72406 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 223 / Thursday, November 19, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0666; FRL–9937–17– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; District 

of Columbia; Regulation To Limit 

Nitrogen Oxides Emissions From 

Large Non-Electric Generating Units 

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 District of 

Columbia Department of Energy and 

Environment (DOEE). This revision caps 

emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) from 

large non-electric generating units (nonEGUs) to meet the requirements of 

EPA’s NOX SIP Call. This action is being 

taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 21, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2015–0666 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0666, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, 

Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. 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. EPA–R03–OAR–2015– 

0666. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

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 email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email 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. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available in 

www.regulations.gov or may be viewed 

during normal business hours at the Air 

Protection Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the District of Columbia 

Department of Energy and Environment, 

Air Quality Division, 1200 1st Street 

NE., 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20002. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marilyn Powers, (215) 814–2308, or by 

email at powers.marilyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 

19, 2015, DOEE submitted, as a revision 

to its SIP, a regulation to limit NOX

emissions from the non-EGUs in the 

District that are subject to EPA’s NOX

SIP call. 

I. Background 

On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), 

EPA issued a finding that required 22 

states and the District of Columbia to 

submit SIPs to address the regional 

transport of ground level ozone that was 

significantly contributing to 

nonattainment or interfering with 

maintenance for the 1-hour and 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in downwind areas, 

known as the NOX SIP Call. The October 

27, 1998 rulemaking action established 

a model trading rule under 40 CFR part 

96 that states could adopt to comply 

with the reduction requirements of the 

NOX SIP Call, commonly referred to as 

the NOX Budget Trading Program 

(NBTP). The NBTP established under 

the NOX SIP Call applied to electric 

generating units (EGUs) greater than 25 

megawatts electric (25 MWe) and nonEGUs (large industrial boilers and 

turbines) with a maximum rated heat 

input capacity greater than 250 million 

British thermal units per hour (mmbtu/ 

hr). To comply with the NOX SIP Call, 

the District submitted a SIP revision that 

incorporated by reference the 40 CFR 

part 96 model trading rule. On 

November 1, 2001 (66 FR 55099), the 

revision was approved into the District 

of Columbia SIP. 

On May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162), EPA 

promulgated the Clean Air Interstate 

Rule (CAIR), which required 28 states 

and the District of Columbia to reduce 

NOX and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions 

that were significantly contributing to 

downwind nonattainment and 

interfering with maintenance of the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard and the 

1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

annual standard. The May 12, 2005 

rulemaking established model trading 

rules for EGUs that states could adopt to 

comply with their reduction obligations 

under CAIR. The NOX SIP Call 

requirements continued to apply, and 

the CAIR model trading rules included 

a CAIR NOX ozone season trading 

program that was coordinated with the 

NOX SIP Call, replacing the NBTP as it 

applied to EGUs for those states that 

chose to participate in the CAIR trading 

program. In addition, as part of their 

CAIR SIP, states had the option of 

expanding the applicability provisions 

of the CAIR NOX ozone season trading 

program to include the non-EGUs that 

were trading under the NBTP. Thus, a 

state that elected to have non-EGUs 

participate in the CAIR NOX ozone 

season trading program would meet its 

NOX SIP Call obligations for both the 

EGUs and non-EGUs that were formerly 

trading under the NBTP through the 

CAIR trading program. 

On April 28, 2006 (71 FR 25328), EPA 

promulgated Federal implementation 

plans (FIPs) for all States covered by 

CAIR in order to ensure that the 

emission reductions required by CAIR 

were achieved on schedule. The CAIR 

FIPs, which applied only to EGUs, 

required participation in the CAIR 

trading programs. The CAIR FIP trading 

programs imposed essentially the same 

requirements as, and were integrated 

with, the respective CAIR SIP trading 

programs. Thus a state subject to the 

CAIR FIP would be meeting its NOX SIP 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 223 / Thursday, November 19, 2015 / Proposed Rules 72407 

1On January 1, 2015, the trading programs under 

the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) 

replaced the trading programs under CAIR. EPA 

had promulgated CSAPR to replace CAIR after the 

D.C. Circuit remanded CAIR to EPA in 2008. See 

North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 

2008). See also 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011) 

(promulgating CSAPR). After litigation on the 

merits of CSAPR, EPA began implementing CSAPR 

in 2015. See EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, 

L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). See also 79 FR 71663 

(December 3, 2014) (interim final rulemaking 

adjusting CSAPR’s implementation dates). CSAPR 

does not apply to the District of Columbia. The 

District has no EGUs meeting the applicability 

criteria under CSAPR since the only EGU in the 

District permanently shut down in 2012. With this 

shut down, the District therefore also no longer has 

any EGU obligations under the NOX SIP Call. 

2Applicable non-EGUs are the non-EGUs that 

were subject to the NOX SIP Call, including large 

industrial boilers and turbines with a maximum 

rated heat input capacity greater than 250 mmbtu/ 

hr. 

Call requirements with respect to its 

EGUs. Upon approval of a SIP revision 

implementing CAIR, a state’s CAIR FIP 

would be withdrawn. 

Subsequently, EPA discontinued the 

NBTP in 2008. The District of Columbia, 

however, did not submit a CAIR SIP. 

Therefore it became subject to the CAIR 

FIP in January 2009, and its NOX SIP 

Call reductions for EGUs that were 

trading in the NBTP were met by the 

CAIR NOX ozone season trading 

program under the FIP.1 However, 

because the CAIR FIP did not have an 

option for inclusion of non-EGUs as 

trading participants, the District was 

required to submit a SIP revision to 

demonstrate compliance with its NOX

SIP Call state budget for non-EGUs, in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 51.121. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

On June 19, 2015, DOEE submitted a 

SIP revision that addresses NOX

reductions from its non-EGUs to meet 

its obligations under the NOX SIP Call. 

The submission removes, from the 

District’s SIP, regulation Title 20 DCMR 

Chapter 10—Nitrogen Oxides Emissions 

Budget Program. Sections 1000 through 

1013 of 20 DCMR Chapter 10 comprised 

the District’s Ozone Transport 

Commission (OTC) NOX Budget 

Program, which preceded the NOX SIP 

Call trading program, and section 1014 

incorporated by reference the NBTP. 

This submission replaces this regulation 

with revised Chapter 10—Air Quality— 

Non-EGU Limits on Nitrogen Oxides 

Emissions. The revised Chapter 10 

regulation establishes a 25 ton ozone 

season NOX emissions cap on applicable 

non-EGUs 2 in the District, and allocates 

the cap to the non-EGUs located at the 

U.S. General Services Administration 

Central (GSA) Heating and Refrigeration 

Plant, with a reallocation required 

whenever a new non-EGU in the District 

becomes subject to the NOX SIP Call. 

The regulation also requires continuous 

emissions monitoring (CEMs) of NOX

emissions, recordkeeping and reporting 

pursuant to 40 CFR part 75 to ensure 

compliance with the District’s non-EGU 

emissions cap. The submission includes 

a revision to an associated definition 

and an abbreviation in the District’s 

regulations to ensure consistency with 

NOX SIP Call requirements. The 

submission also removes the obsolete 

requirements in 20 DCMR Chapter 10 

for the OTC NOX Budget Program 

because the program ended in 2003 

upon the start of the EPA NBTP under 

the NOX SIP Call. 

Under section 110(l) of the CAA, EPA 

may not approve a revision of a plan if 

the revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress or any other applicable 

requirement under section 110 of the 

CAA. EPA finds the proposed removal 

of the regulations for the discontinued 

OTC and NOX SIP Call trading programs 

from the District’s SIP will not interfere 

with attainment or reasonable further 

progress of any NAAQS nor interfere 

with any other applicable CAA 

requirement. First, the revision to the 

SIP merely removes outdated provisions 

from the SIP (i.e., the NBTP and OTC 

program) which are no longer effective. 

Second, the District’s emissions budget 

under the NOX SIP Call was more 

stringent than the budget under the OTC 

NOX Budget Program thus providing for 

greater NOX reductions and protection 

of the NAAQS so removal of the OTC 

program has no effect on the NAAQS. 

Likewise, the CAIR NOX Ozone Season 

trading program budget was designed to 

replace the NBTP for EGUs and was 

more stringent than the NOX SIP Call 

budget, thus providing greater NOX

reductions and protection of the 

NAAQS than the NBTP. As the District 

no longer has any EGUs subject to the 

NOX SIP Call nor to CSAPR which 

replaced CAIR, removal of the NBTP 

from the SIP has no effect on NOX

emissions in the District. Finally, 

approval of this proposed SIP revision 

will maintain the NOX emission 

reduction requirements of the NOX SIP 

Call for the District’s non-EGUs and 

allow the District to meet its remaining 

NOX SIP Call emissions budget. As the 

District no longer has any EGUs, the 

District has no further obligations under 

CSAPR, CAIR or the NOX SIP Call 

regarding EGUs. Therefore, removal of 

the previous trading programs from the 

District’s SIP does not interfere with 

attainment or reasonable further 

progress on any NAAQS nor interfere 

with any applicable requirement under 

section 110 of the CAA. 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA’s review of this material 

indicates that the submittal is adequate 

to address the emission reduction 

requirements of the non-EGUs under the 

NOX SIP Call and is in accordance with 

requirements in CAA section 110 and its 

implementing regulations. EPA is 

proposing to approve the District of 

Columbia SIP revision, submitted on 

June 19, 2015, that establishes a 25 ton 

ozone season NOX emissions cap for 

non-EGUs in the District. EPA is 

soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. 

IV. 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 the requirements of 1 

CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to 

incorporate by reference revised District 

of Columbia regulation Title 20 DCMR, 

Environment, Chapter 10—Air 

Quality—Non-EGU Limits on Nitrogen 

Oxides Emissions, and the revised 

definition of ‘‘Fossil fuel-fired’’ in 

Chapter 1, General Rules. The 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). 

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 

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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
72408 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 223 / Thursday, November 19, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

• 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). 

In addition, this action proposing 

approval of the District of Columbia 

regulation to limit NOX emissions from 

non-EGUs subject to the NOX SIP Call 

and approval of a related definition and 

abbreviation, 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, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: November 6, 2015. 

Shawn M. Garvin, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2015–29369 Filed 11–18–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 679 

[Docket No. 151027997–5997–01] 

RIN 0648–BF48 

Control Date for the Trawl Limited 

Access Fishery for Yellowfin Sole in 

the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking (ANPR); control date. 

SUMMARY: At the request of the North 

Pacific Fishery Management Council 

(Council), this document announces a 

control date of October 13, 2015, that 

may be used as a reference date for a 

future management action to limit 

future access to the offshore sector of 

the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 

(BSAI) trawl limited access fishery for 

yellowfin sole. This date corresponds to 

the date the Council announced its 

intent to evaluate participation and 

effort in response to a public request to 

consider further limits on access to the 

offshore sector of the BSAI trawl limited 

access fishery for yellowfin sole. This 

document is intended to promote 

awareness of possible rulemaking and 

provide notice to the public that any 

participation in the offshore sector of 

the BSAI trawl limited access fishery for 

yellowfin sole after the control date may 

not ensure continued access to that 

fishery under a future management 

action. This document is also intended 

to discourage speculative entry into the 

fishery while the Council considers 

whether and how access to the fishery 

may be further limited under a future 

management action. 

DATES: October 13, 2015, shall be known 

as the control date for the offshore 

sector of the BSAI trawl limited access 

fishery for yellowfin sole and may be 

used as a reference for participation in 

a future management action that is 

consistent with the Council’s objectives 

and applicable Federal laws. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rachel Baker: 907–586–7228 or 

rachel.baker@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS 

manages the groundfish fisheries in the 

U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of 

the BSAI under the Fishery 

Management Plan for Groundfish of the 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 

Management Area (FMP). The Council 

prepared, and NMFS approved, the FMP 

under the authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens 

Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations 

governing U.S. fisheries and 

implementing the FMP appear at 50 

CFR parts 600 and 679. 

This advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking would apply to owners and 

operators of vessels that participate in 

the Federal fishery for yellowfin sole 

with trawl gear in the offshore sector of 

the BSAI. The BSAI is defined at § 679.2 

and shown in Figure 1 to 50 CFR part 

679. 

Vessels that participate in the offshore 

sector of the BSAI trawl limited access 

fishery for yellowfin sole include 

catcher vessels, catcher/processors, and 

motherships. Catcher vessels participate 

in the offshore sector by delivering 

yellowfin sole to catcher/processors or 

motherships for processing. Catcher/

processors participate in the offshore 

sector by catching and processing 

yellowfin sole or by receiving and 

processing deliveries of yellowfin sole 

from catcher vessels. Motherships 

participate in the offshore sector by 

receiving and processing deliveries of 

yellowfin sole from catcher vessels. This 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

would not apply to owners and 

operators of trawl catcher vessels that 

participate in the inshore sector of the 

BSAI trawl limited access fishery for 

yellowfin sole, i.e., vessels that deliver 

yellowfin sole to shoreside processors 

rather than to catcher/processors or 

motherships. 

The Council and NMFS annually 

establish biological thresholds and 

annual total allowable catch limits for 

groundfish species, such as yellowfin 

sole, to sustainably manage the 

groundfish fisheries in the BSAI. To 

achieve these objectives, NMFS requires 

vessel operators participating in BSAI 

groundfish fisheries to comply with 

various regulatory restrictions, such as 

fishery closures, to maintain catch 

within specified total allowable catch 

limits. The BSAI groundfish fishery 

restrictions also include prohibited 

species catch (PSC) limits for Pacific 

halibut that generally require halibut to 

be discarded when harvested. When 

harvest of halibut PSC reaches the 

specified halibut PSC limit for that 

fishery, NMFS closes directed fishing 

for the target groundfish species, even if 

the total allowable catch limit for that 

species has not been harvested. The 

Council and NMFS have long sought to 

control fishing effort in the North 

Pacific Ocean to ensure that fisheries are 

conservatively managed and do not 

exceed established biological 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS