Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 83 / Wednesday, April 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 24337 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0206; FRL–9908–93– 

Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Wisconsin; 

Nitrogen Oxide Combustion Turbine 

Alternative Control Requirements for 

the Milwaukee-Racine Former 

Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: On February 24, 2014, the 

Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources (WDNR) submitted revisions 

to its nitrogen oxide (NOX) combustion 

turbine rule for the Milwaukee-Racine 

former nonattainment area. This 

revision is contained in ‘‘2013 

Wisconsin Act 91—Senate Bill 371’’ 

which allows alternative NOX emission 

requirements for simple cycle 

combustion turbines that undergo a 

modification on or after February 1, 

2001, if dry low NOX combustion is not 

technically or economically feasible. 

This revision is approvable because it 

provides for alternative NOX

requirements subject to Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) approval on a 

case-by-case basis and therefore satisfies 

the reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) requirements of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective June 30, 2014, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by May 30, 

2014. If adverse comments are received, 

EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 

the direct final rule in the Federal 

Register informing the public that the 

rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–RO5– 

OAR–2014–0206, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 408–2279. 

4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

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

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, 

Chief, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office normal hours 

of operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. The Regional Office official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2014– 

0206. 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 docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Steven 

Rosenthal, Environmental Engineer, at 

(312) 886–6052 before visiting the 

Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Rosenthal, Environmental 

Engineer, Attainment Planning & 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6052, 

rosenthal.steven@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What is the background for this action? 

II. What are Wisconsin’s NOX rule revisions 

and what is EPA’s analysis of the 

revisions? 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background for this 

action? 

The WDNR established a stationary 

source NOX control program in 2000 to 

meet rate-of-progress (ROP) 

requirements that are applicable to the 

Milwaukee-Racine former 

nonattainment area under the 1990 1-hr 

ozone national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS). The entire NOX

control program consists of emission 

limits for new sources, existing sources, 

and existing sources that undergo a 

major modification. These NOX control 

requirements are set forth in chapter NR 

428, Wisconsin Administrative Code 

(NR 428). EPA approved this NOX

control program as part of Wisconsin’s 

ozone State implementation plan (SIP) 

on November 13, 2001, 66 FR 56931. 

Also, EPA approved RACT 

requirements, set forth in NR 

428.22(1)(g)1.a and b., on March 24, 

2010, 75 FR 14116. 

The Milwaukee-Racine former 

nonattainment area was designated 

attainment for the 1997 8-hr ozone 

NAAQS on February 9, 2012, 77 FR 

6739. As part of the designation to 

attainment, a maintenance plan was 

required that showed daily NOX

emissions will not exceed levels 

consistent with attainment. The NR 428 

ROP and RACT requirements, among 

other requirements, are part of this 

maintenance plan. 

Under the current SIP approved NR 

428 NOX control program, existing 

simple cycle combustion turbines larger 

than 84 megawatts (MW) that undergo a 

major modification after February 2001 

must meet the emission limitations set 

forth in s. NR 428.04(2)(g)1.a. and 2.a. 

This provision sets NOX emission limits 

of 12 or 25 parts per million dry volume 

(ppmdv) at 15% oxygen (O2), on a 30- 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

24338 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 83 / Wednesday, April 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

day rolling basis, when firing natural 

gas or distillate oil, respectively. 

II. What are Wisconsin’s NOX rule 

revisions and what is EPA’s analysis of 

the revisions? 

The WDNR originally set the NOX

emission limitations for combustion 

turbines in NR 428.04(2)(g)1.a. and 2.a. 

based on the assumption that dry low 

NOX (DLN) combustion technology was 

both feasible and available for new and 

modified combustion turbines. As 

previously stated, the emission 

limitations in NR 428.04(2)(g)1.a. and 

2.a. apply to simple cycle combustion 

turbines that are larger than 84 MW and 

undergo a major modification. There are 

only four existing combustion turbines 

in the Milwaukee-Racine former 

nonattainment area that may meet these 

criteria. These combustion turbines are 

the model 11N turbines that were 

manufactured by ASEA Brown-Boveri 

(ABB) and operated by We Energies at 

its Paris generating facility. 

In 2008, the WDNR conducted a best 

available control technology (BACT) 

assessment for a set of ABB 11N 

combustion turbines operated by We 

Energies at its Concord facility. This 

BACT analysis is applicable to the NR 

428 and alternative emission 

requirements as it applies to the same 

model combustion turbine. In 

performing this top-down BACT control 

analysis, selective catalytic reduction 

(SCR) was the most effective control 

technology considered. However, the 

WDNR determined that SCR was not 

cost-effective for BACT as the cost 

would likely exceed 8,236 dollars per 

ton of controlled NOX. The analysis also 

noted that the cost would likely be even 

higher due to intermittent operating 

profiles and high flue gas temperatures 

associated with simple cycle 

combustion turbines. After excluding 

SCR, the analysis showed that the next 

best available technology is DLN 

combustion technology. In this case, the 

WDNR determined that DLN was not 

commercially available for the ABB 11N 

simple cycle combustion turbines. After 

SCR and DLN, the Concord BACT 

analysis indicates that the next best 

technology for the 11N ABB combustion 

turbines is water injection. Therefore 

water injection was determined by the 

WDNR to be BACT for the Concord 

simple cycle combustion turbines. Thus, 

the best control technology available 

that is consistent with the intent of NR 

428 in meeting ROP and RACT 

requirements is water injection for those 

simple cycle combustion turbines for 

which DLN is not available. 

The Wisconsin Legislature enacted 

Wisconsin statute s. 285.27 (3m) on 

December 13, 2013 to establish different 

emission requirements for simple cycle 

combustion turbines that are modified 

and that do not have the necessary DLN 

combustion control technology 

available. Under the proposed 

requirement, the affected combustion 

turbines must operate water injection 

and meet NOX emission limits of 25 or 

65 ppmdv at 15% O2, on a 30-day 

rolling basis, when firing natural gas or 

distillate oil, respectively. The emission 

limitations originally applicable under 

NR 428 for modified combustion 

turbines and the alternative 

requirements enacted under s. 285.27 

(3m), Wis. Stats., are compared in Table 

1. 

TABLE 1—NOX EMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR SIMPLE CYCLE COMBUSTION TURBINE >84 MW THAT UNDERGO A MAJOR

MODIFICATION

NR 428 

Emission limits 

s. 285.27 (3m) 

Wis. Stats. 

alternative requirements 

Emission Limitations: 1.

Natural Gas ................................................................................................... 12 ............................................ 25. 

Distillate Oil ........................................................................................................... 25 ............................................ 65. 

Technology Requirement ...................................................................................... None Specified ....................... Operation of Water Injection. 

1Emission limitations in parts per million dry volume @15% O2 on a 30-day rolling basis. 

In order to be subject to the 

alternative requirements under s. 285.27 

(3m), Wis. Stats., the owner/operator of 

the combustion turbine must 

satisfactorily demonstrate that 

equipping the turbine with a DLN 

combustion system is not 

technologically or economically feasible 

or that a DLN combustion system is not 

commercially available from the 

manufacturer of the combustion turbine 

and the owner/operator must obtain a 

written confirmation of this 

demonstration from EPA. 

Based on the use of water injection 

NOX control technology, s. 285.27 (3m), 

Wis. Stats. sets forth emission 

limitations of 25 or 65 ppmdv at 15% 

O2, on a 30-day rolling basis, when 

firing natural gas or distillate oil, 

respectively. These emissions 

limitations are appropriate for two 

reasons. First, these emission limits are 

consistent with the Concord combustion 

turbines BACT emission limits. Second, 

these are the same emission limitations 

for using water injection in meeting 

RACT requirements under the NR 428 

control program. These RACT 

requirements are set forth in NR 

428.22(1)(g)1.a. and b., Wis. Adm. Code, 

and were approved by the WDNR and 

EPA on March 24, 2010, 75 FR 14116. 

The alternative emission requirements 

established in s. 285.27 (3m), Wis. 

Stats., will not increase allowable NOX

emission rates above current levels for 

the affected combustion turbines. This 

determination is based on looking at the 

ROP and RACT emission limitations for 

simple cycle combustion turbines under 

the NR 428 NOX control program. As 

shown in Table 2, the alternative 

emission limits in s. 285.27 (3m), Wis. 

Stats. are significantly more stringent 

than the ROP emission limitations and 

are equivalent to the applicable NOX

RACT emission limitations. The 

combustion turbines in question at the 

Paris facility have been subject to the 

NOX RACT emission limitations since 

May 2009. Therefore, as shown in Table 

2, the alternative emission limitations 

do not relax current allowable emission 

requirements. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 83 / Wednesday, April 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 24339 

TABLE 2—COMPARISON OF EXISTING COMBUSTION TURBINE AND ALTERNATIVE NOX EMISSION LIMITS

Emission limitations @ 15% O2 on a 30-day rolling basis 

Effective 2001 

NR 428 

ROP Limits 1

Effective 2009 

NR 428 

RACT Limits 2

s. 285.27 (3m) 

Wis. Stats. 

Alternative Limits 

Natural Gas .................................................................................. 75 25 25 

Distillate Oil .................................................................................. 110 65 65 

1 ROP emission limitations for existing simple cycle combustion turbines larger than 85 MW are set forth in NR 428.05(3)(d)1. and 2., Wis. 

Adm. Code. 2 RACT emission limitations for existing simple cycle combustion turbines larger than 85 MW are set forth in NR 428.22(1)(g)1.a. and b., Wis. 

Adm. Code. 

In conclusion, the WDNR established 

more stringent NOX emission limits for 

simple cycle combustion turbines in the 

Milwaukee-Racine former 

nonattainment area that undergo a major 

modification than for other existing 

simple cycle combustion turbines, but 

subsequently determined that these 

more stringent limits are not feasible for 

the four existing combustion turbines to 

which these limits will likely apply. 

The Wisconsin legislature adopted s. 

285.27 (3m), which became effective on 

December 15, 2013, to allow these units 

to meet the existing RACT limits instead 

of the more stringent limits, if EPA 

agrees in writing that equipping these 

turbines with a DLN combustion system 

is not technologically or that 

economically feasible or a DLN 

combustion system is not commercially 

available from the manufacturer of the 

combustion turbine. 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

For the reasons stated above, EPA is 

approving Section 1. 285.27(3m), into 

Wisconsin’s NOX SIP. 

We are publishing this action without 

prior proposal because we view this as 

a noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

State plan if relevant adverse written 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective June 30, 2014 without further 

notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comments by May 30, 

2014. If we receive such comments, we 

will withdraw this action before the 

effective date by publishing a 

subsequent document that will 

withdraw the final action. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed action. 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 is 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. If we 

do not receive any comments, this 

action will be effective June 30, 2014. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of 

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 

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 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.); 

• 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 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 rule 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. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by June 30, 2014. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

24340 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 83 / Wednesday, April 30, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

1CAIR required certain states, including 

Pennsylvania, to reduce emissions of SO2 and NOX

that significantly contribute to downwind 

nonattainment of the 1997 NAAQS for ozone and 

PM2.5. 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005). 

2EPA promulgated CSAPR (76 FR 48208, August 

8, 2011) as a replacement to CAIR in response to 

the United States Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia Circuit’s decision in North Carolina v. 

EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008). 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: March 20, 2014. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Section 52.2570 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(131) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2570 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(131) On February 24, 2014, the 

Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources submitted revisions to its 

nitrogen oxide (NOX) combustion 

turbine rule for the Milwaukee-Racine 

former nonattainment area. This 

revision is contained in ‘‘2013 

Wisconsin Act 91—Senate Bill 371’’ 

which allows alternative NOX emission 

requirements for simple cycle 

combustion turbines, that undergo a 

modification on or after February 1, 

2001, if dry low NOX combustion is not 

technically or economically feasible. 

This revision is approvable because it 

provides for alternative NOX

requirements subject to EPA approval 

on a case-by-case basis and therefore 

satisfies the reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) requirements of the 

Clean Air Act (Act). 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

Wisconsin statute, Section 285.27 (3m), 

Exemption from Standards for Certain 

Combustion Turbines, as revised by 

2013 Wisconsin Act 91 enacted 

December 13, 2013. (A copy of 2013 

Wisconsin Act 91 is attached to Section 

285.27(3m) to verify the enactment 

date.) 

[FR Doc. 2014–09724 Filed 4–29–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0002; FRL–9910–06– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Regional Haze State 

Implementation Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is reissuing its final 

limited approval of the Pennsylvania 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) to 

implement the regional haze program 

for the first planning period through 

2018. EPA originally finalized a limited 

approval of the Pennsylvania regional 

haze SIP on July 13, 2012. In response 

to a petition for review of that final 

action in the United States Court of 

Appeals for the Third Circuit, EPA 

successfully moved for a voluntary 

remand, without vacatur, to more 

adequately respond to certain public 

comments. EPA is providing new 

responses to those comments in this 

rulemaking notice. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

May 30, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0002. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the electronic docket, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., confidential business 

information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for 

public inspection 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 Commonwealth’s 

submittal are available at the 

Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air 

Quality Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 

Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 

17105. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Asrah Khadr, U.S. EPA, Region 3, (215) 

814–2071, or by email at khadr.asrah@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses 

III. Summary of Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On January 26, 2012, EPA proposed a 

limited approval of the Pennsylvania 

regional haze SIP as meeting most of the 

applicable requirements of sections 

169A and 169B of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) and EPA’s implementing 

regulations at 40 CFR 51.308–309 

(Regional Haze Rule) and 40 CFR 51, 

appendix Y (BART Guidelines). 77 FR 

3984. In that same action, EPA proposed 

to approve the Pennsylvania regional 

haze SIP as meeting the infrastructure 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the 

CAA relating to visibility protection for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

and the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. EPA received 

several adverse comments on its 

proposed limited approval, including 

comments from Earthjustice on behalf of 

Sierra Club, the National Parks 

Conservation Association, and the Clean 

Air Council. 

In a separate but related action, EPA 

had previously proposed a limited 

disapproval of the Pennsylvania 

regional haze SIP for relying on the 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) 1 to 

satisfy the best available retrofit 

technology (BART) requirement for 

emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) from 

Pennsylvania’s BART-eligible electric 

generating units (EGUs). 76 FR 82219. In 

that same action, EPA proposed a 

Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) that 

replaced Pennsylvania’s reliance on 

CAIR with reliance on the Cross-State 

Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR).2

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES