Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 57535 

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: Eric 

Svingen, Environmental Engineer, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

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

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–4489, 

svingen.eric@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this rule, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the Rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

Dated: August 5, 2016. 

Robert A. Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2016–20011 Filed 8–22–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0075; FRL–9950–85– 

Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Wisconsin; 

Kenosha County, 2008 8-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area Reasonable 

Further Progress Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

an Early Progress Plan and motor 

vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for 

volatile organic compounds and oxides 

of nitrogen for Kenosha County, 

Wisconsin. Wisconsin submitted an 

Early Progress Plan for Kenosha County 

on January 16, 2015. This submittal was 

developed to establish MVEBs for the 

Kenosha 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

area. This approval of the Early Progress 

Plan for the Kenosha 2008 8-Hour ozone 

nonattainment area is based on EPA’s 

determination that Wisconsin has 

demonstrated that the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

containing these MVEBs, when 

considered with the emissions from all 

sources, shows some progress toward 

attainment from the 2011 base year 

through a 2015 target year. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 22, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2015–0075 at http://

www.regulations.gov or via email to 

persoon.carolyn@epa.gov. For 

comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 

follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or removed 

from Regulations.gov. For either manner 

of submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

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

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Leslie, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–6680, 

leslie.michael@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this rule, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the Rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

Dated: August 5, 2016. 

Robert A. Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2016–20008 Filed 8–22–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0623; FRL–9951–32– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; FL: Nassau Area; 

SO2 Attainment Demonstration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
57536 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

1EPA’s April 23, 2014 memorandum entitled 

‘‘Guidance for the 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area 

SIP Submissions,’’ hereafter referred to as the ‘‘SO2

Nonattainment Guidance.’’ 

2EPA’s June 22, 2010 final action revoked the two 

1971 primary 24-hour standard of 140 ppb and the 

annual standard of 30 ppb because they were 

determined not to add additional public health 

protection given a 1-hour standard at 75 ppb. See 

75 FR 35520. However, the secondary 3-hour SO2

standard was retained. Currently, the 24-hour and 

annual standards are only revoked for those areas 

the EPA has already designated for the 2010 1-hour 

SO2 NAAQS in August 2013 and June 30, 2016, 

including the Nassau Area. See 40 CFR 50.4(e). 

3EPA is continuing its designation efforts for the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS. Pursuant to a court-ordered 

consent decree finalized March 2, 2015, in the U.S. 

District Court for the Northern District of California, 

EPA must complete the remaining designations for 

the rest of the country on a schedule that contains 

three specific deadlines. By July 2, 2016, EPA must 

designate areas specified in the March 2, 2015 

consent decree based on specific emission criteria. 

Sierra Club, et al. v. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 13-cv-03953–SI (2015). The last two 

deadlines for completing designations, December 

2017 and December 2020 are expected to be 

informed by information required pursuant the 

‘‘Data Requirements Rule for the 2010 1-Hour 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary National Ambient Air 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision, submitted by the State of 

Florida through the Florida Department 

of Environmental Protection (FL DEP), 

to EPA on April 3, 2015, for the purpose 

of providing for attainment of the 2010 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) in the 

Nassau County SO2 nonattainment area 

(hereafter referred to as the ‘‘Nassau 

Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’). The Nassau Area is 

comprised of a portion of Nassau 

County in Florida surrounding the 

Rayonier Performance Fibers, LLC 

sulfite pulp mill (hereafter referred to as 

‘‘Rayonier’’). The attainment plan 

includes the base year emissions 

inventory, an analysis of the reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) 

and reasonably available control 

measures (RACM), a reasonable further 

progress (RFP) plan, a modeling 

demonstration of SO2 attainment, and 

contingency measures for the Nassau 

Area. As a part of approving the 

attainment demonstration, EPA is also 

proposing to approve into the Florida 

SIP the SO2 emissions limits and 

associated compliance parameters. This 

action is being taken in accordance with 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA’s 

guidance related to SO2 attainment 

planning. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 22, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2015–0623 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, 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: D. 

Brad Akers, Air Regulatory Management 

Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Akers 

can be reached via electronic mail at 

akers.brad@epa.gov or via telephone at 

(404)562–9089. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA proposing to take? 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed action? 

III. What is included in Florida’s attainment 

plan for the Nassau Area? 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of Florida’s 

attainment plan for the Nassau Area? 

A. Pollutants Addressed 

B. Emissions Inventory Requirements 

C. Air Quality Modeling 

D. RACM/RACT 

E. RFP Plan 

F. Contingency Measures 

G. Attainment Date 

V. Proposed Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA proposing to 

take? 

EPA is proposing to approve Florida’s 

SIP revision for the Nassau Area, as 

submitted through FL DEP to EPA on 

April 3, 2015, for the purpose of 

demonstrating attainment of the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS. Specifically, EPA is 

proposing to approve the base year 

emissions inventory, a modeling 

demonstration of SO2 attainment, an 

analysis of RACM/RACT, a RFP plan, 

and contingency measures for the 

Nassau Area. Additionally, EPA is 

proposing to approve specific SO2

emission limits and compliance 

parameters established for the two SO2

sources impacting the Nassau Area into 

the Florida SIP. 

EPA has preliminarily determined 

that Florida’s SO2 attainment plan for 

the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for Nassau 

County meets the applicable 

requirements of the CAA and EPA’s SO2

Nonattainment Guidance.1 Moreover, 

the Nassau Area is currently showing a 

design value below the 2010 SO2

NAAQS, having implemented most of 

the control measures included in the 

SIP submittal. Thus, EPA is proposing 

to approve Florida’s attainment plan for 

the Nassau Area as submitted on April 

3, 2015. EPA’s analysis for this 

proposed action is discussed in Section 

IV of this proposed rulemaking. 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed action? 

On June 2, 2010, the EPA 

Administrator signed a final rule 

establishing a new SO2 NAAQS as a 1- 

hour standard of 75 parts per billion 

(ppb), based on a 3-year average of the 

annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily 

maximum concentrations. See 75 FR 

35520 (June 22, 2010). This action also 

revoked the existing 1971 annual 

standard and 24-hour standards, subject 

to certain conditions.2 EPA established 

the NAAQS based on significant 

evidence and numerous health studies 

demonstrating that serious health effects 

are associated with short-term 

exposures to SO2 emissions ranging 

from 5 minutes to 24 hours with an 

array of adverse respiratory effects 

including narrowing of the airways 

which can cause difficulty breathing 

(bronchoconstriction) and increased 

asthma symptoms. For more 

information regarding the health 

impacts of SO2, please refer to the June 

22, 2010 final rulemaking. See 75 FR 

35520. Following promulgation of a new 

or revised NAAQS, EPA is required by 

the CAA to designate areas throughout 

the United States as attaining or not 

attaining the NAAQS; this designation 

process is described in section 107(d)(1) 

of the CAA. On August 5, 2013, EPA 

promulgated initial air quality 

designations of 29 areas for the 2010 

SO2 NAAQS (78 FR 47191), which 

became effective on October 4, 2013, 

based on violating air quality 

monitoring data for calendar years 

2009–2011, where there was sufficient 

data to support a nonattainment 

designation.3


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 57537 

Quality Standard (NAAQS); Final Rule,’’ or ‘‘Data 

Requirements Rule.’’ See 80 FR 51052 (August 21, 

2015). http://www.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/ 

designations/pdfs/201503Schedule.pdf. On June 30, 

2016, EPA designated a total of 61 areas for the 

2010- 1-hour SO2 standard as part of the 2nd round 

of designations pursuant to the March 2, 2015 

consent decree. See 81 FR 45039. 

4The CAA new source review (NSR) program is 

composed of three separate programs: Prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD), NNSR, and Minor 

NSR. PSD is established in part C of title I of the 

CAA and applies in areas that meet the NAAQS— 

‘‘attainment areas’’—as well as areas where there is 

insufficient information to determine if the area 

meets the NAAQS—‘‘unclassifiable areas.’’ The 

NNSR program is established in part D of title I of 

the CAA and applies in areas that are not in 

attainment of the NAAQS—‘‘nonattainment areas.’’ 

The Minor NSR program addresses construction or 

modification activities that do not qualify as 

‘‘major’’ and applies regardless of the designation 

of the area in which a source is located. Together, 

these programs are referred to as the NSR programs. 

Section 173 of the CAA lays out the NNSR program 

for preconstruction review of new major sources or 

major modifications to existing sources, as required 

by CAA section 172(c)(5). The programmatic 

elements for NNSR include, among other things, 

compliance with the lowest achievable emissions 

rate and the requirement to obtain emissions offsets. 

5Rayonier processes high purity wood pulp used 

in manufacturing photographic films, filters, rayon 

fabric and other industrial and consumer products. 

6The new company name of WestRock reflects 

the recent merger between companies MeadWestCo 

and RockTenn. FL DEP issued an administrative 

revision to the operating permit, revision number 

0890003–048–AV, on August 19, 2015 to reflect this 

administrative change in company name. The April 

3, 2015, final SIP submittal was prior to this merger, 

and therefore refers to WestRock as RockTenn. 

WestRock produces various containerboard 

products. 

7 General Conformity pursuant to CAA section 

176(c) requires that actions by federal agencies do 

not cause new air quality issues or delay or interfere 

with attainment of a NAAQS. With respect to the 

Nassau nonattainment area federal agencies must 

work with the state to ensure that federal actions 

conform to the air quality plans established in the 

applicable SIP that ensures attainment of the SO2

NAAQS. 

Effective on October 4, 2013, the 

Nassau Area was designated as 

nonattainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS 

for an area that encompasses the 

primary SO2 emitting source Rayonier 

sulfite pulp mill and the nearby SO2

monitor (Air Quality Site ID: 12–089– 

0005). The October 4, 2013, final 

designation triggered a requirement for 

Florida to submit a SIP revision with a 

plan for how the Area would attain the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS as expeditiously as 

practicable, but no later than October 4, 

2018, in accordance with CAA section 

172(b). 

The required components of a 

nonattainment plan submittal are listed 

in section 172(c) of part D of the CAA. 

The base year emissions inventory 

(section 172(c)(3)) is required to show a 

‘‘comprehensive, accurate, current 

inventory’’ of all relevant pollutants in 

the nonattainment area. The 

nonattainment plan must identify and 

quantify any expected emissions from 

the construction of new sources to 

account for emissions in the area that 

might affect RFP toward attainment, or 

with attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS, and provide for a 

nonattainment new source review 

(NNSR) program (section 172(c)(5)). The 

attainment demonstration must include 

a modeling analysis showing that the 

enforceable emissions limitations and 

other control measures taken by the 

state will provide for expeditious 

attainment of the NAAQS (section 

172(c)). The nonattainment plan must 

include an analysis of the RACM 

considered, including RACT (section 

172(c)(1)). RFP for the nonattainment 

area must be addressed in the submittal. 

Finally, the nonattainment plan must 

provide for contingency measures 

(section 172(c)(9)) to be implemented in 

the case that RFP toward attainment is 

not made, or the area fails to attain the 

NAAQS by the attainment date. 

III. What is included in Florida’s 

attainment plan for the Nassau Area? 

In accordance with section 172(c) of 

the CAA, the Florida attainment plan for 

the Nassau Area includes: (1) An 

emissions inventory for SO2 for the 

plan’s base year (2011); and (2) an 

attainment demonstration. The 

attainment demonstration includes: 

Technical analyses that locate, identify, 

and quantify sources of emissions 

contributing to violations of the 2010 

SO2 NAAQS; a declaration that FL DEP 

is unaware of any future growth in the 

area that would be subject to CAA 173,4

and the assertion that the NNSR 

program approved in the SIP at Section 

62–252.500, Florida Administrative 

Code (F.A.C.) would account for any 

such growth; a modeling analysis of an 

emissions control strategy for the 

Rayonier sulfite pulp mill 5 and a nearby 

source, the WestRock CP, LLC kraft pulp 

mill (formerly RockTenn kraft pulp 

mill) 6 (hereafter referred to as 

‘‘WestRock’’), that attains the SO2

NAAQS by the October 4, 2018 

attainment date; a determination that 

the control strategy for the primary SO2

source within the NAA constitutes 

RACM/RACT; adherence to a 

construction schedule to ensure 

emissions reductions are achieved as 

expeditiously as practicable; a request 

from FL DEP that emissions reduction 

measures including system upgrades 

and/or emissions limitations with 

schedules for implementation and 

compliance parameters be incorporated 

into the SIP; and contingency 

measures.7

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of Florida’s 

attainment plan for the Nassau Area? 

Consistent with CAA requirements 

(see, e.g., section 172), an attainment 

demonstration for a SO2 nonattainment 

area must include a showing that the 

area will attain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS as 

expeditiously as practicable. The 

demonstration must also meet the 

requirements of 40 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) 51.112 and Part 51, 

Appendix W, and include inventory 

data, modeling results, and emissions 

reduction analyses on which the state 

has based its projected attainment. In 

the case of the Nassau Area, 2013–2015 

quality-assured and certified air quality 

data indicated a design value below the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. EPA is 

proposing that the attainment plan 

submitted by Florida is sufficient, and 

EPA is proposing to approve the plan to 

assure ongoing attainment. 

A. Pollutants Addressed 

Florida’s SO2 attainment plan 

evaluates SO2 emissions for the portion 

of Nassau County that is designated 

nonattainment for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS. There are no significant 

precursors to consider for the SO2

attainment plan. SO2 is a pollutant that 

arises from direct emissions, and 

therefore concentrations are highest 

relatively close to the source(s) and 

much lower at greater distances due to 

dispersion. See SO2 Nonattainment 

Guidance. Thus, SO2 concentration 

patterns resemble those of other directly 

emitted pollutants like lead and differ 

from those of photochemically-formed 

(secondary) pollutants such as ozone. 

The two sources included in FL DEP’s 

SIP to address the Nassau Area and their 

operations are briefly described later in 

this preamble. As the Nassau Area 

includes one such major point source of 

SO2 and one source just outside the 

Area, it is expected that an attainment 

demonstration addressing SO2

emissions at these two sources will 

effectively ensure that the Area will 

attain by the attainment date of October 

4, 2018. 

B. Emissions Inventory Requirements 

States are required under section 

172(c)(3) of the CAA to develop 

comprehensive, accurate and current 

emissions inventories of all sources of 

the relevant pollutant or pollutants in 

the area. These inventories provide a 

detailed accounting of all emissions and 

emission sources by precursor or 

pollutant. In addition, inventories are 

used in air quality modeling to 

demonstrate that attainment of the 

NAAQS is as expeditious as practicable. 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
57538 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

8The AERR at Subpart A to 40 CFR part 51 cover 

overarching federal reporting requirements for the 

states to submit emissions inventories for criteria 

pollutants to EPA’s Emissions Inventory System. 

The EPA uses these submittals, along with other 

data sources, to build the National Emissions 

Inventory. 

The April 23, 2014, SO2 Nonattainment 

Guidance provides that the emissions 

inventory should be consistent with the 

Air Emissions Reporting Requirements 

(AERR) at Subpart A to 40 CFR part 51.8

For the base year inventory of actual 

emissions, a ‘‘comprehensive, accurate 

and current,’’ inventory can be 

represented by a year that contributed to 

the three-year design value used for the 

original nonattainment designation. The 

final SO2 Nonattainment Guidance 

notes that the base year inventory 

should include all sources of SO2 in the 

nonattainment area as well as any 

sources located outside the 

nonattainment area which may affect 

attainment in the area. Florida elected to 

use 2011 as the base year. Actual 

emissions from all sources of SO2 in the 

Nassau Area were reviewed and 

compiled for the base year emissions 

inventory. Emissions from all stationary 

sources of SO2 located in the Nassau 

Area were estimated and included in 

the inventory, and a source outside the 

Area that FL DEP determined caused or 

contributed to elevated SO2

concentrations within the 

nonattainment area was also included. 

The primary SO2-emitting point 

source located within the Nassau Area 

is the Rayonier sulfite pulp mill, which 

produces films, fibers and fabrics among 

other consumer products. Rayonier 

consists of three main SO2 emitters: 

• Emissions Unit (EU) 005 (Rayonier 

EU 005) is the vent gas scrubbing 

system, which handles emissions from 

numerous vents from the cooking acid 

plant, the red stock washers, the 

unwashed stock tank, the spent sulfite 

liquor storage tanks, the spent sulfite 

liquor washer area, the digesters, and 

the blow pits; 

• Rayonier EU 006 is the sulfite 

recovery boiler, which fires spent liquor 

to produce combustion gases that 

contain recoverable SO2 and heat for 

steam generation; 

• Rayonier EU 022 is the power 

boiler, which fires biomass and No. 6 

fuel oil to produce heat for steam 

generation; and 

• Rayonier EU 005 is itself a control 

technology, utilizing a wet alkaline 

absorbing section for SO2 removal, 

while Rayonier EU 006 and EU 022 each 

have wet alkaline scrubbers in place. 

The emissions at all units for the 

Rayonier facility were recorded using 

data collected from continuous 

emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) 

and are quality-assured by FL DEP. 

The largest SO2 source within 25 

kilometers (km) outside the Nassau Area 

is WestRock. The WestRock facilities 

consist of five main SO2 emitters: 

• Emissions Unit 006 (WestRock EU 

006) is the No. 5 power boiler, which 

fires biomass and No. 6 fuel oil to 

produce heat for steam generation; 

• WestRock EUs 007 and 011 are 

recovery boilers, which fire black liquor 

solids to produce heat for steam 

generation and recover process 

chemicals; 

• WestRock EU 015 is the No. 7 

power boiler, which fires coal, oil and/ 

or natural gas to produce heat for steam 

generation; and 

• WestRock EU 021 is a lime kiln, 

which burns low volume, high density 

non-condensable gases (NCGs) from 

several units across the plant in 

addition to its primary purpose of 

converting calcium carbonate to lime. 

WestRock EU 006 currently serves as a 

backup control device for NCGs that 

pass through WestRock EU 021. 

Emissions from the WestRock facility 

were collected via CEMS or calculated. 

Specifically, WestRock EUs 007, 011, 

and 015 did not previously have CEMS 

installed. In this instance, the emission 

rates of SO2 were calculated, as shown 

in Appendix B of the April 3, 2015, 

submittal. For WestRock EU 015, the 

hourly feed rates of coal, fuel oil and/ 

or natural gas burned are included along 

with the particular emission factors 

used to calculate the SO2 emissions 

rates. For WestRock EUs 007 and 011, 

the hourly rates of the black liquor 

solids and/or oil burned are included 

along with the particular emission 

factors used to calculate the SO2

emissions rates. 

Pursuant to Florida’s SIP-approved 

regulations at Chapter 62–210.370, 

F.A.C., paragraph (3), FL DEP collects 

annual operating reports (AORs), 

incorporated by reference into the SIP at 

62–210.900(5), from all major sources. 

These AORs were used to develop the 

base year inventory for actual emissions 

for the point sources and satisfy the 

AERR. FL DEP utilized EPA’s 2011 

National Emissions Inventory (NEI), 

Version 2 to obtain estimates of the area 

and nonroad sources. For onroad mobile 

source emissions, FL DEP utilized EPA’s 

Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator 

(MOVES2014). A more detailed 

discussion of the emissions inventory 

development for the Nassau Area can be 

found in Florida’s April 3, 2015, 

submittal. 

Table 1 shows the level of emissions, 

expressed in tpy, in the Nassau Area for 

the 2011 base year by emissions source 

category. The point source category 

includes WestRock, outside the Nassau 

Area, but determined by FL DEP to 

contribute to nonattainment. 

TABLE 1—2011 BASE YEAR EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR THE NASSAU AREA

[tpy] 

Year Point Onroad Nonroad Area Total 

2011 ..................................................................................... 4,278.64 0.08 0.09 0.39 4,279.20 

EPA has evaluated Florida’s 2011 base 

year emissions inventory for the Nassau 

Area and has made the preliminary 

determination that this inventory was 

developed consistent with EPA’s 

guidance. Therefore, pursuant to section 

172(c)(3), EPA is proposing to approve 

Florida’s 2011 base year emissions 

inventory for the Nassau Area. 

The attainment demonstration also 

provides for a projected attainment year 

inventory that includes estimated 

emissions for all emission sources of 

SO2 which are determined to impact the 

nonattainment area for the year in 

which the area is expected to attain the 

standard. This inventory must address 

any future growth in the Area. Growth 

means any potential increases in 

emissions of the pollutant for which the 

Nassau Area is nonattainment (SO2) due 

to the construction and operation of 

new major sources, major modifications 

to existing sources, or increased minor 

source activity. FL DEP included a 

statement in its April 3, 2015, submittal 

declaring that FL DEP is unaware of any 

plans for the growth of major sources in 

the Nassau Area, and that normal minor 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 57539 

9FL DEP acknowledges a minor source permit to 

construct a natural gas-fired combustion turbine 

cogeneration system within the Nassau 

nonattainment area located on the Rayonier 

property. The turbine would produce process steam 

for the co-located Rayonier plant which would 

generate up to 21 megawatts provided to the 

electrical grid. Because the turbine is natural-gas 

fired, maximum annual SO2 emissions would be 

less than 7 tons per year (tpy) and not subject to 

NNSR. FL DEP determined that these small SO2

emissions resulting from the new facility would not 

interfere with the attainment plan for the Nassau 

Area. 

10 40 CFR part 51 Appendix W (EPA’s Guideline 

on Air Quality Models) (November 2005) located at 

http://www3.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/ 

appw_05.pdf. EPA has proposed changes to 

Appendix W. See 80 FR 45340 (July 29, 2015). 

source growth should not significantly 

impact the Area. FL DEP further asserts 

that the NNSR program at Section 62– 

252.500, F.A.C., approved into the SIP 

and last updated on June 27, 2008 (see 

73 FR 36435), would address any 

proposed new major sources or planned 

major modifications for SO2 sources.9

The NNSR program includes lowest 

achievable emissions rate, offsets, and 

public hearing requirements. 

FL DEP provided a 2018 projected 

emissions inventory for all known 

sources included in the 2011 base year 

inventory, discussed previously, that 

were determined to impact the Nassau 

County NAA. The projected 2018 

emissions in Table 2 are estimated 

actual emissions, representing a 21 

percent reduction from the base year 

SO2 emissions. The point source 

emissions were estimated by 

multiplying the 2018 allowable 

emissions by the ratio of 2011 actual 

emissions to allowable emissions. Per 

the SO2 Nonattainment Guidance, the 

allowable emission limits that FL DEP is 

requesting EPA approve into the SIP as 

a control measure were modeled to 

show attainment. These allowable 

emission limits are higher than the 

projected actual emissions included in 

the future year inventory, and therefore 

offer greater level of certainty that the 

NAAQS will be protected under all 

operating scenarios. Emissions estimates 

for onroad sources were re-estimated 

with MOVES2014. The nonroad and 

area source emissions were scaled based 

on estimated population growth in the 

Nassau Area portion of Nassau County. 

TABLE 2—PROJECTED 2018 SO2 EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR THE NASSAU AREA

[tpy] 

Year Point Onroad Nonroad Area Total 

2011 ..................................................................................... 4,278.64 0.08 0.09 0.39 4,279.20 

2018 ..................................................................................... 3,376.26 0.03 0.10 0.41 3,376.80 

C. Air Quality Modeling 

The SO2 attainment demonstration 

provides an air quality dispersion 

modeling analysis to demonstrate that 

control strategies chosen to reduce SO2

source emissions will bring the area into 

attainment by the statutory attainment 

date of October 4, 2018. The modeling 

analysis, outlined in Appendix W to 40 

CFR part 51 (EPA’s Modeling 

Guidance),10 is used for the attainment 

demonstration to assess the control 

strategy for a nonattainment area and 

establish emission limits that will 

provide for attainment. The analysis 

requires five years of meteorological 

data to simulate the dispersion of 

pollutant plumes from multiple point, 

area, or volume sources across the 

averaging times of interest. The 

modeling demonstration typically also 

relies on maximum allowable emissions 

from sources in the nonattainment area. 

Though the actual emissions are likely 

to be below the allowable emissions, 

sources have the ability to run at higher 

production rates or optimize controls 

such that emissions approach the 

allowable emissions limits. A modeling 

analysis that provides for attainment 

under all scenarios of operation for each 

source must therefore consider the 

worst case scenario of both the 

meteorology (e.g., predominant wind 

directions, stagnation, etc.) and the 

maximum allowable emissions. 

FL DEP’s modeling analysis was 

developed in accordance with EPA’s 

Modeling Guidance and the SO2

Nonattainment Guidance, and was 

prepared using EPA’s preferred 

dispersion modeling system, the 

American Meteorological Society/ 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Regulatory Model (AERMOD) consisting 

of the AERMOD (version 14134) model 

and two data input preprocessors 

AERMET (version 14134) and AERMAP 

(version 11103). AERMINUTE 

meteorological preprocessor and 

AERSURFACE surface characteristics 

preprocessor were also used to develop 

inputs to AERMET. The Building Profile 

Input Program for Plume Rise Model 

Enhancements (BPIP–PRIME) was also 

used in the downwash-modeling. More 

detailed information on the AERMOD 

Modeling system, and other modeling 

tools and documents can be found on 

the EPA Technology Transfer Network 

Support Center for Regulatory 

Atmospheric Modeling (SCRAM) 

(http://www3.epa.gov/ttn/scram/) and 

in Florida’s April 3, 2015, SIP submittal 

in the docket for this proposed action 

(EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0623) on 

www.regulations.gov. A brief 

description of the modeling used to 

support Florida’s attainment 

demonstration is provided later on. 

1. Modeling Approach 

The following is an overview of the 

air quality modeling approach used to 

demonstrate compliance with the 2010 

SO2 NAAQS, as submitted in Florida’s 

April 3, 2015, submittal. The basic 

procedures are outlined later in this 

preamble. 

i. FL DEP developed model inputs 

using the AERMOD modeling system 

and processors. 

The pre-processors AERMET and 

AERMINUTE were used to process five 

years (i.e., 2008–2012) of 1-minute 

meteorological data from the 

Jacksonville National Weather Service 

Office (NWS) at the Jacksonville 

International Airport, Jacksonville, 

Florida, surface level site, based on FL 

DEP’s land use classifications, in 

combination with twice daily upper-air 

meteorological information from the 

same site. The Jacksonville International 

Airport is located approximately 28 km 

southeast from Nassau Area. The 

AERMOD pre-processor AERMAP was 

used to generate terrain inputs for the 

receptors, based on a digital elevation 

mapping database from the National 

Elevation Dataset developed by the U.S. 

Geological Survey. FL DEP used 

AERSURFACE to generate directionspecific land-use surface characteristics 

for the modeling. The BPIP–PRIME 

preprocessor was used to generate 

direction-specific building downwash 

parameters. FL DEP developed a 

Cartesian receptor grid across the 

nonattainment boundary (approximately 

2.4 km around the violating monitor), 

with 100 meter spacing in ambient air 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
57540 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

11FL DEP is following the SO2 Nonattainment 

Guidance on procedures for establishing emissions 

limits with averaging periods longer than 1 hour. 

12The hourly emission rate that the model 

predicts would result in the 5-year average of the 

annual 99th percentile of daily maximum hourly 

SO2 concentrations at the level of the NAAQS. 

to ensure maximum concentrations are 

captured in the analysis. All other input 

options were also developed 

commensurate with the Modeling 

Guidance. 

Next, FL DEP selected a background 

SO2 concentration based on local SO2

monitoring data from monitoring station 

No. 12–089–0005 for the period January 

2012 to December 2013. This 

background concentration from the 

nearby ambient air monitor is used to 

account for SO2 impacts from all 

sources that are not specifically 

included in the AERMOD modeling 

analysis. The data was obtained from 

the Florida Air Monitoring and 

Assessment System. This monitor is 

approximately 0.9 km to the southeast 

of Rayonier and 2.5 km south of 

WestRock. Due to its close proximity to 

the Rayonier facility, monitored 

concentrations at this station are 

strongly influenced by emissions from 

both facilities. As a result, the data was 

filtered to remove measurements where 

the wind direction could transport 

pollutants from Rayonier and WestRock 

to the station. More specifically, the 

data was filtered to remove 

measurements where hourly wind 

direction was between 263° to 61°. 

ii. FL DEP performed current and 

post-control dispersion modeling using 

the EPA-approved AERMOD modeling 

system. 

iii. Finally, FL DEP derived the 99th 

percentile maximum 1-hour daily SO2

design value across the five year 

meteorological data period. 

EPA’s SO2 nonattainment 

implementation guidance provides a 

procedure for establishing longer-term 

averaging times for SO2 emission limits 

(up to a 30-day rolling averaging time).11

In conjunction with states’ CAA 

obligation to submit SIPs that 

demonstrate attainment, EPA believes 

that air agencies that consider longer 

term average times for a SIP emission 

limit should provide additional 

justification for the application of such 

limits. This justification involves 

determining the ‘‘critical emission 

value’’ 12 or the 1-hour emission limit 

that modeling found to provide for 

attainment and adjusting this rate 

downward to obtain a comparable 

stringency to the modeled 1-hour 

average emission limit. A comparison of 

the 1-hour limit and the proposed 

longer term limit, in particular an 

assessment of whether the longer term 

average limit may be considered to be of 

comparable stringency to a 1-hour limit 

at the critical emission value, is critical 

for demonstrating that any longer term 

average limits in the SIP will help 

provide adequate assurance that the 

plan will provide for attainment and 

maintenance of the 1-hour NAAQS. 

This allows states to develop control 

strategies that account for variability in 

1-hour emissions rates through emission 

limits with averaging times that are 

longer than 1 hour, using averaging 

times as long as 30-days, and still 

demonstrate attainment of the 2010 SO2

NAAQS. 

EPA’s recommended procedure for 

determining longer term averaging 

times, including calculating the 

adjustment factor between the 1-hour 

critical emission value and the 

equivalent 30-day rolling average 

emissions limit, is provided in 

Appendices B and C of the SO2

Nonattainment Guidance. EPA is 

proposing to conclude that FL DEP 

completed this analysis for both 

Rayonier and WestRock facilities to 

derive SIP emission limits with 3-hour 

longer-term averaging time that are 

comparatively stringent to the 1-hour 

limit. For more details, see Florida’s 

April 3, 2015, SIP submittal. 

2. Modeling Results 

The SO2 NAAQS compliance results 

of the attainment modeling are 

summarized in Table 3 later on in this 

preamble. Table 3 presents the results 

from four sets of AERMOD modeling 

runs that were performed. The four 

modeling runs were the result of using 

an uncontrolled, or pre-modification, 

run and three different controlled, or 

post-modification, scenarios. Maximum 

allowable permitted emissions limits 

were used for the Nassau Area modeling 

demonstration. These emissions limits 

and other control measures were 

established in construction permits 

issued by FL DEP. The conditions have 

been incorporated in the latest title V 

permit renewal for Rayonier, and will be 

incorporated for WestRock upon future 

title V renewal. FL DEP is requesting 

that these emissions limits and 

operating conditions, detailed in 

Section IV.D. of this proposed 

rulemaking, be adopted into the SIP to 

become federally enforceable upon 

approval of the nonattainment plan, 

prior to the renewal of the title V 

operating permit for the WestRock 

facility. The three post-control runs help 

to identify the worst possible scenario of 

emissions distributions between the two 

units EUs 007 and 011 (recovery boilers) 

at the WestRock facility. Under one 

modeling scenario, an emissions cap of 

300 pounds per hour (lb/hr) SO2 for 

WestRock EUs 007 and 011 is allotted 

equally between the recovery boilers. 

For the two remaining scenarios, the 

entire 300 lb/hr cap is allotted totally for 

EU 007 or EU 011, assuming that only 

one recovery boiler is operating. 

The modeling utilized five years 

(2008–2012) of meteorological data from 

the NWS site in Jacksonville, Florida, as 

processed through AERMET, 

AERMINTE and AERSURFACE. This 

procedure was used since this site 

represented the nearest site with 

complete data. 

Table 3 shows that the maximum 1- 

hour average across all five years of 

meteorological data (2008–2012) is less 

than or equal to the 2010 SO2 NAAQS 

of 75 ppb for all three sets of AERMOD 

modeling runs. For more details, see 

Florida’s April 3, 2015 SIP submittal. 

TABLE 3—MAXIMUM MODELED SO2 IMPACTS IN THE NASSAU AREA, MICROGRAMS PER CUBIC METER (ppb)13

Model scenario Averaging time 

Maximum predicted impact 

Background Total SO2 NAAQS 

Rayonier WestRock 

Pre-modification ....................................... 1-hour ............ 14 0.0 2957.80 

(1128) 

4.19 (1.6) 2961.99 

(1130) 

196. 4 (75) 

Equal Cap Distribution ............................. 1-hour ............ 114.45 (43.7) 67.69 (25.8) 10.72 (4.09) 192.87 (73.6) 

Entire Cap—EU 007 ................................ 1-hour ............ 110.93 (42.3) 71.56 (27.3) 9.16 (3.5) 191.65 (73.1) 

Entire Cap—EU 011 ................................ 1-hour ............ 117.51 (44.8) 63.79 (24.3) 12.82 (4.9) 194.11 (74.0) 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 57541 

13The April 3, 2015, final submittal contained 

typographical errors in its summary modeling table. 

On April 8, 2016, FL DEP provided EPA Region 4 

with corrected numbers. FL DEP in no way revised 

the modeling demonstration nor the results 

inherent in the April 3, 2015, submittal. The 

correspondence and clarifying information is 

provided in the Docket for this proposed action. 

14The ‘‘0’’ impact from Rayonier indicates that 

the worst case scenario was at a time when 

WestRock was impacting the area of maximum 

concentration because the wind was coming from 

the direction of WestRock. Rayonier impacts other 

receptors in the nonattainment area and may impact 

this same receptor at other times, as can be seen 

with the remainder of the modeling demonstration. 

15The final stack height for the vent gas scrubber 

system (Rayonier EU 005) is 180 ft. The 

construction permit contained options for the 

power boiler (Rayonier EU 022) to meet a 

moderately lower emission limit paired with an 

increased stack height, or an even lower emission 

limit on the unit and maintaining the existing stack 

height. The stack height for EU 022 was not 

increased, as Rayonier selected the lower emission 

limit option. 

16See EPA’s June 1985 guidance document, 

‘‘Guideline for Determination of Good Engineering 

Practice Stack Height (Technical Support Document 

For the Stack Height Regulations),’’ which can be 

found at: http://www3.epa.gov/scram001/guidance/ 

guide/gep.pdf. 

17Strelow, Roger. ‘‘Guidance for Determining the 

Acceptability of SIP Regulations in Non-Attainment 

Areas.’’ Memo to Regional Administrators. Office of 

Air and Waste Management, Environmental 

Protection Agency. Washington, DC December 9, 

1976. Located at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ 

aqmguide/collection/cp2/19761209_strelow_

ract.pdf. 

The pre-controlanalysis resultedin a 

predicted impact of 1130 ppb. The postcontrol analysis resulted in a worst-case 

predicted impact of 74.0 ppb. EPA is 

preliminarily determining that this data 

indicates sufficient reductions in air 

quality impact with the future 

implementation of the post-construction 

control plan for the Rayonier and 

WestRock facilities. Furthermore, EPA 

is preliminarily concluding that this 

data also supports FL DEP’s analysis 

that the controls for Rayonier represent 

RACM and RACT for the SIP. The 

control strategy for Rayonier, as 

reflected in its Air Permit No. 0890004– 

036–AC, includes increasing a stack 

height for Rayonier EU 005, a vent 

scrubber, from 110 feet (ft) to at least 

165 ft, and plans to extend another stack 

at a power boiler (Rayonier EU 022) if 

needed; 15 and lowering the allowable 

SO2 emissions for the power boiler 

(Rayonier EU 006), recovery boiler 

(Rayonier EU 022), and vent gas 

scrubber system (Rayonier EU 005). The 

result of increasing a stack height is that 

the plume has a better opportunity for 

greater dispersion across an area, 

minimizing stagnation and local 

impacts from higher concentrations, 

primarily due to the avoidance of 

building downwash effects.16 Rayonier’s 

allowable SO2 emissions (total from all 

three controlled units) will be reduced 

from 836.5 lb/hr to 502.3 lb/hr 

representing a 40 percent emission 

decrease. The state issued a revised title 

V permit (No. 0890004–042–AV) to 

incorporate the Rayonier Permit and 

authorize Rayonier to operate in 

accordance with those conditions. 

The control strategy for WestRock, as 

reflected in its Air Permit No. 0890003– 

046–AC, includes the following 

operational changes to the four largest 

SO2-emitting units: Improved 

combustion at WestRock EUs 007 and 

011, the two recovery boilers, and 

emissions limits on WestRock EUs 006, 

015, 007 and 011, the two power boilers 

and two recovery boilers. Florida will 

incorporate the new physical and 

operational changes for WestRock into 

its title V permit upon renewal. The title 

V permit is scheduled to be renewed by 

March 17, 2017. WestRock’s allowable 

SO2 emissions from WestRock EU 006, 

the power boiler No. 5, will be reduced 

from 550 lb/hr to 15 lb/hr representing 

a 97 percent emission decrease. The 

modeling results included in Table 3 

prove that WestRock should be included 

in the considerations of controls for the 

following reasons: (1) If both facilities 

were left uncontrolled, as presented in 

the first modeled scenario, WestRock 

would have the greater impact on the 

area of maximum concentration within 

the Nassau Area; and (2) with the worst 

possible post-control modeling scenario, 

35 percent of the total predicted impact 

on the Nassau Area would stem from 

WestRock. Therefore, if no controls 

were implemented at WestRock, the 

Area would not likely attain and 

maintain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. All 

emissions limits and related compliance 

parameters have been proposed for 

incorporation into the SIP to make these 

changes federally enforceable. More 

details on the pre- and post-construction 

operations at the facilities are included 

in the Florida SIP submission. FL DEP 

asserts that the proposed control 

strategy significantly lowers the 

modeled SO2 impacts from the 

WestRock facility and is sufficient for 

the Nassau Area to attain 2010 SO2

NAAQS. 

EPA has reviewed the modeling that 

Florida submitted to support the 

attainment demonstration for the 

Nassau Area and has preliminarily 

determined that this modeling is 

consistent with CAA requirements, 

Appendix W and EPA’s guidance for 

SO2 attainment demonstration 

modeling. 

D. RACM/RACT 

CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that 

each attainment plan provides for the 

implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable and 

attainment of the NAAQS. EPA 

interprets RACM, including RACT, 

under section 172, as measures that a 

state determines to be both reasonably 

available and contribute to attainment 

as expeditiously as practicable ‘‘for 

existing sources in the area.’’ 

Florida’s analysis is found in Section 

3 of the FL DEP attainment 

demonstration within the April 3, 2015, 

SIP submittal. The State determined that 

controls for SO2 emissions at Rayonier 

are appropriate in the Nassau Area for 

purposes of attaining the 2010 SO2

NAAQS. Florida only completed a 

RACM/RACT analysis for Rayonier 

since it is the only such point source 

within the boundaries of the 

nonattainment area. FL DEP included 

WestRock in its attainment and impact 

modeling because of the source’s 

proximity to the Nassau Area (within 5 

km) and its likelihood of contributing to 

violations of the SO2 NAAQS within the 

area. In a modeling-based attainment 

demonstration, the means of 

considering impacts of sources outside 

the nonattainment area would depend 

on whether the sources cause significant 

concentration gradients. Florida 

proposed a control strategy for the 

WestRock facility, but does not assert 

that those controls constitute ‘‘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’’ 17 because section 172(c)(1) 

provides for the implementation of 

RACT for existing sources in the area. 

However, an analysis of attainment 

needs to consider all potential sources, 

both inside and outside the 

nonattainment area that could 

reasonably cause or contribute to 

violations of the NAAQS within the 

area. FL DEP affirms the 

implementation of controls at WestRock 

significantly lowers the modeled SO2

impact from the facility and is sufficient 

to attain 2010 SO2 NAAQS in the 

Nassau Area. The control measures at 

both sources are summarized later on in 

this preamble. 

On April 12, 2012, FL DEP issued 

construction Air Permit No. 0890004– 

036–AC to Rayonier for additional 

proposed control measures to reduce 

SO2 emissions. The specified limits and 

conditions from this construction 

permit, adopted into the title V 

operating permit on May 30, 2014, 

reflecting RACT controls, are included 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
57542 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

18 Information pulled from the April 3, 2015 

submittal, in which the original construction permit 

is included. None of these changes authorize an 

increased production rate at the facility. 

19See previous discussion on longer-term 

emission limits. For more information, see the April 

3, 2015 submittal. 

20Rayonier considered two emissions limits: 180 

lb/hr SO2 at the current stack height of 190 ft; or 

250 lb/hr SO2 if the stack height were increased to 

210 ft. The final limit is 180 lb/hr as the stack 

height was not increased. 

in the April 3, 2015, SIP submittal for 

incorporation into the SIP. In 

accordance with the schedule in the 

permit, Rayonier was required to 

implement the controls on or before 

December 31, 2014. FL DEP reported in 

its SIP submittal that as of the second 

quarter of 2014, Rayonier has completed 

implementation of the RACT controls 

listed in the permit and summarized in 

Table 4: 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF RACT CONTROLS FOR RAYONIER 18

Description of measure Explanation 

Rayonier EU 005: The vent gas scrubber system at this unit undergoes construction to increase the stack height and an operational 

change to meet an enforceable emission limit.

Rayonier was authorized to construct a new stack for the vent gas scrubber system, increasing the stack height from the existing level of 110 ft to at least 165 ft. The as-built stack 

height is 180 ft. 

Rayonier has a new emission limitation, lowering the allowable SO2 from 250 parts per million 

(ppm) to 100 ppm as a 3-hour rolling average.19 This emission limit was incorporated into 

the title V operating permit and is proposed for incorporation into the SIP. 

Rayonier EU 006: The recovery boiler undergoes an operational change to meet an enforceable emission limit.Rayonier has a new emission limitation, lowering the allowable SO2 from 300 parts per million 

by volume, dry basis (ppmvd) to 250 ppmvd as a 3-hour rolling average. This emission limit 

was incorporated into the title V operating permit and is proposed for incorporation into the 

SIP. 

Rayonier EU 022: The power boiler undergoes 

an operational change to meet an enforceable emission limit.

Rayonier has a new emission limitation of 180 lb/hour SO2 as a 3-hour rolling average.20 This 

emission limit was incorporated into the title V operating permit and is proposed for incorporation into the SIP. 

On January 9, 2015, construction Air 

Permit No. 0890003–046–AC was issued 

to WestRock for additional proposed 

control measures to reduce SO2

emissions. The specified limits and 

conditions from this construction 

permit are to be adopted into the title V 

operating permit upon renewal, and are 

intended to supplement the RACT 

adopted for Rayonier in the Nassau Area 

to help with attainment and 

maintenance of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

These controls are included in the April 

3, 2015, SIP submittal for incorporation 

into the SIP. The SO2 Nonattainment 

Guidance discusses an anticipated 

control compliance date of January 1, 

2017. Areas that implement attainment 

plan control strategies by this date are 

expected to be able to show a year of 

quality-assured air monitoring data 

showing attainment of the NAAQS and 

a year of compliance information, which 

when modeled, would also show 

attainment of the NAAQS. In 

accordance with the schedule in the 

construction permit, WestRock is 

required to implement the controls on 

or before January 1, 2018. This date, 

though later than the date suggested in 

the SO2 Nonattainment Guidance, 

provides for 9 months of compliance 

information by the October 4, 2018 

attainment date, including a semiannual 

compliance report in July 2018. 

Additionally, the Nassau Area is 

currently showing an attaining design 

value for 2013–2015, which means that 

attainment of the NAAQS is as 

expeditious as practicable. The 

supplemental control measures at 

WestRock are summarized in Table 4: 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF SUPPLEMENTAL CONTROL MEASURES FOR WESTROCK

Description of measure Explanation 

WestRock EU 006: 21 The power boiler undergoes an operational change to meet an enforceable emission limit.As of January 1, 2016, WestRock is required to comply with a 15.0 lb/hr emission limitation as 

a 3-hour block average for SO2, except during times when this unit is operated as a back-up 

control device for NCGs. By December 1, 2017, WestRock will have a lower emission limitation of 15.0 lb/hr SO2 during all periods of operation as a 3-hour block average and the unit 

will no longer operate as a back-up control device for NCGs. This limit will be incorporated 

into the title V operating permit upon scheduled renewal and is proposed for incorporation 

into the SIP. 

WestRock EU 015: 22 The power boiler undergoes an operational change to meet an enforceable emission limit.As of January 31, 2016, WestRock is required to comply with an emission limitation of 

1225.20 lb/hr SO2 during all periods of operation as a 3-hour block average, determined via 

stack testing. By December 1, 2017, WestRock will show compliance with the 1225.20 lb/hr 

SO2 emission limitation via newly installed CEMS. This limit will be incorporated into the title 

V operating permit upon scheduled renewal and is proposed for incorporation into the SIP. 

WestRock EUs 007 and 011: The recovery boilers undergo operational changes to limit fuel 

oil use and meet individual and combined enforceable emissions limits.

By January 1, 2018, WestRock will only be allowed to use ultra-low sulfur diesel during periods of fuel oil usage. By this date, WestRock will have a new emission limitation of 150.0 lb/ 

hr SO2 for each independent recovery boiler during all periods of operation as a 3-hour 

block average. Compliance with the SO2 emissions standard shall be demonstrated by data 

collected from a certified CEMS23. Alternatively, WestRock can comply with a collective 

emissions limit across the two recovery boilers of 300.0 lb/hr SO2 as a 3-hour block average, as determined only by CEMS. The selected limit will be incorporated into the title V operating permit upon scheduled renewal and both options are proposed for incorporation into 

the SIP. 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 57543 

21Additional controls not requested for 

incorporation into the SIP for WestRock EU 006 

include the elimination of fuel oil usage as of 

January 31, 2016, and the elimination of operation 

as a back-up control for NCGs. The latter is not a 

direct control measure for SO2, but means that the 

power boiler will not fire recovered process vapors. 

22An additional control not requested for 

incorporation into the SIP for WestRock EU 015 is 

the installation of a white liquor scrubber system 

upstream to remove total reduced sulfur from the 

incoming NCG stream. WestRock EU 015 operates 

as a back-up control device for NCGs is not part of 

the SO2 attainment strategy, but compliance with 40 

CFR 63, Subpart S. The addition of the scrubber 

system is to prevent any additional sulfur load to 

the power boiler. WestRock EU 015 will be required 

to comply with the SIP emission limit regardless of 

how it is used with respect to the control of NCGs. 

23FL DEP also acknowledges that parametric 

methods other than CEMS may be considered, 

subject to approval, to demonstrate compliance 

with the individual boiler emission limit of 150 lb/ 

hr SO2 limit. 

24SO2 Guideline Document, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711, 

EPA–452/R–94–008, February 1994. Located at: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html. 

EPA is proposing to approve Florida’s 

determination that the proposed 

controls for SO2 emissions at Rayonier 

constitute RACM/RACT for that source 

in the Nassau Area based on the 

analysis described previously. 

Additionally, EPA proposes to approve 

Florida’s determination that the 

supplemental control measures initiated 

at WestRock help to bring the area into 

attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS as 

expeditiously as practicable. Further, 

EPA determines that no further controls 

would be required at Rayonier, and that 

the proposed controls are sufficient for 

RACM/RACT purposes for the Nassau 

Area at this time. EPA, therefore, 

proposes to approve Florida’s April 3, 

2015, SIP submission as meeting the 

RACM/RACT requirements of the CAA. 

In addition, by approving the RACM/ 

RACT for Rayonier, and the 

supplemental control measures for 

WestRock, for the purposes of Florida’s 

attainment planning, the control 

measures outlined in Tables 3 and 4 

will become permanent and enforceable 

SIP measures to meet the requirements 

of the CAA. 

Based on FL DEP’s modeling 

demonstration, the Nassau Area is 

projected to begin showing attaining 

monitoring values for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS by the 2018 attainment date. 

Currently, monitored design values are 

complying with the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

As noted previously, some of the control 

measures at WestRock will not be in 

place for a full year prior to the 

attainment date as recommended in the 

2014 SO2 Nonattainment Guidance; a 

recommendation intended to provide 

data to evaluate the effect of the control 

strategy on air quality. Because the Area 

is currently attaining the 2010 SO2

NAAQS, EPA proposes to find that the 

full control strategy will be in place for 

an adequate time prior to the attainment 

date to ensure attainment of the 

NAAQS. Furthermore, FL DEP has 

already implemented RACT controls for 

sources within the Nassau Area, as the 

RACT project was completed at 

Rayonier in 2014, long before the 

suggested 2017 date. 

E. RFP Plan 

Section 172(c)(2) of the CAA requires 

that an attainment plan includes a 

demonstration that shows reasonable 

further progress for meeting air quality 

standards will be achieved through 

generally linear incremental 

improvement in air quality. Section 

171(1) of the Act defines RFP as ‘‘such 

annual incremental reductions in 

emissions of the relevant air pollutant as 

are required by this part (part D) or may 

reasonably be required by EPA for the 

purpose of ensuring attainment of the 

applicable NAAQS by the applicable 

attainment date.’’ As stated originally in 

the 1994 SO2 Guideline Document 24

and repeated in the 2014 SO2

Nonattainment Guidance, EPA 

continues to believe that this definition 

is most appropriate for pollutants that 

are emitted from numerous and diverse 

sources, where the relationship between 

particular sources and ambient air 

quality are not directly quantified. In 

such cases, emissions reductions may be 

required from various types and 

locations of sources. The relationship 

between SO2 and sources is much more 

defined, and usually there is a single 

step between pre-control nonattainment 

and post-control attainment. Therefore, 

EPA interpreted RFP for SO2 as 

adherence to an ambitious compliance 

schedule in both the 1994 SO2

Guideline Document and the 2014 SO2

Nonattainment Guidance. The control 

measures for attainment of the 2010 SO2

NAAQS included in the State’s 

submittal have been modeled to achieve 

attainment of the NAAQS. The permits 

and the adoption of specific emissions 

limits and compliance parameters 

require these control measures and 

resulting emissions reductions to be 

achieved as expeditiously as 

practicable. As a result of an ambitious 

compliance schedule, projected to yield 

a sufficient reduction in SO2 emissions 

from the Rayonier and WestRock 

facilities, and resulting in modeled 

attainment of the SO2 NAAQS, EPA has 

preliminarily determined that FL DEP’s 

SO2 attainment plan for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS fulfills the RFP requirements 

for the Nassau Area. Furthermore, 

currently the monitored SO2 design 

value for the Nassau Area is below the 

NAAQS, and because of the modeled 

attainment with the selected control 

strategies, EPA does not anticipate 

future nonattainment, or that the Area 

will not meet the statutory October 4, 

2018, attainment date. EPA therefore 

proposes to approve Florida’s 

attainment plan with respect to the RFP 

requirements. 

F. Contingency Measures 

In accordance with section 172(c)(9) 

of the CAA, contingency measures are 

required as additional measures to be 

implemented in the event that an area 

fails to meet the RFP requirements or 

fails to attain a standard by its 

attainment date. These measures must 

be fully adopted rules or control 

measures that can be implemented 

quickly and without additional EPA or 

state action if the area fails to meet RFP 

requirements or fails to meet its 

attainment date and should contain 

trigger mechanisms and an 

implementation schedule. However, 

SO2 presents special considerations. As 

stated in the final 2010 SO2 NAAQS 

promulgation on June 22, 2010 (75 FR 

35520) and in the 2014 SO2

Nonattainment Guidance, EPA 

concluded that because of the 

quantifiable relationship between SO2

sources and control measures, it is 

appropriate that state agencies develop 

a ‘‘comprehensive program to identify 

sources of violations of the SO2 NAAQS 

and undertake an aggressive follow-up 

for compliance and enforcement.’’ 

Based on all the control measures that 

are completed for Rayonier and planned 

for WestRock, FL DEP believes that the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS can be achieved on a 

consistent basis. However, if a fourth 

exceedance of the SO2 NAAQS occurs 

during any calendar year, or upon a 

determination that the Nassau Area has 

failed to attain the NAAQS by the 

attainment date, Rayonier and WestRock 

will immediately undertake full system 

audits of controlled SO2 emissions. 

Within 10 days, each source will 

independently submit a report to FL 

DEP summarizing all operating 

parameters for four 10-day periods up to 

and including the dates of the 

exceedances. These sources are required 

to deploy provisional SO2 emission 

control strategies within this 10-day 

period and include ‘‘evidence that these 

control strategies have been deployed, 

as appropriate’’ in the report to FL DEP. 

FL DEP will then begin a 30-day 

evaluation of these reports to determine 

the cause of the exceedances, followed 

by a 30-day consultation period with the 

sources to develop and implement 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
57544 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

25The most recent quality-assured design values 

for each NAAQS are publicly available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values. 

appropriate operational changes needed 

to expeditiously to prevent any future 

violation of the NAAQS. Explicit 

measures addressed in Florida’s April 3, 

2015, SIP submittal are: 

• Fuel switching to reduce or 

eliminate the use of sulfur-containing 

fuels; 

• combustion air system 

enhancement; 

• vent gas scrubber enhancement; 

• white liquor scrubber enhancement; 

and/or 

• physical or operational reduction of 

production capacity. 

Florida may consider other options 

for additional controls if these measures 

are not deemed to be the most 

appropriate to address air quality issues 

in the Area. 

Florida would implement the most 

appropriate control strategy to address 

the exceedances. If a permit 

modification might be required to 

conform to applicable air quality 

standards, Florida will make use of the 

State’s authority in Rule 62–4.080, 

F.A.C. to require permittees to comply 

with new or additional conditions. This 

authority would allow Florida to work 

directly with the source(s) expeditiously 

to make changes to permits. 

Subsequently, Florida would submit 

any relevant permit change to EPA as a 

source-specific SIP revision to make the 

change permanent and enforceable. EPA 

recognizes this strategy as an acceptable 

additional step, but according to CAA 

section 172(c)(9), a measure requiring 

further action by FL DEP or EPA (e.g., 

necessitating a revised permit and SIP 

revision) could not serve as the primary 

contingency measure. 

EPA is proposing to find that Florida’s 

April 3, 2015, SIP submittal includes a 

comprehensive program to 

expeditiously identify the source of any 

violation of the SO2 NAAQS and for 

aggressive follow-up. Therefore, EPA 

proposes that the contingency measures 

submitted by Florida follow the 2014 

SO2 Nonattainment Guidance and meet 

the section 172(c)(9) . EPA notes that 

Florida has further committed to pursue 

additional actions that may require a 

SIP revision if needed to address the 

exceedances. 

G. Attainment Date 

Florida’s modeling indicates that the 

Nassau Area will begin attaining the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS by January 1, 2018, 

once the control strategy is completely 

implemented. This modeling does not 

provide for an attaining three-year 

design value by the proposed attainment 

date of October 4, 2018. However, 

expeditious implementation of RACM/ 

RACT for the Rayonier source, coupled 

with actual emissions from the 

WestRock source, has already provided 

for an attaining design value of 58 ppb 

considering 2013–2015 data, and in fact 

exhibited attaining data since 2011– 

2013 with a design value of 70 ppb.25

The recent design value is well under 

the NAAQS, and the ongoing 

compliance schedule for WestRock 

control measures will help to assure that 

the area maintains the NAAQS in the 

future. Therefore, the area is expected to 

attain the NAAQS by the attainment 

date. 

V. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve Florida’s 

SO2 attainment plan for the Nassau 

Area. EPA has preliminarily determined 

that the SIP meets the applicable 

requirements of the CAA. Specifically, 

EPA is proposing to approve Florida’s 

April 3, 2015, SIP submission, which 

includes the base year emissions 

inventory, a modeling demonstration of 

SO2 attainment, an analysis of RACM/ 

RACT, a RFP plan, and contingency 

measures for the Nassau Area. 

Additionally, EPA is proposing to 

approve into the Florida SIP specific 

SO2 emission limits and compliance 

parameters established for the two SO2

point sources impacting the Nassau 

Area. 

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 

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 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 

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, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides. 

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

Dated: August 15, 2016. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2016–20119 Filed 8–22–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2014–0425; FRL–9951–15– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; GA; Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS