provide it 

in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment 

directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov 

your e-mail address will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact information in the body 

of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If 

EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For 

additional information about EPA’s public docket visit the 

EPA Docket Center homepage at 

http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the 

index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., 

CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by 

statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 

material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

5 of 50

Publicly available docket materials are available either 

electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy at the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA West Building, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 

20460. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. 

The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 

566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and 

Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gabrielle Stevens, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air Markets 

Division, MC 6204J, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460, telephone (202) 343-9252, 

e-mail at stevens.gabrielle@epa.gov. Electronic copies of 

this document can be accessed through the EPA Website at: 

http://epa.gov/airmarkets.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is publishing this rule 

without a prior proposed rule because we view this as a 

noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse comment. 

However, in the “Proposed Rules” section of today’s Federal 

Register, we are publishing a separate document that will 

serve as the proposed rule if significant adverse comments 

are received on this direct final rule. We will not 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

6 of 50

institute a second comment period on this action. Any 

parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. 

For further information about commenting on this rule, see 

the ADDRESSES section of this document.

If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a 

timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the 

public that this direct final rule will not take effect. 

We would address all public comments in any subsequent 

final rule based on the proposed rule.

Regulated Entities. Entities regulated by this action 

primarily are fossil fuel-fired boilers, turbines, and 

combined cycle units that serve generators that produce 

electricity for sale or cogenerate electricity for sale and 

steam. Regulated categories and entities include:

Category NAICS code

Examples of 

potentially 

regulated 

industries

Industry 2211, 2212, 2213 Electric service 

providers

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to 

provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be 

regulated by this action. This table lists the types of 

entities which EPA is now aware could potentially be 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

7 of 50

regulated by this action. Other types of entities not 

listed in this table could also be regulated. To determine 

whether your facility, company, business, organization, 

etc., is regulated by this action, you should carefully 

examine the applicability criteria in §§ 97.404, 97.504, 

and 97.604 of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 

If you have questions regarding the applicability of this 

action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in 

the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

I. Detailed Discussion of Corresponding Rule Revisions

EPA has determined that the following additional 

corrections are needed to the August 8, 2011 final 

Transport Rule, as a result of comments received on the 

proposed rule, Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to 

Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and 

Ozone (76 FR 63860, October 14, 2011)(Revisions Rule). In 

that proposed rule, EPA took comment on several similar 

corrections and demonstrated a consistent methodology for 

calculating those corrections. EPA received no comments 

opposing the proposal to make these corrections to state 

budgets and new unit set-asides, and EPA received very few 

comments addressing the manner in which the corrections 

were quantified, to which EPA responded in the final 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

8 of 50

revisions rule. EPA has calculated the corrections in this 

rulemaking in a fully consistent manner with the approach 

developed through public comment on the proposed and 

finalized revisions rule. See the “Final Revisions Rule 

State Budgets and New Unit Set-Asides” Technical Support 

Document (TSD) in the docket for this rulemaking for a 

quantitative demonstration of these revisions. For 

quantitative assessments of the relationship between final 

revisions to the Transport Rule and the original analysis, 

also see “Final Revisions Rule Significant Contribution 

Assessment” TSD in the docket for this rulemaking. The

“Final Revisions Rule Unit-Level Allocations under the 

FIPs”, also in the docket for this rulemaking, present

unit-level allocations under the FIPs. 

(1) Revise the Arkansas ozone season NOX budgets for 

2012 and 2014 and correct the ozone season new 

unit set-aside budget for an omitted planned 

facility. 

EPA is increasing the Arkansas 2012 and 2014 ozoneseason NOX budget based upon comments received that 

demonstrate that the McClellan plant is in an out-of-merit-
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

9 of 50

order dispatch area with conditions likely to necessitate 

what would otherwise be non-economic generation.2

EPA re-calculated the emissions from the McClellan 

plant with non-economic generation to account for the input 

assumption changes. These calculations yield increases to 

the Arkansas 2012 and 2014 state budgets for ozone-season 

NOX of 73 tons. Comments on the revisions rule identified 

Turk Unit 1 as commencing commercial operation on or after 

January 1, 2010, qualifying it as a new unit under the 

final Transport Rule’s unit-level allocation methodology 

(76 FR 48290); however, the final Transport Rule 

erroneously omitted this unit’s projected emissions from 

the calculation of Arkansas’ ozone-season NOX new unit setaside. EPA is therefore revising the portion of the 

Arkansas ozone-season budget dedicated to the state’s new 

unit set-aside account so that it takes into account this 

unit’s projected emissions, consistent with the new unit 

set-aside methodology in the final Transport Rule. EPA is 

only applying this revision for 2014 and beyond, because 

the Agency has already recorded (i.e., distributed) 

 

2 In the proposed revisions rule, EPA characterized an out-of-meritorder dispatch area as one in which “units... are frequently dispatched 

out of regional economic order as a result of short-run limitations on 

the ability to meet local electricity demand with generation from 

outside the area.” (76 FR 63865)
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

10 of 50

allowances under the Arkansas state budget for the 2012 and 

2013 control periods. Turk Unit 1 remains eligible to 

request allowance allocation from the new unit set-asides 

for any control period under the program. This revision 

yields an ozone-season NOX new unit set-aside of 8 percent 

for 2014 and beyond for Arkansas. This revision to the 

Arkansas new unit set-aside necessitates changes to 

allowance allocations to existing units in 2014 and beyond. 

(2) Revise the Georgia SO2, annual NOX, and ozone 

season NOX budgets for 2014.

In the final Transport Rule, EPA explained its intent 

to capture “reductions that occur due to state rules, 

consent decrees, and other planned changes in generation 

patterns that occur after 2012, but during or prior to 

2014” in the 2014 state budgets (76 FR 48261). Commenters 

on the revisions rule noted that EPA inadvertently included 

pollution control installation requirements from a Georgia 

state rule whose deadlines at certain units actually extend 

beyond 2014. To correct the alignment of the Georgia 2014 

state budgets with the requirements for affected units in 

Georgia to install controls by the state rule’s deadlines, 

EPA is increasing Georgia’s 2014 state budgets by 40,334 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

11 of 50

tons of SO2, 13,198 tons of annual NOX, and 5,762 tons of 

ozone-season NOX. 

(3) Revise the Indiana SO2 budgets for 2012 and 2014.

EPA is revising the Indiana 2012 and 2014 annual SO2

budgets based on comments received on the proposed 

revisions rule (76 FR 63860, October 14, 2011) regarding 

post-combustion control status at Gallagher Units 2 and 4. 

Commenters identified an erroneous assumption of flue gas 

desulphurization (FGD, or scrubber) with 86 percent removal 

at units that have actually installed dry sorbent injection 

(DSI) technology with a 60 percent removal rate and an 

emission rate limit of 0.8 lbs/mmBtu established in a NSR 

settlement agreement. EPA has recalculated the projected 

emissions at these units, and that recalculation supports a 

3,465 ton increase in the state’s annual SO2 budget. 

Commenters on the revisions rule also identified a 

facility in Indiana, Gibson Unit 5, which currently faces

immediate-term limitations regarding the amount of flue gas 

that can be treated in its existing FGD. In the final 

Transport Rule analysis, EPA relied on the SO2 removal 

efficiency that this facility reported at its scrubber to 

the Energy Information Administration (EIA). However, EPA 

has since determined that this reported value only intended 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

12 of 50

to address the removal efficiency for the portion of the 

flue gas treated in the scrubber. EPA has recalculated the 

projected emissions for this unit using the most recent 

data reported by this facility to EIA on form 860 for 2009, 

which includes the scrubber’s removal efficiency and the 

portion of flue gas treated. This recalculation supports 

an increase to Indiana’s 2012 and 2014 SO2 budget of an 

additional 1,873 tons (5,338 tons total). 

(4) Revise the Kansas SO2 and annual NOX budgets for 

2012 and 2014.

Commenters on the revisions rule provided information 

showing that one unit at the Quindaro plant in Kansas is in 

an out-of-merit-order dispatch area with conditions likely 

to necessitate what would otherwise be non-economic 

generation. EPA re-calculated the emissions from this 

plant with non-economic generation to account for the input 

assumption changes. These calculations yield increases to 

the Kansas 2012 and 2014 state budgets for annual SO2 of 452 

tons and annual NOX of 640 tons. 

In the final Transport Rule, EPA explained its intent 

to capture “reductions that occur due to state rules, 

consent decrees, and other planned changes in generation 

patterns that occur after 2012, but during or prior to 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

13 of 50

2014” in the 2014 state budgets (76 FR 48261). Commenters 

on the revisions rule noted that EPA inadvertently included 

an emission rate requirement from a consent decree 

affecting a Kansas facility whose deadline actually extends 

beyond 2014. To correct the alignment of the Kansas 2014 

state budget with the requirements for affected units in 

Kansas to meet the emission rate limitation by the consent 

decree’s deadlines, EPA is increasing the Kansas 2014 

annual NOX budget by an additional 5,154 tons (5,794 tons 

total). 

(5) Revise the Louisiana ozone season NOX budgets for 

2012 and 2014 and adjust the ozone season new 

unit set-aside.

EPA is increasing the Louisiana 2012 and 2014 ozoneseason NOX budgets based on comments received on the 

revisions rule demonstrating that the Stall and Lieberman 

plants are in an out-of-merit-order dispatch area with 

conditions likely to necessitate what would otherwise be 

non-economic generation. EPA re-calculated the emissions 

from the Stall and Lieberman plants with non-economic 

generation to account for the input assumption changes. 

These calculations yield increases to Louisiana’s 2012 and 

2014 state budgets for ozone-season NOX of 89 tons. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

14 of 50

Comments on the revisions rule also noted that in 

calculating the Louisiana ozone-season NOX new unit setaside, EPA included projected emissions from a planned new 

facility, Washington Parish, which will not in fact come 

into service in Louisiana. EPA is therefore reducing the 

size of Louisiana’s ozone-season NOX new unit set-aside in 

2012 and 2014 to 2 percent (from the previous 3 percent) to 

account for the exclusion of these projected emissions from 

the relevant calculation. This revision means that fewer 

allowances will need to be held in reserve for the new unit 

set-aside; after this revision’s effective date, EPA will 

reallocate any allowances in excess of the revised new unit 

set-aside to existing units in the state by the same 

existing unit allowance allocation methodology as 

previously finalized. 

(6) Revise the Mississippi ozone season NOX budgets 

for 2012 and 2014.

EPA is increasing the Mississippi 2012 and 2014 ozoneseason NOX budgets based on comments received on the 

revisions rule demonstrating that the Moselle plant is in 

an out-of-merit-order dispatch area with conditions likely 

to necessitate what would otherwise be non-economic 

generation.
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

15 of 50

EPA re-calculated the emissions from the Moselle plant 

with non-economic generation to account for the input 

assumption changes. These calculations yield increases to 

Mississippi’s 2012 and 2014 state budgets for ozone-season 

NOX of 115 tons. 

(7) Revise the Missouri annual and ozone season NOX 

budgets for 2012 and 2014 and correct the SO2, 

annual NOX, and ozone season NOX new unit setaside budgets for an omitted operating new 

facility.

EPA is increasing the Missouri 2012 and 2014 annual 

and ozone-season NOX budgets to account for operational 

constraints at six plants based upon comments received on 

the revisions rule. The commenters provided information 

showing that these units were in out-of-merit-order 

dispatch areas with conditions likely to necessitate what 

would otherwise be non-economic generation.

EPA re-calculated the emissions from these six plants 

with non-economic generation to account for the input 

assumption changes. These calculations yield increases to 

Missouri’s 2012 and 2014 state budgets for annual NOX of 26

tons and ozone-season NOX of 26 tons. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

16 of 50

Comments on the revisions rule identified Iatan Unit 2 

as commencing commercial operation on or after January 1, 

2010, qualifying it as a new unit under the final Transport 

Rule’s unit-level allocation methodology (76 FR 48290); 

however, the final Transport Rule erroneously omitted this 

unit’s projected emissions from the calculation of 

Missouri’s new unit set-asides. EPA is therefore revising 

the portion of Missouri’s SO2, annual NOX, and ozone-season 

NOX budgets dedicated to the state’s new unit set-asides so 

that they take into account this unit’s projected 

emissions, consistent with the new unit set-aside 

methodology in the final Transport Rule. EPA is only 

applying this revision for 2013 and beyond, because the 

Agency has already recorded (i.e., distributed) allowances 

under the Missouri state budget for the 2012 control 

period. Iatan Unit 2 remains eligible to request allowance 

allocation from the new unit set-asides for any control 

period under the program. This revision yields an ozoneseason NOX new unit set-aside of 6 percent, an annual NOX

new unit set-aside of 6 percent, and an SO2 new unit setaside of 3 percent for 2013 and beyond for Missouri. 

This revision to Missouri’s new unit set-aside necessitates 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

17 of 50

changes to allowance allocations to existing units in 2013 

and beyond. 

(8) Revise the Ohio SO2, annual NOX, and ozone season 

NOX budgets for 2012 and 2014.

EPA is increasing Ohio’s 2012 and 2014 annual SO2,

annual NOX, and ozone-season NOX budgets to account for 

operational constraints at two plants, Conesville and 

Muskingum River, based on comments received on the 

revisions rule. The commenter provided information showing 

that these plants were in out-of-merit-order dispatch areas 

with conditions likely to necessitate what would otherwise 

be non-economic generation.

EPA re-calculated the emissions from these two plants 

with non-economic generation to reflect the input 

assumption changes. These calculations yield increases to 

Ohio’s 2012 and 2014 state budgets for annual SO2 of 5,163 

tons, annual NOX of 547 tons, and ozone-season NOX of 257

tons. 

EPA is finalizing additional adjustments to Ohio’s 

2012 and 2014 annual and ozone-season NOX budgets to correct 

an erroneous assumption of an SCR at Bayshore 4. There is 

no SCR planned or under construction at this facility. 

This results in an additional 2,218 ton increase (2,765 ton 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

18 of 50

total) in the state’s annual NOX budget and a 964 ton 

increase (1,221 ton total) for the ozone-season NOX budget. 

(9) Revise the Nebraska SO2 budgets for 2012 and 2014.

EPA is finalizing revisions to the Nebraska 2012 and 

2014 SO2 budgets, based on comments on the revisions rule, 

to correct assumptions regarding FGD pollution control 

technology at Whelan Energy Center Units 1 and 2 and 

Nebraska City Unit 2. The commenter noted that the 

technology at Nebraska Unit 2 and Whelan Unit 2 is dry FGD 

technology, whereas EPA had assumed wet FGD technology with 

a higher SO2 removal efficiency than the actual dry FGD 

technology that those units achieve. Additionally, EPA is 

also revising its assumption of FGD technology at Whelan 

Energy Center Unit 1. There is no FGD present, planned, or 

under construction at the unit. These adjustments result 

in an increase of 3,110 tons to the 2012 and 2014 annual SO2

budgets for the state. 

(10) Revise the New York SO2, annual NOX, and ozone 

season NOX budgets for 2012 and 2014.

EPA is increasing New York’s 2012 and 2014 annual SO2,

annual NOX, and ozone-season NOX budgets based on comments 

received on the revisions rule demonstrating that the East 

River plant is in an out-of-merit-order dispatch area with 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

19 of 50

conditions likely to necessitate what would otherwise be 

non-economic generation. EPA re-calculated the emissions 

from this facility with out-of-merit-order dispatch to 

reflect the input assumption changes. These calculations 

yield increases to New York’s 2012 and 2014 state budgets 

for annual SO2 of 88 tons, annual NOX of 694 tons, and 

ozone-season NOX of 127 tons. 

EPA is also finalizing an adjustment of 5,360 tons to 

New York’s 2012 and 2014 SO2 budgets based on comments 

received on the revisions rule. Commenters identified two 

facilities, Dunkirk and Huntley, with existing dry sorbent 

injection (DSI) technology for which EPA had assumed an SO2

removal rate of 70 percent but which actually achieves a 

removal rate of only 53 percent. EPA recalculated the 

projected emissions for these units based on this revised 

assumption and is increasing the New York 2012 and 2014 SO2

budgets accordingly. 

(11) Revise the Oklahoma ozone-season NOX budgets for 

2013 and 2014.

EPA is increasing the Oklahoma 20133 and 2014 ozoneseason NOX budget based upon comments received on the 

 

3 These changes do not apply to the Oklahoma 2012 budget because 

similar changes were already made to the affected units’
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

20 of 50

revisions rule demonstrating that the Comanche plant is in 

an out-of-merit-order dispatch area with conditions likely 

to necessitate what would otherwise be non-economic 

generation.

EPA re-calculated the emissions from the Comanche 

plant with non-economic generation to account for the input 

assumption changes. These calculations yield increases to 

the Oklahoma 2013 and 2014 state budgets for ozone-season 

NOX of 859 tons. 

(12) Revise the South Carolina SO2 budgets for 2012 and 

2014.

EPA is finalizing an 8,013 ton increase to South 

Carolina’s 2012 and 2014 annual SO2 budgets based on 

comments received on the revision rule regarding postcombustion control technology at three units. This action 

revises the assumption of an FGD at the W S Lee Facility. 

There are no FGDs planned, under construction, or expected 

to be online in 2012 or 2014 at this facility. 

(13) Revise the Texas annual NOX and ozone season NOX

budgets for 2012 and 2014.

 

operation in 2012, as described in the Technical Support Document 

“Determination of State Budgets for the Final Ozone Supplemental 

of the Transport Rule” (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-485, pg 5-7).
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

21 of 50

EPA is increasing the Texas 2012 and 2014 annual and 

ozone-season NOX budgets to account for operational 

constraints at six plants based on comments received on the 

revisions rule: Jones, Moore County, Nichols, Plant X, 

Knox Lee, and Wilkes. The commenters provided information 

showing that these plants were in out-of-merit-order 

dispatch areas with conditions likely to necessitate what 

would otherwise be non-economic generation.

EPA re-calculated the emissions from these plants with 

non-economic generation to account for the input assumption 

changes. These calculations yield increases to the Texas 

2012 and 2014 state budgets for annual NOX of 2,731 tons, 

and ozone-season NOX of 1,142 tons. 

II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review 

and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 

1993), this action is a "significant regulatory action.” 

Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for review under Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011) and 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

22 of 50

any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have 

been documented in the docket for this action. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not impose any new information 

collection burden. This action makes relatively minor 

revisions to the emission budgets and allowance allocations 

or allowance allocations only in certain states in the 

final Transport Rule and corrects minor technical errors 

which are ministerial. However, the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information 

collection requirements contained in the final Transport 

Rule under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 

2060-0667. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 

40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally 

requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility 

analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure 

Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that 

the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. Small entities 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

23 of 50

include small businesses, small organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions.

For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on 

small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) a small 

business as defined by the Small Business Administration’s 

(SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small 

governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, 

county, town, school district or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is 

independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its 

field. 

After considering the economic impacts of today’s 

action on small entities, I certify that this action will 

not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The small entities directly 

regulated by this action are electric power generators 

whose ultimate parent entity has a total electric output of 

4 million megawatt-hours (MWh) or less in the previous 

fiscal year. We have determined that the changes 

considered in this proposed rulemaking pose no additional 

burden for small entities. The proposed revision to the 

new unit set-asides in Arkansas, Missouri, and Texas would 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

24 of 50

yield an extremely small change in unit-level allowance 

allocations to existing units, including small entities, 

such that it would not affect the analysis conducted on 

small entity impacts under the finalized Transport Rule. 

In all other states, the revisions proposed in this 

rulemaking would yield additional allowance allocations to 

all units, including small entities, without increasing 

program stringency, such that it is not possible for the 

impact to small entities to be any larger than that already 

considered and reviewed in the finalized Transport Rule. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

This rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may 

result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, 

local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the 

private sector in any one year. This action is increasing 

the budgets and increasing the total number of allowances 

or maintaining the same budget but revising unit-level 

allocations in several other states in the Transport Rule.

Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 or 205 of UMRA.

In developing the final Transport Rule, EPA consulted 

with small governments pursuant to a plan established under 

section 203 of UMRA to address impacts of regulatory 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

25 of 50

requirements in the rule that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments.

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, as 

specified in Executive Order 13132. This action makes 

relatively minor revisions to the emissions budgets and 

allowance allocations or allowance allocations only in 

certain states in the final Transport Rule. Thus, Executive 

Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. EPA did provide 

information to state and local officials during development 

of both the proposed and final Transport Rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments

This action does not have tribal implications, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 

9, 2000). This action makes relatively minor revisions to 

the emissions budgets and allowance allocations in several 

states in the final Transport Rule and helps ease the 

transition from CAIR. Indian country new unit set-asides 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

26 of 50

will increase slightly or remain unchanged in the states 

affected by this action. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does 

not apply to this action. EPA consulted with tribal 

officials during the process of promulgating the final 

Transport Rule to permit them to have meaningful and timely 

input into its development.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health and Safety Risks

This action is not subject to EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997) because it is not economically significant 

as defined in EO 12866, and because the Agency does not 

believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed 

by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. 

Analyses by EPA that show how the emission reductions from 

the strategies in the final Transport Rule will further 

improve air quality and children’s health can be found in 

the final Transport Rule RIA.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning 

Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use

This action is not a “significant energy action” as 

defined in Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 

2001)), because it is not likely to have a significant 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

27 of 50

adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. EPA believes that there is no meaningful impact to 

the energy supply beyond that which is reported for the 

Transport Rule program in the final Transport Rule.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (“NTTAA”), Public Law No. 104-113, 

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to 

do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test 

methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through 

OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use 

available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. 

As described in section XII.I of the preamble to the 

final Transport Rule, the Transport Rule program requires

all sources to meet the applicable monitoring requirements 

of 40 CFR part 75. Part 75 already incorporates a number of 

voluntary consensus standards. This action does not involve 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

28 of 50

technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not consider the 

use of any voluntary consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and LowIncome Populations

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 

1994)) establishes federal executive policy on 

environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal

agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted 

by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 

by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, 

disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, policies, and 

activities on minority populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

In the Final Revisions Rule Significant Contribution 

Assessment Technical Support Document in the docket to this 

rulemaking, EPA assessed impacts of the emission changes in 

this rule on air quality throughout the Transport Rule 

region. For SO2, the estimated air quality impacts were 

minimal and no additional nonattainment or maintenance 

areas were identified. EPA also assessed the relationship 

between the NOX emission inventories in each affected state 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

29 of 50

and the finalized revisions to annual and ozone-season NOX

budgets and found the revisions represent small percentages 

of each state’s total emissions in 2014. As a result, EPA 

does not believe these technical revisions would affect any 

of the conclusions supported by the air quality and 

environmental justice analyses conducted for the final 

Transport Rule.

Based on the significant contribution assessment in 

the technical support document for this action, EPA has 

determined that this action will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or low-income populations 

because it does not affect the level of protection provided 

to human health or the environment. EPA believes that the 

vast majority of communities and individuals in areas

covered by the Transport Rule program inclusive of this 

action, including numerous low-income, minority, and tribal 

individuals and communities in both rural areas and inner 

cities in the eastern and central U.S., will see

significant improvements in air quality and resulting 

improvements in health. EPA’s assessment of the effects of 

the final Transport Rule program on these communities is
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

30 of 50

available in section XII.J of the preamble to the final 

Transport Rule.

K. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as 

added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 

Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take 

effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule 

report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of 

the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United 

States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and 

other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 

House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of 

the United States prior to publication of the rule in the 

Federal Register. A Major rule cannot take effect until 60 

days after it is published in the Federal Register. This 

action is a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

This rule will be effective [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER 

PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

L. Judicial Review

Petitions for judicial review of this action must be 

filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia Circuit by [INSERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER 

DATE OF PUBLICATION]. Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

31 of 50

indicates which Federal Courts of Appeal have venue for 

petitions of review of final actions by EPA. This section 

provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed 

in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit if (i) the agency action consists of “nationally 

applicable regulations promulgated, or final action taken, 

by the Administrator,” or (ii) such action is locally or 

regionally applicable, if “such action is based on a 

determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in 

taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes 

that such action is based on such a determination.”

In the final Transport Rule, EPA determined that 

“[a]ny final action related to the Transport Rule is 

‘nationally applicable’ within the meaning of section 

307(b)(1).” 76 Fed. Reg. 48,352. Through this rule, EPA 

is revising specific aspects of the final Transport Rule. 

This rule therefore is a final action related to the 

Transport Rule and as such is covered by the determination 

of national applicability made in the final Transport Rule. 

Thus, pursuant to section 307(b) any petitions for review 

of this action must be filed in the Court of Appeals for 

the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the 

date final action is published in the Federal Register. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

32 of 50

Filing a petition for reconsideration of this action 

does not affect the finality of this rule 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. In 

addition, pursuant to CAA section 307(b)(2) this action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its 

requirements.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution 

control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Regional haze, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 

Sulfur dioxide.

40 CFR Part 97

Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution 

control, Electric utilities, Nitrogen oxides, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide.
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

33 of 50

Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce 

Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone: 

Part II

(page 36 of 50)

Dated: ____________________

______________________________________________________

Lisa P. Jackson

Administrator.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 97 of 

chapter I of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 

amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for Part 97 continues to read as 

follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7403, 7410, 7426, 7601, and 

7651, et seq.
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

34 of 50

2. Section 97.410 is amended by: 

a. Revising paragraphs (a)(2)(iv) and (v);

b. Revising paragraph (a)(6), (11), (14), (16), and (20); 

and 

c. Revising paragraphs (b)(2), (6), (11), (14), (16) and 

(20) to read as follows:

§97.410 State NOX Annual trading budgets, new unit setasides, Indian country new unit set-aside, and variability 

limits.

(a) * * *

(2) * * *

(iv) The NOX annual trading budget for 2014 and thereafter 

is 53,738 tons.

(v) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 1,075 tons.

(vi) * * *

* * * * *

(6) Kansas. (i) The NOX annual trading budget for 2012 and 

2013 is 31,354 tons.

(ii) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2012 and 2013 is 

596 tons. 

(iii) The NOX annual Indian country new unit set-aside for 

2012 and 2013 is 31 tons. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

35 of 50

(iv) The NOX annual trading budget for 2014 and thereafter 

is 31,354 tons. 

(v) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 596 tons. 

(vi) The NOX annual Indian country new unit set-aside for 

2014 and thereafter is 31 tons.

* * * * *

(11) Missouri. (i) The NOX annual trading budget for 

2012 and 2013 is 52,400 tons.

(ii) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2012 is 1,572 

tons and for 2013 is 3,144 tons. 

(iii) [Reserved] 

(iv) The NOX annual trading budget for 2014 and thereafter 

is 48,743 tons. 

(v) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 2,925 tons. 

(vi) [Reserved]

* * * * *

(14) New York. (i) The NOX annual trading budget for 2012 

and 2013 is 21,722 tons.

(ii) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2012 and 2013 is 

412 tons. 

(iii) The NOX annual Indian country new unit set-aside for 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

36 of 50

2012 and 2013 is 22 tons. 

(iv) The NOX annual trading budget for 2014 and thereafter 

is 21,722 tons. 

(v) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 412 tons. 

(vi) The NOX annual Indian country new unit set-aside for 

2014 and thereafter is 22 tons.

* * * * *

(16) Ohio. (i) The NOX annual trading budget for 2012 and 

2013 is 95,468 tons.

(ii) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2012 and 2013 is 

1,909 tons. 

(iii) [Reserved] 

(iv) The NOX annual trading budget for 2014 and thereafter 

is 90,258 tons. 

(v) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 1,805 tons. 

(vi) [Reserved]

* * * * *

(20) Texas. (i) The NOX annual trading budget for 2012 and 

2013 is 137,701 tons.

(ii) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2012 and 2013 is 

5,370 tons. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

37 of 50

(iii) The NOX annual Indian country new unit set-aside for 

2012 and 2013 is 138 tons. 

(iv) The NOX annual trading budget for 2014 and thereafter 

is 137,701 tons. 

(v) The NOX annual new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 5,370 tons. 

(vi) The NOX annual Indian country new unit set-aside for 

2014 and thereafter is 138 tons.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) The NOX annual variability limit for Georgia is 9,673 

tons.

* * * * *

(6) The NOX annual variability limit for Kansas is 5,644

tons.

* * * * *

(11) The NOX annual variability limit for Missouri is 8,774 

tons.

* * * * *

(14) The NOX annual variability limit for New York is 3,910 

tons.
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

38 of 50

* * * * *

(16) The NOX annual variability limit for Ohio is 16,246 

tons.

* * * * *

(20) The NOX annual variability limit for Texas is 24,786 

tons.

* * * * *

2. Section 97.510 is amended by:

a. Revising paragraph (a)(2);

b. Revising paragraphs (a)(4)(iv) and (v);

c. Revising paragraphs (a)(9), (12), (13), (15), (17), 

(18), and (22); and

d. Revising paragraphs (b)(2), (4), (9), (12), (13), (15), 

(17), (18), and (22) to read as follows:

§97.510 State NOX Ozone Season trading budgets, new unit 

set-asides, Indian country new unit set-aside, and 

variability limits.

(a) * * * 

(2) Arkansas. (i) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 

2012 and 2013 is 15,110 tons.

(ii) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2012 and 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

39 of 50

2013 is 756 tons.

(iii) [Reserved] 

(iv) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2014 and 

thereafter is 15,110 tons.

(v) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 1,209 tons.

(vi) [Reserved]

* * * * *

(4) * * *

(iv) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2014 and 

thereafter is 24,041 tons.

(v) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 481 tons.

(vi) * * *

* * * * *

(9) Louisiana. (i) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 

2012 and 2013 is 18,115 tons.

(ii) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2012 and 

2013 is 344 tons.

(iii) The NOX ozone season Indian country new unit set-aside 

for 2012 and 2013 is 18 tons. 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

40 of 50

(iv) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2014 and 

thereafter is 18,115 tons.

(v) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 344 tons.

(vi) The NOX ozone season Indian country new unit set-aside 

for 2014 and thereafter is 18 tons.

* * * * *

(12) Mississippi. (i) The NOX ozone season trading budget 

for 2012 and 2013 is 12,429 tons.

(ii) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2012 and 

2013 is 237 tons.

(iii) The NOX ozone season Indian country new unit set-aside 

for 2012 and 2013 is 12 tons. 

(iv) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2014 and 

thereafter is 12,429 tons.

(v) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 237 tons.

(vi) The NOX ozone season Indian country new unit set-aside 

for 2014 and thereafter is 12 tons.

(13) Missouri. (i) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 

2012 and 2013 is 22,788 tons.
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

41 of 50

(ii) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2012 is 684 

tons and for 2013 is 1,367 tons.

(iii) [Reserved] 

(iv) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2014 and 

thereafter is 21,099 tons.

(v) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 1,266 tons.

(vi) [Reserved]

* * * * *

(15) New York. (i) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 

2012 and 2013 is 10,369 tons.

(ii) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2012 and 

2013 is 197 tons.

(iii) The NOX ozone season Indian country new unit set-aside 

for 2012 and 2013 is 10 tons. 

(iv) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2014 and 

thereafter is 10,369 tons.

(v) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 197 tons.

(vi) The NOX ozone season Indian country new unit set-aside 

for 2014 and thereafter is 10 tons.
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

42 of 50

* * * * * 

(17) Ohio. (i) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2012 

and 2013 is 41,284 tons.

(ii) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2012 and 

2013 is 826 tons.

(iii) [Reserved] 

(iv) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2014 and 

thereafter is 39,013 tons.

(v) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 780 tons.

(vi) [Reserved]

(18) Oklahoma. (i) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 

2012 is 36,567 tons and for 2013 is 22,694 tons.

(ii) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2012 is 731

tons and for 2013 is 454 tons.

(iii) [Reserved] 

(iv) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2014 and 

thereafter is 22,694 tons.

(v) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 454 tons.

(vi) [Reserved]
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

43 of 50

* * * * * 

(22) Texas. (i) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2012 

and 2013 is 65,560 tons.

(ii) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2012 and 

2013 is 2,556 tons.

(iii) The NOX ozone season Indian country new unit set-aside 

for 2012 and 2013 is 66 tons. 

(iv) The NOX ozone season trading budget for 2014 and 

thereafter is 65,560 tons.

(v) The NOX ozone season new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 2,556 tons.

(vi) The NOX ozone season Indian country new unit set-aside 

for 2014 and thereafter is 66 tons.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) The NOX ozone season variability limit for Arkansas is 

3,173 tons.

* * * * *

(4) The NOX ozone season variability limit for Georgia is 

5,049 tons.

* * * * *

(9) The NOX ozone season variability limit for Louisiana is 

3,804 tons.
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

44 of 50

* * * * *

(12) The NOX ozone season variability limit for Mississippi 

is 2,610 tons.

(13) The NOX ozone season variability limit for Missouri is 

4,431 tons.

* * * * *

(15) The NOX ozone season variability limit for New York is 

2,177 tons.

* * * * *

(17) The NOX ozone season variability limit for Ohio is 

8,193 tons.

(18) The NOX ozone season variability limit for Oklahoma is 

4,766 tons.

* * * * *

(22) The NOX ozone season variability limit for Texas is 

13,768 tons.

* * * * *

3. Section 97.610 is amended by revising:

a. Paragraph (a)(2);

b. Paragraphs (a)(7)(ii) and (v);

c. Paragraphs (a)(9) and (11); and 

d. Paragraphs (b)(2), (9), and (11) to read as follows:

§97.610 State SO2 Group 1 trading budgets, new unit set-
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

45 of 50

asides, Indian country new unit set-aside, and variability 

limits.

(a) * * *

(2) Indiana. (i) The SO2 trading budget for 2012 and 2013 is 

290,762 tons.

(ii) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2012 and 2013 is 8,723 

tons.

(iii) [Reserved] 

(iv) The SO2 trading budget for 2014 and thereafter is 

166,449 tons.

(v) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2014 and thereafter is 

4,993 tons.

(vi) [Reserved] 

* * * * *

(7) * * *

(ii) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2012 is 4,149 tons and 

for 2013 is 6,224 tons.

* * * * * 

(v) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2014 and thereafter is 

4,978 tons.

(vi) * * *

* * * * *

(9) New York. (i) The SO2 trading budget for 2012 and 2013 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

46 of 50

is 36,296 tons.

(ii) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2012 and 2013 is 690 

tons.

(iii) The SO2 Indian country new unit set-aside for 2012 and 

2013 is 36 tons. 

(iv) The SO2 trading budget for 2014 and thereafter is 

27,556 tons.

(v) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2014 and thereafter is 

523 tons.

(vi) The SO2 Indian country new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 28 tons.

* * * * *

(11) Ohio. (i) The SO2 trading budget for 2012 and 2013 is 

315,393 tons.

(ii) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2012 and 2013 is 6,308 

tons.

(iii) [Reserved] 

(iv) The SO2 trading budget for 2014 and thereafter is 

142,240 tons.

(v) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2014 and thereafter is 

2,845 tons.

(vi) [Reserved] 

* * * * *
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

47 of 50

(b) * * *

(2) The SO2 variability limit for Indiana is 29,961 tons.

* * * * *

(9) The SO2 variability limit for New York is 4,960 tons.

* * * * *

(11) The SO2 variability limit for Ohio is 25,603 tons.

* * * * *

4. Section 97.710 is amended by:

a. Revising paragraphs (a)(2)(iv) and (v);

b. Revising paragraphs (a)(3), (5), and (6); and 

c. Revising paragraphs (b)(2), (3), (5) and (6) to read as 

follows:

§97.710 State SO2 Group 2 trading budgets, new unit setasides, Indian country new unit set-aside, and variability 

limits.

(a) * * *

(2) * * *

(iv) The SO2 trading budget for 2014 and thereafter is 

135,565 tons.

(v) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2014 and thereafter is 

2,711 tons.

(vi) * * *

(3) Kansas. (i) The SO2 trading budget for 2012 and 2013 is 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

48 of 50

41,980 tons.

(ii) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2012 and 2013 is 798 

tons.

(iii) The SO2 Indian country new unit set-aside for 2012 and 

2013 is 42 tons. 

(iv) The SO2 trading budget for 2014 and thereafter is 

41,980 tons.

(v) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2014 and thereafter is 

798 tons.

(vi) The SO2 Indian country new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 42 tons.

* * * * *

(5) Nebraska. (i) The SO2 trading budget for 2012 and 2013 

is 68,162 tons.

(ii) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2012 and 2013 is 2,658 

tons.

(iii) The SO2 Indian country new unit set-aside for 2012 and 

2013 is 68 tons. 

(iv) The SO2 trading budget for 2014 and thereafter is 

68,162 tons.

(v) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2014 and thereafter is 

2,658 tons.

(vi) The SO2 Indian country new unit set-aside for 2014 and 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

49 of 50

thereafter is 68 tons.

(6) South Carolina. (i) The SO2 trading budget for 2012 and 

2013 is 96,633 tons.

(ii) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2012 and 2013 is 1,836 

tons.

(iii) The SO2 Indian country new unit set-aside for 2012 and 

2013 is 97 tons. 

(iv) The SO2 trading budget for 2014 and thereafter is 

96,633 tons.

(v) The SO2 new unit set-aside for 2014 and thereafter is 

1,836 tons.

(vi) The SO2 Indian country new unit set-aside for 2014 and 

thereafter is 97 tons.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) The SO2 variability limit for Georgia is 24,402 tons.

(3) The SO2 variability limit for Kansas is 7,556 tons.

* * * * *

(5) The SO2 variability limit for Nebraska is 12,269 tons.

(6) The SO2 variability limit for South Carolina is 17,394 

tons.

* * * * *
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

1 of 5

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 97

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491; FRL- ]

RIN 2060-AR35

Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce 

Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone: 

Part II

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing additional revisions to certain 

portions of the Transport Rule (Federal Implementation 

Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and 

Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals, 76 FR 48208 (August 

8, 2011). The final Transport Rule limits the interstate 

transport of emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur 

dioxide (SO2) that contribute harmful levels of fine 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

2 of 5

particle matter and ozone in downwind states. After the 

final rule was published, it was brought to our attention 

that there are some incorrect data assumptions that affect 

a few states’ budgets or new unit set-asides in the rule 

text. EPA proposed revisions to the final Transport Rule 

on October 14, 2011 (76 FR 63860) based on this new 

information and sought comment on additional unit-level 

information addressing post-combustion pollution control 

equipment and operational requirements necessitating noneconomic generation of a unit. EPA is finalizing the 

earlier specifically proposed revisions in a separate 

action. EPA has reviewed the information provided in 

comments addressing the topics described above and proposes 

to determine that the unit-level adjustments described in 

the preamble to the direct final are merited.

DATES: Written comments must be received by [INSERT DATE 

30 DAYS FROM PUBLICATION].

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID 

No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491, by mail to: Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Comments may also be 

submitted electronically or through hand delivery/courier 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

3 of 5

by following the detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES

section of the direct final rule located in the rules 

section of this Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gabrielle Stevens, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air Markets 

Division, MC 6204J, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460, telephone (202) 343-9252, 

e-mail at stevens.gabrielle@epa.gov. Electronic copies of 

this document can be accessed through the EPA Website at: 

http://epa.gov/airmarkets.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document proposes to take 

action on certain portions of the Transport Rule. We 

finalized a rule to address discrepancies in unit-specific 

modeling assumptions that affect the proposed calculation 

of Transport Rule state budgets in Florida, Louisiana, 

Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, 

Texas and Wisconsin, as well as new unit set-asides in 

Arkansas and Texas (see 76 FR 63860, October 14, 2011). We 

are issuing a direct final rule, in parallel with this 

proposal, based on comments received on the Revisions Rule 

proposal, to amend the August 8, 2011 final regulation (76 

FR 48208) by correcting annual NOX budgets in Georgia, 

Kansas, Missouri, New York, Ohio, and Texas; ozone-season 
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

4 of 5

NOX budgets in Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, 

Missouri, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas; SO2 budgets 

in Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, and 

South Carolina; and new unit set-aside budgets in Arkansas, 

Louisiana, and Missouri.

We have explained our reasons for this action in the 

preamble to the direct final rule. If we receive no 

significant adverse comment, on the direct final rule, EPA 

will withdraw the relevant portions of the rule and timely 

notice of the withdrawal will be published in the Federal 

Register. We would address all relevant public comments in 

any subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule.

We do not intend to institute a second comment period 

on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must 

do so at this time. For further information, please see 

the information provided in the ADDRESSES section of this 

document.
*** E.O. 12866 Review_CSAPR Rule Revisions Part II_RIN2060-AR35_FRN_2012-01-17 –

Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote, or Release During Review***

5 of 5

Revisions to Federal Implementation Plans to Reduce 

Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone: 

Part II

 (page 5 of 5)

Dated: ____________________

______________________________________________________

Lisa P. Jackson

Administrator.