38992 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

the state determines that the existing 

regional haze plan requires no further 

substantive revision at this time to 

achieve the RPGs for Class I areas 

affected by the state’s sources. The basis 

for the State’s negative declaration is the 

findings from the Progress Report, 

including the findings that: Visibility 

has improved at Class I areas (with the 

exception of the best-days visibility at 

SWAN as discussed above) in North 

Carolina; SO2 emissions from the State’s 

sources have decreased beyond the 2018 

projections in the regional haze plan; 

additional EGU control measures not 

relied upon in the State’s regional haze 

plan have occurred or will occur in the 

implementation period; and the EGU 

SO2 emissions in North Carolina are 

already below the levels projected for 

2018 in the regional haze plan and are 

expected to continue to trend 

downward. EPA proposes to conclude 

that North Carolina has adequately 

addressed 40 CFR 51.308(h) because the 

visibility trends at the Class I areas 

impacted by the State’s sources and the 

emissions trends of the State’s largest 

emitters of visibility-impairing 

pollutants indicate that the RPGs for 

Class I areas impacted by source in 

North Carolina will be met. 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve North 

Carolina’s Regional Haze Progress 

Report, SIP revision, submitted by the 

State on May 31, 2013, as meeting the 

applicable regional haze requirements 

set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h). 

EPA also proposes to approve the 

updated RPGs for North Carolina’s Class 

I areas. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely proposes to approve state 

law as meeting federal requirements and 

does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. For that reason, this proposed 

action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where 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 as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: June 1, 2016. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2016–14036 Filed 6–14–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2008–0603; FRL–9947–67– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Philadelphia County 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology Under the 1997 8-Hour 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

state implementation plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These 

revisions pertain to a demonstration that 

Philadelphia County (Philadelphia) 

meets the requirements for reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA) for nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) as ozone precursors 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). 

In this rulemaking action, EPA is 

proposing to approve three separate SIP 

revisions addressing RACT under the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for 

Philadelphia, including new or revised 

source-specific RACT determinations 

for fifteen major sources of NOX and/or 

VOC and certifications that certain 

previous source-specific RACT 

determinations for major sources of NOX

and/or VOC continue to adequately 

represent RACT under the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. EPA also proposes to 

convert the prior conditional approval 

of the Philadelphia RACT 

demonstration for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS to full approval, as 

Pennsylvania has met the obligations 

associated with the conditional 

approval. EPA therefore proposes to 

find that Pennsylvania has met all 

applicable RACT requirements under 

the CAA for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for Philadelphia. This action is 

being taken under the CAA. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before July 15, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2008–0603 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. For 

comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 

follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or removed 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 38993 

1See 44 FR 53782 (September 17, 1979); EPA’s 

1976 memorandum from Roger Strelow, Assistant 

Administrator for Air and Waste Management to 

Regional Administrators, ‘‘Guidance for 

Determining Acceptability of SIP Regulations in 

Non-attainment Areas’’ (December 9, 1976); and 

also, 72 FR 20586, 20610 (April 25, 2007). 2A major source in an ozone nonattainment area 

is defined as any stationary source that emits or has 

the potential to emit NOX and VOC emissions above 

a certain applicability threshold that is based on the 

classification of the ozone nonattainment area. See 

‘‘major stationary source’’ in 40 CFR 51.165. 3 ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard—Phase 1,’’ 

69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2001). 

4 ‘‘Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State 

Implementation Plan Requirements’’ Final Rule, 80 

FR 12264 (March 6, 2015). 

from Regulations.gov. For either manner 

of submission, 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, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emlyn Ve ́lez-Rosa, (215) 814–2038, or 

by email at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 

27, 2014, February 18, 2015, and April 

26, 2016, the Pennsylvania Department 

of Environmental Protection (PADEP) 

submitted on behalf of Philadelphia Air 

Management Services (AMS) three 

separate revisions to its SIP to satisfy 

the RACT requirements for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS for Philadelphia. 

Altogether, the Philadelphia RACT SIP 

revisions are intended to fulfill the 

conditions in EPA’s December 13, 2013 

conditional approval. 78 FR 75902. 

I. Background 

A. General 

Ground level ozone pollution 

(commonly referred to as smog) is 

formed when VOC react with NOX in 

the presence of sunlight. In order to 

reduce ozone concentrations in the 

ambient air, the CAA requires all 

nonattainment areas to apply controls 

on VOC and NOX emission sources to 

achieve emission reductions. Among 

effective control measures, RACT 

controls are a major group for reducing 

VOC and NOX emissions from stationary 

sources. 

Since the 1970’s, EPA has 

consistently interpreted RACT to mean 

the lowest emission limit that a 

particular source is capable of meeting 

by the application of the control 

technology that is reasonably available 

considering technological and economic 

feasibility.1 Section 172(c)(1) of the 

CAA provides that SIPs for 

nonattainment areas must include 

reasonably available control measures 

(RACM) for attainment of the NAAQS, 

including emissions reductions from 

existing sources through adoption of 

RACT. Sections 182(b)(2) and (f)(1) of 

the CAA require states with moderate, 

or worse, ozone nonattainment areas to 

implement RACT controls on each 

category of stationary sources covered 

by a control technique guideline (CTG) 

document issued by EPA and on all 

major stationary sources of VOC and 

NOX emissions located in the area.2

Pursuant to section 184(b) of the CAA, 

the same requirements for sources of 

NOX and VOC apply to any areas in an 

ozone transport region (OTR) 

established under section 184(a), 

therefore including marginal and 

moderate nonattainment areas as well 

attainment areas within an OTR. A 

single OTR has been established, 

comprised of 12 eastern states, or 

portions thereof, and the District of 

Columbia (hereafter, ‘‘the OTR’’). The 

entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

is part of the OTR. 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA 

revised the NAAQS for ground-level 

ozone, setting at 0.08 parts per million 

(ppm) averaged over an 8-hour time 

frame. On April 15, 2004, EPA issued 

final designations for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS, which included 

Philadelphia County as part of the 

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, 

PA-NJ-MD-DE moderate ozone 

nonattainment area. 69 FR 23858, at 

23931 (April 30, 2004). At the same 

time, EPA published the first phase of 

its final rule to implement the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS (Phase I Ozone 

Implementation Rule), in which EPA 

revoked the previous 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS for most areas of the country, 

effective on June 15, 2005, and 

established anti-backsliding principles 

to transition from implementing the 

revoked 1-hour ozone NAAQS to the 

more protective 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, as codified in 40 CFR 51.905.3

The nonattainment designation for 

Philadelphia under the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS, and its location in the 

OTR, triggered the Commonwealth’s 

obligation to submit a SIP revision 

addressing how it meets the CAA RACT 

requirements in Philadelphia under the 

standard. 

On March 12, 2008 (73 FR 16436), 

EPA significantly strengthened the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS by revising the 

primary 8-hour ozone standard to a 

level of 0.075 ppm. On March 6, 2015 

(80 FR 12264), EPA published a final 

rule for the implementation of the 2008 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, while at the same 

time revoking the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, effective on April 6, 2015.4

Consistent with EPA’s previous 

approach, the 2008 8-Hour Ozone 

Implementation Rule established antibacksliding principles to transition from 

implementing the revoked 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS to the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, as codified in 40 CFR 51.1100. 

In this rule, EPA clarified that RACT 

under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

among other requirements, continues to 

apply to a nonattainment area, in 

accordance with its designation and 

classification for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS at the time of the revocation of 

the standard. Therefore, 1997 8-hour 

ozone RACT continues to be an 

applicable requirement for Philadelphia. 

The implementation of RACT controls 

under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is 

required in Philadelphia for each 

category of VOC sources covered by a 

CTG document issued by EPA (i.e., CTG 

RACT) and all other major stationary 

sources of NOX and VOC (major source 

RACT or non-CTG RACT), as defined for 

a moderate nonattainment area. 

Philadelphia was also subject to the 

CAA RACT requirements under the 

1-hour ozone NAAQS, as it was 

designated as part of the PhiladelphiaWilmington-Trenton, PA-NJ-DE-MD 

severe ozone nonattainment area under 

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 

56694, 56822 (November 6, 1991). As a 

result, PADEP and AMS implemented 

numerous RACT controls in 

Philadelphia to meet the statutory RACT 

requirements under this previous 

standard. 

B. EPA’s Requirements Under the 1997 

8-Hour Ozone RACT 

On November 29, 2005, EPA 

published the second phase to its 

implementation rule to address 

nonattainment SIP requirements for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (the Phase 2 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38994 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

5 ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard—Phase 2,’’ 

70 FR 71612–71705 (November 29, 2005). 

6For more information, see the preamble of the 

final Phase 2 Ozone Implementation Rule for a 

discussion of EPA’s interpretation of the CAA 

RACT requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, in 70 FR 71652–71659 (November 29, 

2005). 

7The D.C. Circuit addressed whether reductions 

from the NOX SIP call could address NOX RACT. 

The issue as to whether CAIR satisfies NOX RACT 

for EGUs was not addressed by the D.C. Circuit 

because the D.C. Circuit had already remanded 

CAIR to EPA for further analysis at that time. See 

North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896; modified by 

550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008). In subsequent 

litigation, the rule that EPA promulgated to replace 

CAIR (i.e., the Cross State Air Pollution Rule or 

CSAPR) was initially vacated by the D.C. Circuit but 

upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. EPA v. EME 

Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). 

EPA began implementing CSAPR in January 2015. 

See 79 FR 71663 (December 3, 2014) (interim final 

rulemaking issued after D.C. Circuit lifted stay on 

CSAPR). Thus, EPA decided it would be 

appropriate to reconsider its prior determination 

that CAIR could satisfy NOX RACT in light of the 

earlier decision in NRDC v. EPA. See 79 FR 32892 

(June 9, 2014) (proposing removal of prior 

determination that CAIR could be NOX RACT). 

8AMR V section XV and AMR V section XVI 

address EPA’s RACT requirements as specified in 

the following CTGs: (1) ‘‘Control Techniques 

Guidelines for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair 

Operations (Surface Coating)’’ (61 FR 44050, August 

27, 1996), (2) ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic 

Compound Emissions from Air Oxidation Processes 

in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing 

Ozone Implementation Rule).5 This rule 

addressed, among other things, control 

and planning obligations as they apply 

to nonattainment areas under the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, including RACT 

and RACM. In this rule, EPA 

specifically required that states meet the 

RACT requirements under the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS, either through a 

certification that previously adopted 

RACT controls in their SIP revisions 

approved by EPA under the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS continue to represent 

adequate RACT control levels for 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS attainment 

purposes, or through the adoption of 

new or more stringent regulations that 

represent RACT control levels.6 A 

certification must be accompanied by 

appropriate supporting information 

such as consideration of information 

received during the public comment 

period and consideration of new data. 

Adoption of new RACT regulations 

should occur when states have new 

stationary sources not covered by 

existing RACT regulations, or when new 

data or technical information indicates 

that a previously adopted RACT 

measure does not represent a newly 

available RACT control level. EPA also 

requires states to submit a negative 

declaration if there are no CTG major 

sources of VOC and NOX emissions 

within the nonattainment area in lieu of 

or in addition to a certification. 

EPA particularly addressed controls 

for NOX emissions from electric 

generating units (EGUs) in the Phase 2 

Ozone Implementation Rule. EPA 

determined that the regional NOX

emissions reductions that result from 

either the NOX SIP Call or the Clean Air 

Interstate Rule (CAIR) for addressing 

interstate transport of ozone pollution, 

would meet the NOX RACT requirement 

for EGUs located in states included 

within the respective geographic 

regions. Thus, EPA concluded that the 

states did not need to perform a NOX

RACT analysis for sources subject to the 

state’s emission cap-and-trade program 

where such program has been adopted 

by the state and approved by EPA as 

meeting the NOX SIP Call requirements 

or, in states achieving the CAIR 

reductions solely from EGUs, the CAIR 

NOX requirements. 

In November 2008, several parties 

challenged the Phase 2 Ozone 

Implementation Rule, particularly, 

EPA’s determination that compliance by 

EGUs with the requirements of the NOX

SIP and/or CAIR could also be 

construed as compliance with RACT 

under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

As a result of this litigation, the United 

States Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) 

decided that such presumptions and 

determinations by EPA in the Phase 2 

Ozone Implementation Rule were 

inconsistent with the statutory 

requirements of section 172(c)(1) of the 

CAA. Because region-wide RACT-level 

emissions reductions do not meet the 

statutory requirement that the 

reductions be from sources in the 

nonattainment area, the D.C. Circuit 

found that EPA had not shown that 

compliance with NOX SIP Call would 

result in at least RACT-level reductions 

in emissions from sources within each 

nonattainment area. See NRDC v. EPA, 

571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009).7

C. EPA’s Conditional Approval for 

Philadelphia’s 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

RACT Demonstration 

On September 29, 2006, PADEP 

submitted, on behalf of AMS, a SIP 

revision purporting to address the RACT 

requirements for Philadelphia under the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 2006 

SIP revision consisted of a RACT 

demonstration for Philadelphia, 

including (1) a certification that 

previously adopted RACT regulations 

that were approved by EPA in 

Pennsylvania’s SIP for Philadelphia 

under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 

continue to represent RACT for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS implementation 

purposes; (2) the adoption of federally 

enforceable permits that represent CTG 

RACT control for four major VOC 

sources; and (3) a negative declaration 

that certain VOC source categories that 

would be covered by CTG documents do 

not exist in Philadelphia. 

EPA identified two deficiencies in the 

2006 SIP revision which precluded 

EPA’s approval. First, the 2006 SIP 

revision included as RACT certain 

provisions that relied on the NOX SIP 

Call, which in light of the 2009 D.C. 

Circuit decision in NRDC v. EPA 

regarding the inappropriateness of the 

NOX SIP Call as RACT, precluded EPA 

from approving the 2006 SIP revision. 

Specifically, the 2006 SIP submittal 

certified as RACT the following PADEP 

regulations: 25 Pa Code sections 145.1– 

145.100 (‘‘NOX Budget Trading 

Program’’), 25 Pa Code sections 

145.111–145.113 (‘‘Emissions of NOX

from Stationary Internal Combustion 

Engines’’), and 25 Pa Code sections 

145.141–144 (‘‘Emissions of NOX from 

Cement Manufacturing’’). Second, EPA 

also determined that the Philadelphia 

2006 SIP revision did not sufficiently 

address the source-specific RACT 

requirements for 46 major sources of 

NOX and/or VOC that were previously 

approved under the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS, per the SIP approved 

regulation in 25 Pa Code sections 

129.91–92, which AMS certified as 

RACT under the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

On June 22, 2010, PADEP submitted 

another RACT SIP revision addressing 

certain CTG RACT requirements that 

superseded portions of the RACT 

demonstration in the 2006 SIP revision. 

The 2010 SIP revision consisted of two 

new CTG regulations, Air Management 

Regulation (AMR) V section XV 

(‘‘Control of Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC) from Marine Vessel 

Coating Operations’’) and AMR V 

section XVI (‘‘Synthetic Organic 

Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) Air 

Oxidation, Distillation, and Reactor 

Processes’’), and related amendments to 

AMR V Section I (‘‘Definitions’’), as 

adopted by AMS on April 26, 2010, 

effective upon adoption. The 2010 SIP 

revision also included a negative 

declaration demonstrating that there are 

no sources in Philadelphia for the CTG 

source category of natural gas and 

gasoline processing plants. The CTG 

regulations adopted in 2010 superseded 

source-specific RACT determinations 

provided in the 2006 SIP revision, 

because the new provisions are as, if not 

more, stringent than those RACT 

requirements previously submitted in 

2006.8 Additionally, the 2010 SIP 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 38995 

Industry’’ (EPA–450/3–84–015, December 1984), 

and (3) ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions from Reactor Processes and Distillation 

Operations in Synthetic Organic Chemical 

Manufacturing Industry’’ (EPA–450/4–91–031, 

August 1993). 

9 In this action, EPA also withdrew its previous 

proposed rule published on August 26, 2008 (73 FR 

50270), proposing to fully approve the 2006 SIP 

revision addressing 1997 8-hour ozone RACT for 

Philadelphia. 

10The applicable ‘‘major source’’ thresholds for 

1997 8-hour ozone RACT purposes are 50 tons per 

year (TPY) of VOC and 100 TPY of NOX or greater 

of potential emissions for each respective pollutant, 

in light of the moderate ozone classification of 

Philadelphia for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, as 

well as its location in the OTR. 

revision clarified that in the 2006 SIP 

submission, AMS had erroneously 

defined two sources in Philadelphia 

under the CTG category for natural gas 

and gasoline processing plants, and for 

which AMS submitted source-specific 

RACT determinations in the 2006 SIP 

revision. For these reasons, EPA 

determined that the provisions in the 

2006 and 2010 SIP revisions were 

related in addressing Philadelphia’s 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS RACT 

obligation and were not separable for 

approval purposes as each SIP submittal 

contained provisions addressing RACT 

obligations. 

Pursuant to section 110(k)(4) of the 

CAA, on April 26, 2013, PADEP 

submitted, on behalf of AMS, a letter in 

which AMS committed to submit SIP 

revisions addressing the source-specific 

RACT requirements for major sources of 

NOX and/or VOC in Philadelphia under 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

including EGUs that were presumed to 

rely on the NOX SIP Call provisions to 

meet RACT. In the April 26, 2013 letter, 

AMS identified five sources that since 

the approval of the 1-hour ozone sourcespecific RACT determinations have 

adopted or will adopt additional 

controls that it believed represent RACT 

under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

and for which it would submit new 

source-specific RACT determinations: 

(1) Philadelphia Energy Solutions 

Refining and Marketing, LLC (formerly 

Sunoco Inc. (R&M)—Philadelphia), (2) 

Kraft Nabisco (formerly Nabisco Biscuit 

Co, and presently Mondelez), (3) 

Temple University—Health Sciences 

Campus, (4) GATX Terminals 

Corporation (presently, Kinder Morgan 

Liquids terminals, LLC), and (5) 

Honeywell International—Frankford 

Plant (formerly Sunoco Chemicals— 

Frankford Plant). Additionally, AMS 

indicated it would submit sourcespecific RACT determinations for five 

EGU sources in Philadelphia that relied 

on emissions reductions under the NOX

SIP Call as RACT including: (1) Exelon 

Generating Company—Delaware 

Station, (2) Exelon Generating 

Company—Richmond Station, (3) 

Exelon Generating Company— 

Schuylkill Station, (4) Veolia Energy— 

Edison Station (formerly TRIGEN— 

Edison Station), and (5) Veolia Energy— 

Schuylkill Station (formerly TRIGENSchuylkill Station). AMS needed to 

submit source-specific RACT 

determinations or alternative 

certifications to address RACT for any 

major NOX sources, such as EGUs, for 

which AMS relied in prior SIP 

submissions on the NOX SIP Call to 

address RACT for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, because EPA cannot approve 

as RACT provisions relying on the NOX

SIP Call. See NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 

1245. 

On June 19, 2013 (78 FR 36716), EPA 

proposed conditional approval of the 

Philadelphia 1997 8-hour ozone RACT 

demonstration included in both the 

2006 and 2010 RACT SIP revisions, 

based upon AMS’s commitment to 

submit additional SIP revisions to 

correct the deficiencies previously 

identified by EPA.9 In the June 19, 2013 

proposed conditional approval, EPA 

proposed that in order to correct the 

deficiencies in the Philadelphia 1997 

8-hour ozone RACT demonstration, 

AMS needed to provide a sourcespecific RACT analysis for each major 

NOX/VOC source subject to 25 Pa Code 

129.91–92 for which current controls do 

not currently and adequately represent 

RACT for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, including each of the 10 major 

NOX and/or VOC sources identified by 

AMS in the April 26, 2013 letter, or 

alternatively provide a certification that 

source-specific RACT controls for all 

other major sources of NOX and VOC in 

Philadelphia previously approved by 

EPA in Pennsylvania’s SIP for the 

1-hour ozone NAAQS continue to 

adequately represent RACT for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

On December 13, 2013 (78 FR 75902), 

EPA finalized its conditional approval 

of the Philadelphia 1997 8-hour ozone 

RACT demonstration, as provided in the 

2006 and 2010 SIP revisions, with the 

condition that Pennsylvania, on behalf 

of AMS, submits additional SIP 

revisions addressing source-specific 

RACT to address the deficiencies in the 

previously submitted 1997 8-hour ozone 

RACT demonstration. As stated in the 

December 13, 2013 final action, once 

EPA determines that AMS has satisfied 

this condition, EPA shall remove the 

conditional nature of such approval and 

the Philadelphia 1997 8-hour ozone 

RACT demonstration will receive at that 

time full approval status. For a detailed 

discussion of EPA’s conditional 

approval of Philadelphia’s 1997 8-hour 

ozone RACT demonstration and the 

identified deficiencies of the 2006 SIP 

revision, see 78 FR 75902 (December 13, 

2013) (final action) and 78 FR 36716 

(June 19, 2013) (proposed action). 

II. Summary of SIP Revisions 

To satisfy the requirements from 

EPA’s December 13, 2013 conditional 

approval, PADEP has submitted to EPA, 

on behalf of AMS, subsequent SIP 

revisions addressing the source-specific 

RACT requirements for major sources in 

Philadelphia subject to 25 Pa Code 

129.91–92. On June 27, 2014, February 

18, 2015, and April 26, 2016, PADEP 

submitted to EPA, on behalf of AMS, 

three separate SIP revisions pertaining 

to the Philadelphia 1997 8-hour ozone 

RACT demonstration (hereafter 

collectively referred to as ‘‘the 

Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions’’). 

AMS provided documentation in the 

Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions to 

support that RACT has been met for all 

major sources of NOX and/or VOC in 

Philadelphia, including source-specific 

RACT determinations for affected 

emission units at each major source 

subject to 25 Pa Code 129.91–92.10

Specifically, AMS evaluated a total of 

25 major NOX and/or VOC sources in 

Philadelphia for RACT. 

On April 26, 2016, PADEP also 

submitted a letter, on behalf of AMS, 

withdrawing from the 2006 SIP revision 

the certification of the Pennsylvania 

rules related to the NOX SIP Call as 1997 

8-hour ozone RACT, specifically 25 Pa 

Code sections 145.1–145.100, 25 Pa 

Code sections 145.111–145.113, and 25 

Pa Code sections 145.141–144. In the 

letter, PADEP reaffirms that AMS is no 

longer relying on the SIP approved 

provisions related to the NOX SIP Call 

as 1997 8-hour ozone RACT for any 

sources in Philadelphia. On May 4, 

2016, EPA submitted a letter accepting 

PADEP’s request for withdrawal of these 

provisions from the 2006 SIP revision, 

and acknowledging that this portion of 

the submittal is no longer pending 

before EPA for a final action. 

The June 27, 2014 SIP revision 

consists of a source-specific RACT 

determination for certain emissions 

units (6 process heaters) at Philadelphia 

Energy Solutions Refining and 

Marketing, LLC (PES). The February 19, 

2015 SIP revision addresses RACT 

requirements for the 25 major sources of 

NOX and/or VOC in Philadelphia, 

including the remaining emissions units 

at PES that were not addressed in the 

June 27, 2014 SIP revision. The April 

26, 2016 SIP revision amends the RACT 

determinations for 15 sources that were 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38996 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

11The CTG RACT requirements are those 

specified in regulations in the Pennsylvania SIP and 

are consistent with EPA’s CTGs for the affected 

source categories. Presumptive RACT requirements 

are those specified in 25 Pa Code section 129.93, 

which are alternative compliance option for sources 

subject to source-specific RACT. 

previously addressed in the February 

19, 2015 SIP revision. 

In the Philadelphia RACT SIP 

revisions, AMS includes a RACT 

evaluation for each major source of NOX

and/or VOC in Philadelphia. AMS 

identifies applicable RACT 

requirements for the existing emissions 

units at each major source located in 

Philadelphia, including CTG RACT, 

presumptive RACT requirements, and 

source-specific RACT requirements.11

AMS identified 16 major sources of NOX

and/or VOC in Philadelphia subject to 

Pennsylvania’s source-specific RACT 

requirements, as summarized in Table 1, 

including 14 major sources subject to 

previous source-specific RACT 

determinations and 2 major sources 

newly subject to source-specific RACT. 

TABLE 1—MAJOR NOX AND/OR VOC SOURCES IN PHILADELPHIA SUBJECT TO SOURCE-SPECIFIC RACT UNDER THE 1997 

8-HOUR OZONE NAAQS 

Major source Plant ID No. 

1-Hr 

ozone 

RACT 

source? 

Major source 

pollutant 

New or revised 

source-specific 

determination? 

(‘‘Yes’’ or ‘‘No’’) 

New or revised RACT 

permit 

(effective date) 

Exelon Generating Company—Delaware Station.04901 X NOX .................. No.

Exelon Generating Company—Richmond Station.04903 X NOX .................. Yes ................... PA–51–4903 (02/09/

16). 

Exelon Generating Company—Schuylkill Station.04904 X NOX .................. No.

Honeywell—Frankford Plant [formerly, Sunoco 

Chemical—Frankford Plant].

01551 X NOX and VOC .. Yes ................... PA–51–1151 (02/09/

16). 

Kinder Morgan Liquids Terminals, LLC [formerly, GATX Terminals Corp.].05003 X VOC .................. Yes ................... PA–51–5003 (02/09/

16). 

Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division (NSWCCD).09724 X NOX .................. Yes ................... PA–51–9724 (02/09/

16). 

Newman & Company, Inc. ............................... 03489 X NOX .................. No.

PaperWorks Industries Inc. [formerly, Jefferson Smurfit, Corp./Container Corp. of America].01566 X NOX .................. Yes ................... PA–51–1566 (01/09/

15). 

Philadelphia Energy Solutions—Refining and 

Marketing, LLC [formerly, Sunoco Inc. 

(R&M)—Philadelphia].

01501/01517 X NOX and VOC .. Yes ................... PA–51–01501 and 

PA–51–01517 (02/

09/16). 

Philadelphia Gas Works—Richmond Plant ...... 04922 X NOX .................. Yes ................... PA–51–4922 (01/09/

15). 

Philadelphia Prison System .............................. 09519 ........................ NOX .................. Yes ................... PA–51–9519 (02/09/

16). 

Plain Products Terminals, LLC [formerly, 

Maritank Philadelphia, Inc. and Exxon Company, USA].

05013 X VOC .................. Yes ................... PA–51–05013 (02/09/

16). 

Temple—Health Sciences Campus ................. 08906 X NOX .................. Yes ................... PA–51–8906 (01/09/

15). 

Temple—Main Campus .................................... 08905 ........................ NOX .................. Yes ................... PA–51–8905 (01/09/

15). 

Veolia Energy—Edison Station [formerly 

TRIGEN- Edison Station].

04902 X NOX .................. Yes ................... PA–51–4902 (01/09/

15). 

Veolia Energy—Schuylkill Station [TRIGEN— 

Schuylkill Station]/Grays Ferry Cogeneration 

Partnership/Veolia Energy Efficiency, LLC a.

04942/04944/

10459 

X NOX .................. Yes ................... PA–51–4942 (02/09/

16)/PA–51–4944 

(01/09/15)/PA–51– 

10459 (01/09/15). 

aGrays Ferry Cogeneration Plant, Veolia Schuylkill, and Veolia Energy Efficiency have been aggregated as a single major source after the 1- 

hour RACT determination. AMS submitted RACT documentation for each facility separately, although considering RACT applicability as a single 

major source of NOX. 

The source-specific RACT 

determinations submitted by AMS 

consist of an evaluation of all 

reasonably available controls at this 

time for each affected emissions unit, 

resulting in an AMS determination of 

what specific control requirements, if 

any, satisfy RACT for that particular 

unit. The adoption of new or additional 

controls or the revisions to existing 

controls as RACT were specified as 

requirements in new or revised federally 

enforceable permits (hereafter RACT 

permits) issued by AMS for the source. 

The new or revised RACT permits have 

been submitted as part of the 

Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions for 

EPA’s approval in the Pennsylvania SIP 

under 40 CFR 52.2020(d)(1). For sources 

subject to previous RACT 

determinations specified in RACT 

permits under 40 CFR 52.2020(d)(1) for 

which AMS is revising or adopting 

additional source-specific controls, the 

revised RACT permits, once approved 

by EPA, will supersede those permits 

currently in the SIP. All new or revised 

RACT permits submitted by AMS are 

listed in the last column of Table 1. 

As part of the source-specific RACT 

determinations, AMS is also certifying 

for certain emissions units at major 

sources subject to source-specific RACT 

determinations under the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS, which are part of the 

Pennsylvania SIP at 40 CFR 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 38997 

52.2020(d)(1), that the existing RACT 

controls continue to represent RACT for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For 

these units, AMS did not propose 

additional revisions. 

AMS submitted source-specific RACT 

determinations for nine of the ten major 

sources identified in EPA’s conditional 

approval. AMS did not submit the 

required source-specific RACT 

determination for Kraft Nabisco 

(formerly Nabisco Biscuit Co, and 

presently Mondelez), because it 

concluded that this source is no longer 

considered a major source of NOX and 

VOC for 1997 8-hour ozone RACT. As 

clarified in the Philadelphia RACT SIP 

revisions, in 2012, Mondelez took 

federally enforceable facility-wide limits 

of 25 tons per year for both NOX and 

VOC emissions, restricting the facility’s 

potential emissions under the 

applicable thresholds for 1997 8-hour 

ozone RACT. EPA concurs with AMS’s 

conclusion regarding the operational 

status of Mondelez and thus determines 

that the condition in the December 13, 

2013 conditional approval to submit a 

source-specific RACT determination 

under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

for this source is no longer applicable. 

AMS is further certifying that there 

are 27 additional NOX and/or VOC 

sources in Philadelphia subject to 

source-specific RACT determinations 

for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the 

Pennsylvania SIP at 40 CFR 

52.2020(d)(1) that are no longer subject 

to RACT for purposes of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. AMS clarifies that 18 of 

these sources have permanently shut 

down, while the remaining nine are no 

longer considered major sources of 

NOX/VOC emissions for RACT under 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (less 

than 100 or 50 TPY, respectively). 

Sources that remain in operation must 

still comply with the SIP approved 

1-hour ozone RACT determinations, 

although not subject to 1997 8-hour 

ozone RACT. AMS is formally 

requesting EPA to remove from the SIP 

the 18 source-specific RACT 

determinations approved under the 

1-hour ozone NAAQS, as codified in 40 

CFR 52.2020(d)(1). The shutdown 

sources and their respective SIP 

approved RACT Permits are listed in 

Table 2. AMS certifies that none of these 

shutdown facilities have active 

operating permits or air pollution 

licenses for any equipment, and that 

under Pennsylvania and Philadelphia 

regulations, they cannot operate until 

further notification and issuance of 

applicable permits. 

TABLE 2—SHUTDOWN MAJOR SOURCES OF NOX AND/OR VOC IN PHILADELPHIA SUBJECT TO PREVIOUS SOURCESPECIFIC RACT DETERMINATIONS

Source 

SIP approved RACT 

permit 

(effective date) 

EPA’s SIP approval date 

Aldan Rubber Company ......................................................................................................... PA–51–1561 (07/21/00) 10/30/01, 66 FR 54691. 

Amoco Oil Company ............................................................................................................... PA–51–5011 (05/29/15) 10/31/01, 66 FR 54936. 

Arbill Industries, Inc ................................................................................................................ PA–51–3811 (07/27/99) 10/30/01, 66 FR 54691. 

Braceland Brothers, Inc .......................................................................................................... PA–51–3679 (07/14/00) 10/30/01, 66 FR 54691. 

Budd Company ....................................................................................................................... PA–51–1564 (12/28/95) 12/15/00, 65 FR 78418. 

Eastman Chemical [formerly, McWhorter Technologies, Inc.] ............................................... PA–51–3542 (07/27/99) 10/30/01, 66 FR 54691. 

Graphic Arts, Incorporated ..................................................................................................... PA–51–2260 (07/14/00) 10/30/01, 66 FR 54691. 

Interstate Brands Corporation ................................................................................................ PA–51–5811 (04/10/95) 12/15/00, 65 FR 78418. 

Kurz Hastings, Inc. ................................................................................................................. PA–51–1585 (05/29/95) 10/31/01, 66 FR 54936. 

Lawrence McFadden, Inc ....................................................................................................... PA–51–2074 (06/11/97) 10/31/01, 66 FR 54936. 

O’Brien (Philadelphia) Cogeneration, Inc.—Northeast Water Pollution Control Plant ........... PA–51–1533 (07/21/00) 10/30/01, 66 FR 54691. 

O’Brien (Philadelphia) Cogeneration, Inc.—Southwest Water Pollution Control Plant .......... PA–51–1534 (07/21/00) 10/30/01, 66 FR 54691. 

Pearl Pressman Liberty .......................................................................................................... PA–51–7721 (07/24/00) 10/30/01, 66 FR 54691. 

Philadelphia Baking Company ................................................................................................ PA–51–3048 (04/10/95) 10/31/01, 66 FR 54936. 

Rohm and Haas Company—Philadelphia .............................................................................. PA–51–1531 (07/27/99) 10/31/01, 66 FR 54942. 

Tasty Baking Co ..................................................................................................................... PA–51–2054 (04/04/95) 10/31/01, 66 FR 54942. 

Transit America, Inc ................................................................................................................ PA–51–1563 (06/11/97) 11/5/01, 66 FR 55880. 

SBF Communications ............................................................................................................. PA–51–2197 (07/21/00) 10/31/01, 66 FR 54942. 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of SIP Revisions 

After thorough review and evaluation 

of the information provided by AMS in 

the Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions for 

major sources of NOX and/or VOC in 

Philadelphia, EPA finds that the AMS 

source-specific RACT determinations 

and conclusions provided are 

reasonable and address RACT 

requirements for Philadelphia for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in 

accordance with the Phase 2 Ozone 

Implementation Rule and latest 

available information. EPA finds that 

the proposed source-specific RACT 

controls and emissions limits in the 

Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions 

adequately meet the CAA RACT 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for each major source of NOX

and VOC in Philadelphia not covered by 

Pennsylvania RACT regulations. 

EPA also finds that the all proposed 

revisions to previously SIP approved 

RACT requirements, as discussed in the 

Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions will 

result in equivalent or additional 

reductions of NOX and/or VOC 

emissions and should not interfere with 

any applicable requirement concerning 

attainment or reasonable further 

progress with the NAAQS or interfere 

with other applicable CAA requirement 

in section 110(l) of the CAA. In the case 

of AMS removal of RACT requirements 

from the SIP that are no longer 

applicable, as the sources have been 

permanently removed, EPA finds these 

SIP revisions to be adequate and will 

not have any adverse impact to air 

quality. EPA’s complete analysis of the 

Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions is 

included in the technical support 

document (TSD) available in the docket 

for this rulemaking action and available 

on line at http://www.regulations.gov. 

As discussed earlier, EPA determined 

in the December 15, 2013 conditional 

approval that the Philadelphia 1997 

8-hour ozone RACT demonstration as 

provided in the 2006 and 2010 SIP 

revisions adequately met RACT under 

the CAA, with exception of the sourcespecific RACT requirements in 25 PA 

Code sections 129.91–92 and the NOX

SIP Call related provisions in the 

Pennsylvania SIP in 25 Pa Code sections 

145.1–145.100, 25 Pa Code sections 

145.111–145.113, and 25 Pa Code 

sections 145.141–144. In this proposed 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38998 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

12EPA’s evaluation of the 2006 and 2010 SIP 

revisions is provided in the June 19, 2013 proposed 

conditional approval and related technical support 

document dated May 22, 2013, and will not be 

restated here. See 78 FR 36716. 

rulemaking action, EPA finds that the 

subsequent Philadelphia RACT SIP 

revisions adequately correct the two 

deficiencies identified by EPA on the 

Philadelphia RACT demonstration, as 

provided in the 2006 and 2010 SIP 

revisions, and thus satisfy the December 

15, 2013 conditional approval. Based on 

PADEP’s withdrawal of the certified 

provisions relying on NOX SIP Call as 

RACT from the 2006 SIP revision, EPA 

finds that the remaining certified NOX

and/or VOC regulations, the CTG 

negative declarations, and the recently 

adopted regulatory provisions in AMR V 

sections XV and XVI, submitted as part 

of the 2006 and 2010 SIP revisions, are 

consistent with the latest available 

information and EPA’s guidance and 

therefore adequately meet RACT for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.12

Consequently, EPA finds that the 

Philadelphia 1997 8-hour ozone RACT 

demonstration, as provided within the 

SIP revisions submitted to EPA from 

2006 to 2016, address RACT under the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for all NOX

and/or VOC major sources in 

Philadelphia through: (1) Compliance 

with previously approved RACT 

regulations in the Pennsylvania SIP, 

including but not limited to CTG 

regulations (in the 2006 and 2010 SIP 

revisions); (2) submission of negative 

declarations (in the 2006 and 2010 SIP 

revisions) for CTG source categories; (3) 

the adoption of additional sourcespecific controls and/or limits in major 

sources, included in federally 

enforceable permits and submitted as 

part of the SIP revisions; and/or (4) 

certifications for major sources subject 

to source-specific RACT controls 

previously approved into the SIP, which 

controls continue to represent RACT 

under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Additional details regarding 

Philadelphia’s source-specific RACT 

determinations, full background on the 

Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions, and 

EPA’s detailed evaluation of the 

Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions can be 

found in the TSD prepared for this 

rulemaking action and available in the 

docket for this rulemaking at http://

www.regulations.gov. 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA proposes to approve the 

Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions 

submitted on June 27, 2014, February 

18, 2015, and April 26, 2016 for all 

major sources of NOX and/or VOC in 

Philadelphia subject to 25 Pa Code 

129.91–92, as adequately meeting the 

CAA RACT requirements for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is proposing 

to incorporate by reference in the 

Pennsylvania SIP, via RACT permits, 

source-specific RACT determinations 

under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

for certain major sources of NOX and 

VOC emissions. 

EPA also proposes to find that the 

Philadelphia RACT SIP revisions satisfy 

the conditions established by EPA in its 

December 13, 2013 conditional approval 

to correct the deficiencies of the 

previously submitted Philadelphia 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS RACT 

demonstration. For this reason, EPA 

also proposes to remove the conditional 

nature of the December 13, 2013 

conditional approval and grant full 

approval to the Philadelphia 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS RACT 

demonstration, as submitted on 

September 29, 2006 and June 22, 2010 

as SIP revisions. 

EPA also proposes in this rulemaking 

action that the certified and recently 

adopted NOX and VOC regulations and 

the negative declarations, included in 

the September 29, 2006 and June 22, 

2010 SIP revisions, meet RACT under 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Therefore, EPA also proposes to 

incorporate by reference into the 

Pennsylvania SIP the regulatory 

provisions in AMR V sections I, XV, and 

XVI, as amended or adopted in April 26, 

2010 and effective upon adoption. 

Finally, EPA proposes that the 

Philadelphia 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS RACT demonstration, included 

within the September 29, 2006, June 22, 

2010, June 27, 2014, February 18, 2015, 

and April 26, 2016 SIP revisions, 

satisfies the RACT requirements under 

the CAA for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, in accordance with the Phase 

2 Ozone Implementation Rule. EPA is 

soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this proposed rulemaking action, 

EPA is proposing to include in a final 

EPA rule, regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by 

reference source-specific RACT 

determinations under the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS for certain major sources 

of NOX and VOC emissions, and 

Philadelphia CTG RACT regulations of 

AMR V sections I, XV, and XVI, as 

amended or adopted in April 26, 2010 

and effective upon adoption. EPA has 

made, and will continue to make, these 

documents generally available 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and/or may be 

viewed at the appropriate EPA office 

(see the ADDRESSES section of this 

preamble for more information). In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by 

reference the regulatory provisions 

under 40 CFR 52.2020(c) and the 

source-specific RACT requirements 

under 40 CFR 52.2020(d)(1). 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 38999 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule, 

regarding the Philadelphia RACT 

requirements under the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS, does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP is not approved 

to apply in Indian country located in the 

state, and EPA notes that it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: June 3, 2016. 

Shawn M. Garvin, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2016–14102 Filed 6–14–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2015–0238, FRL–9947–68- 

Region 1] 

Air Plan Approval; CT; NOX Emission 

Trading Orders as Single Source SIP 

Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

Connecticut. This revision continues to 

allow facilities to create and/or use 

emission credits using NOX Emission 

Trading and Agreement Orders (TAOs) 

to comply with the NOX emission limits 

required by Regulations of Connecticut 

State Agencies (RCSA) section 22a–174– 

22 (Control of Nitrogen Oxides). The 

intended effect of this action is to 

propose approval of the individual 

trading orders to allow facilities to 

determine the most cost-effective way to 

comply with the state regulation. This 

action is being taken in accordance with 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before July 15, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R01–OAR–2015–0238 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Dahl.Donald@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, 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, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Donald Dahl, Air Permits, Toxics, and 

Indoor Programs Unit, Office of 

Ecosystem Protection, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, 5 Post 

Office Square, Suite 100, (OEP05–2), 

Boston, MA 02109–3912, phone number 

(617) 918–1657, fax number (617) 918– 

0657, email Dahl.Donald@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background and Purpose. 

II. Analysis of State Submission 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background and Purpose 

On November 15, 2011, the 

Connecticut Department of Energy and 

Environmental Protection (CT DEEP) 

submitted a formal revision to its State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). This SIP 

revision consists of eighty-nine sourcespecific Trading Agreement and Orders 

(TAOs) that allow twenty-four 

individual stationary sources of nitrogen 

oxide (NOX) emissions to create and/or 

trade NOX emission credits in order to 

ensure more effective compliance with 

EPA SIP-approved state regulations for 

reducing NOX emissions. We previously 

approved source-specific TAOs of the 

same kind issued by CT DEEP under 

this program for these same sources on 

September 28, 1999 (64 FR 52233), 

March 23, 2001 (66 FR 16135), and 

September 9, 2013 (78 FR 54962). The 

SIP submittal also includes Consent 

Order 8029A issued to Hamilton 

Sundstrand which addresses Volatile 

Organic Compound (VOC) emissions. 

In our September 9, 2013 approval, 

EPA acted on most of the TAOs 

contained in CT DEEP’s July 1, 2004 SIP 

revision submission to EPA. At that 

time, EPA did not act on (1) TAO 8021 

issued to Pfizer; (2) TAO 8246 issued to 

Sikorsky Aircraft; (3) TAO 8110A issued 

to Yale University; and (4) Consent 

Order 7019A issued to Hamilton 

Sundstrand Corporation. On May 29, 

2015, CT DEEP revised its July 1, 2004 

SIP revision submittal to EPA by 

modifying TAO 8110A. Today we are 

acting on the modified version of TAO 

8110A. EPA will take action on TAOs 

8246 and 8021 at a future date. Lastly, 

on April 22, 2014 the CT DEEP 

withdrew Consent Order 7019A from 

the 2004 SIP submittal. 

The CAA requires states to develop 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) regulations for all 

major stationary sources of NOX in areas 

which have been classified as 

‘‘moderate,’’ ‘‘serious,’’ ‘‘severe,’’ and 

‘‘extreme’’ as well as in all areas of the 

Ozone Transport Region (OTR). EPA has 

defined RACT as the lowest emission 

limitation that a particular source is 

capable of meeting by the application of 

control technology that is reasonably 

available considering technological and 

economic feasibility (44 FR 53762; 

September 17, 1979). This requirement 

is established by sections 182(b)(2), 

182(f), and 184(b) of the CAA. 

Connecticut, as part of the OTR as 

well as being designated nonattainment 

for ozone, established NOX emission 

limits for existing major sources in order 

to meet the RACT requirement. The 

NOX emission limits are codified in 

Regulations of Connecticut State 

Agencies (RCSA) section 22a–174–22 

(Control of Nitrogen Oxides). These 

state regulations were last approved by 

EPA into the Connecticut SIP on 

October 6, 1997. (See 62 FR 52016). 

As stated above, when determining 

what constitutes RACT for a source, a 

state and EPA need to consider both 

technology and economic feasibility. 

For example, it is technically possible 

for a source to install pollution control 

devices in series to further reduce 

emissions. However, if a state and EPA 


ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS