24930 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

1 In addition to the generally applicable regional 

haze provisions at 40 CFR 51.308, EPA also 

promulgated regulations specific to addressing 

regional haze visibility impairment in Class I areas 

on the Colorado Plateau at 40 CFR 51.309. The 

latter regulations are therefore not relevant here. 

2See 64 FR 35714 (July 1, 1999). On January 10, 

2017, EPA promulgated revisions to the RHR that 

apply for the second and subsequent 

implementation periods. See 82 FR 3078. 

comments will also be placed in our 

online docket and can be viewed by 

following instructions on the https://

www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked 

Questions web page. We review all 

comments received, but we will only 

post comments that address the topic of 

the proposed rule. We may choose not 

to post off-topic, inappropriate, or 

duplicate comments that we receive. 

Personal information. We accept 

anonymous comments. Comments we 

post to https://www.regulations.gov will 

include any personal information you 

have provided. For more about privacy 

and submissions to the docket in 

response to this document, see DHS’s 

eRulemaking System of Records notice 

(85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020). 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security Measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing 

to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS 

AREAS. 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 

1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 

00170.1, Revision No. 01.2. 

■ 2. Amend § 165.154 by revising 

paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 165.154 Safety and Security Zones; 

Captain of the Port Long Island Sound Zone 

Safety and Security Zones. 

(a) * * * 

(3) Naval Submarine Base New 

London, Groton, CT (i) Location. All 

navigable waters of the Thames River, 

from surface to bottom, West of Naval 

Submarine Base New London, Groton, 

CT, enclosed by a line beginning at a 

point on the shoreline at 41°23′7.9′′ N, 

072°05′13.7′′ W; then to 41°23′7.9′′ N, 

072°05′16.9′′ W; then to 41°22′50.3′′ N, 

072°05′30.8′′ W; then to 41°23′42.9′′ N, 

072°05′40.1′′ W; then to 41°23′46.7′′ N, 

072°05′42.3′′ W; then to 41°23′53.9′′ N, 

072°05′44.5′′ W; then to 41°24′8.7′′ N, 

072°05′44.5′′ W; then to 41°24′16.2′′ N, 

072°05′43.4′′ W; then to a point on the 

shoreline 41°24′16.2′′ N, 072°05′36.4′′ 

W; then along the shoreline to the point 

of beginning (NAD 83). 

(ii) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

Dated: April 21, 2022. 

E.J. Van Camp, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Long Island Sound. 

[FR Doc. 2022–08933 Filed 4–26–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2021–0610; FRL–9081–01– 

R4] 

Air Plan Approval; NC; NC BART Rule 

Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

North Carolina State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revision, submitted through a 

letter dated April 13, 2021, proposing 

changes to North Carolina’s SIPapproved rule addressing best available 

retrofit technology (BART) for regional 

haze. EPA proposes to approve North 

Carolina’s SIP revision because the 

changes are consistent with Clean Air 

Act (CAA or Act) requirements. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 27, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2021–0610, 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: 

Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air and 

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

Ms. Notarianni can be reached via 

telephone at (404) 562–9031 or 

electronic mail at notarianni.michele@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

A. Regional Haze and Regional Haze 

SIPs 

Regional haze is visibility impairment 

that is produced by a multitude of 

sources and activities which are located 

across a broad geographic area and emit 

fine particulate matter (PM2.5) (e.g., 

sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon, 

elemental carbon, and soil dust) and 

their precursors (e.g., sulfur dioxide 

(SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX), and in 

some cases, ammonia and volatile 

organic compounds). Fine particle 

precursors react in the atmosphere to 

form PM2.5 which impairs visibility by 

scattering and absorbing light. Visibility 

impairment (i.e., light scattering) 

reduces the clarity, color, and visible 

distance that one can see. PM2.5 can also 

cause serious health effects (including 

premature death, heart attacks, irregular 

heartbeat, aggravated asthma, decreased 

lung function, and increased respiratory 

symptoms) and mortality in humans 

and contributes to environmental effects 

such as acid deposition and 

eutrophication. 

In section 169A of the 1977 

Amendments to the CAA, Congress 

created a program for protecting 

visibility in the nation’s national parks 

and wilderness areas. This section of the 

CAA establishes as a national goal the 

prevention of any future, and the 

remedying of any existing, 

anthropogenic impairment of visibility 

in 156 national parks and wilderness 

areas designated as mandatory Class I 

federal areas. Congress added section 

169B to the CAA in 1990 to address 

regional haze issues, and EPA 

promulgated the Regional Haze Rule 

(RHR), codified at 40 CFR 51.308,1 on 

July 1, 1999.2 The RHR established a 

requirement to submit a regional haze 

SIP which applies to all 50 states, the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2022 / Proposed Rules 24931 

3 40 CFR 51.300(b). 

4See 42 U.S.C. 7491(b)(2); 40 CFR 51.308(b) and 

(f); see also 64 FR 35768 (July 1, 1999). EPA 

established in the RHR that all states either have 

Class I areas within their borders or ‘‘contain 

sources whose emissions are reasonably anticipated 

to contribute to regional haze in a Class I area;’’ 

therefore, all states must submit regional haze SIPs. 

See 64 FR 35721. In addition to each of the 50 

states, EPA also concluded that the Virgin Islands 

and District of Columbia contain a Class I area and/ 

or contain sources whose emissions are reasonably 

anticipated to contribute regional haze in a Class I 

area. See 40 CFR 51.300(b) and (d)(3). 

5See 42 U.S.C. 7491(b)(2)(A); 40 CFR 51.308(d) 

and (e). 

6See 40 CFR 51.308(b). The 2017 RHR revisions 

changed the second period SIP due date from July 

31, 2018, to July 31, 2021, and maintained the 

existing schedules for the subsequent 

implementation periods. See 40 CFR 51.308(f). 

7See 40 CFR 51.308(e); BART Guidelines at I.F. 

8For additional details regarding the three steps 

of the BART evaluation process, see, e.g., 85 FR 

47134, 47136–37 (August 4, 2020). 

9CAIR created regional cap-and-trade programs to 

reduce SO2 and NOX emissions in 28 eastern states 

(and the District of Columbia), including North 

Carolina, that contributed to downwind 

nonattainment or interfered with maintenance of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) or the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

CAIR is no longer in effect is no longer in effect and 

has since been replaced by the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR). CSAPR requires 

substantial reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions 

from EGUs in 27 states in the Eastern United States 

that significantly contribute to downwind 

nonattainment of the 1997 PM2.5 and ozone 

NAAQS, 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. As discussed in Section II.B, below, 

EPA subsequently approved North Carolina’s 

reliance on its Clean Smokestacks Act as a BART 

alternative in lieu of CAIR. See 81 FR 32652 (May 

24, 2016). 

District of Columbia, and the Virgin 

Islands.3

To address regional haze visibility 

impairment, the RHR established an 

iterative planning process that requires 

states in which Class I areas are located 

and states from which emissions may 

reasonably be anticipated to cause or 

contribute to any impairment of 

visibility in a Class I area to periodically 

submit SIP revisions to address regional 

haze visibility impairment.4 Under the 

CAA, each SIP submission must contain 

‘‘a long-term (ten to fifteen years) 

strategy for making reasonable progress 

toward meeting the national goal,’’ and 

the initial round of SIP submissions also 

had to address the statutory requirement 

that certain older, larger sources of 

visibility-impairing pollutants install 

and operate BART, as discussed further 

in Section I.B, below.5 States’ first 

regional haze SIPs were due by 

December 17, 2007, with subsequent SIP 

submissions containing revised longterm strategies originally due July 31, 

2018, and every ten years thereafter.6

B. BART 

1. Statutory and Regulatory 

Requirements 

Section 169A of the CAA directs 

states to evaluate the use of retrofit 

controls at certain larger, often 

uncontrolled, older stationary sources in 

order to address visibility impacts from 

these sources. Specifically, section 

169A(b)(2) of the CAA requires states to 

revise their SIPs to contain such 

measures as may be necessary to make 

reasonable progress towards the 

national visibility goal, including a 

requirement that certain categories of 

existing major stationary sources built 

between 1962 and 1977 procure, install, 

and operate ‘‘Best Available Retrofit 

Technology’’ as determined by the state. 

On July 6, 2005, EPA published the 

Guidelines for BART Determinations 

Under the Regional Haze Rule at 

Appendix Y to 40 CFR part 51 

(hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘BART 

Guidelines’’) to assist states in the BART 

evaluation process. Under the RHR and 

the BART Guidelines, the BART 

evaluation process consists of three 

steps: (1) An identification of all BARTeligible sources, (2) an assessment of 

whether the BART-eligible sources are 

subject to BART, and (3) a 

determination of the BART controls.7

States must conduct BART 

determinations for all ‘‘BART-eligible’’ 

sources that may reasonably be 

anticipated to cause or contribute to any 

visibility impairment in a Class I area, 

or in the alternative, adopt an emissions 

trading program or other alternative 

program as long as the alternative 

provides greater reasonable progress 

towards improving visibility than 

BART. In making a BART determination 

for a fossil fuel-fired electric generating 

plant with a total generating capacity in 

excess of 750 megawatts, a state must 

use the approach set forth in the BART 

Guidelines. A state is generally 

encouraged, but not required, to follow 

the BART Guidelines in other aspects.8

A regional haze SIP must include 

source-specific BART emissions limits 

and compliance schedules for each 

source subject to BART. Once a state has 

made its BART determination, the 

BART controls must be installed and in 

operation as expeditiously as 

practicable, but no later than five years 

after the date of EPA approval of the 

regional haze SIP. See CAA section 

169A(g)(4); 40 CFR 51.308(e)(1)(iv). In 

addition to what is required by the RHR, 

general SIP requirements mandate that 

the SIP must also include all regulatory 

requirements related to monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and reporting for the 

BART controls on the source. See CAA 

section 110(a)(2). 

States undertook the BART 

determination process during the first 

implementation period. The BART 

requirement was a one-time 

requirement. BART-eligible sources may 

need to be re-assessed for additional 

controls in future implementation 

periods under the CAA’s reasonable 

progress provisions. States should treat 

BART-eligible sources the same as other 

reasonable progress sources going 

forward. See 81 FR 26942, 26947 (May 

4, 2016). 

2. Summary of BART Sources in North 

Carolina 

In the State’s December 17, 2007, 

regional haze plan for the first 

implementation period, North Carolina 

identified 17 BART-eligible sources (six 

electric generating units (EGUs) and 

eleven non-EGUs) in the State. The nonEGUs submitted BART-exemption 

modeling demonstrations for NOX, SO2, 

and particulate matter (PM) as 

applicable to individual facilities. Nine 

of the 11 non-EGU sources 

demonstrated that they are not subject 

to BART by modeling less than the 

State’s BART-exemption visibility 

impact threshold of 0.5 deciviews. The 

EGUs relied on the Clean Air Interstate 

Rule (CAIR) 9 as a BART alternative for 

NOX and SO2 and submitted BARTexemption modeling demonstrations for 

PM. All of the EGUs demonstrated that 

they are not subject to BART for PM by 

modeling less than the State’s BARTexemption threshold. See 77 FR 11858, 

11874 (February 28, 2012). 

North Carolina found that two nonEGUs (Blue Ridge Paper and PCS 

Phosphate) had modeled visibility 

impacts greater than the State’s 0.5 

deciview BART contribution threshold. 

Therefore, these two facilities were 

found subject to BART and submitted 

State permit applications including 

their proposed BART determinations. 

PCS Phosphate subsequently shut down 

its two sulfuric acid units subject to 

BART and these units were not further 

evaluated. For Blue Ridge Paper, North 

Carolina determined and EPA agreed 

that BART for the subject-to-BART units 

(two recovery furnaces, their associated 

smelt dissolving tanks, and the black 

liquor oxidation system) is the existing 

emissions control systems in place at 

the time of that determination. See 77 

FR at 11874–75. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
24932 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

10To view EPA’s full analysis of the October 31, 

2014, North Carolina SIP revision and additional 

details regarding the relationship between BART 

and EPA’s transport rules, see the notice of 

proposed rulemaking at 81 FR 19519 (April 5, 

2016). 

11See CAA Section 110(l). 

II. Summary and EPA’s Evaluation of 

North Carolina’s SIP Revision 

A. Summary of North Carolina’s SIP 

Revision 

Through a letter dated April 13, 2021, 

and submitted to EPA on April 14, 2021, 

North Carolina submitted a SIP revision 

to modify its SIP-approved rule at 15A 

North Carolina Administrative Code 

(NCAC) 02D .0543, Best Available 

Retrofit Technology (NC BART Rule), 

which applies to BART-eligible sources. 

EPA incorporated this rule into North 

Carolina’s SIP as part of EPA’s limited 

approval action on the State’s regional 

haze plan for the first implementation 

period. See 77 FR 38185 (June 27, 2012). 

The proposed revisions to the NC 

BART Rule include the following 

changes. The submission removes 15A 

NCAC 02D .0543(g) because it is 

outdated, requiring the submission of 

BART permit applications by September 

1, 2006. The submission also removes 

15A NCAC 02D .0543(i) which required 

owners or operators of BART-eligible 

sources required to adopt BART 

controls in North Carolina to have 

installed and begun operation of the 

BART controls by December 31, 2012. 

The revision also renumbers .0543(h) to 

.0543(g) and removes the statement that 

EGUs covered under and complying 

with 15A NCAC 02D .2400, Clean Air 

Interstate Rules, are considered to be in 

compliance with the BART 

requirements for NOX and SO2 under 

the NC BART Rule. Additionally, the 

revisions update the provisions for 

accessing EPA’s Guidelines for 

Determining Best Available Retrofit 

Technology for Coal-fired Power Plants 

and Other Existing Stationary Facilities 

in a renumbered provision under 15A 

NCAC 02D .0543(h) (formerly provision 

(j)). The submission also includes nonsubstantive punctuation and wording 

changes. 

B. EPA’s Evaluation of North Carolina’s 

SIP Revision 

1. NC BART Rule Revisions 

North Carolina elected to adopt the 

NC BART Rule to establish BART 

requirements in response to federal 

requirements that states address BART 

in their initial regional haze SIPs. The 

CAA and RHR do not require states to 

develop state BART rules for 

incorporation into their SIPs. Thus, 

changes to the NC BART Rule are 

approvable as long as North Carolina 

continues to implement and enforce 

BART and the changes are otherwise 

consistent with federal BART 

requirements. EPA proposes to find that 

the rule changes are approvable for the 

reasons discussed below. 

Regarding the removal of provisions 

under 15A NCAC 02D .0543, EPA 

preliminarily agrees that provisions (g) 

and (i) can be removed because the 

State-established due dates of 

September 1, 2006, and December 31, 

2012, for submission of BART permit 

applications and installation and 

operation of BART, respectively, have 

since passed and all subject sources 

have met those requirements. 

Furthermore, the rule continues to 

require the owner or operator of a 

BART-subject emissions unit to install, 

operate, and maintain BART as 

approved by the State after BART is 

incorporated into the unit’s permit 

under 15A NCAC 02Q. See 15A NCAC 

02D .0543(f). 

EPA preliminarily concurs with the 

removal of the reference to 15A NCAC 

02D .2400, Clean Air Interstate Rules, as 

a means to satisfy BART for SO2 and 

NOX for covered EGUs in North 

Carolina because EPA approved a SIP 

revision on October 31, 2014, allowing 

the State to rely on its Clean 

Smokestacks Act as an alternative to 

BART to satisfy BART requirements for 

BART-eligible EGUs formerly subject to 

CAIR. See 81 FR 32652 (May 24, 

2016).10

EPA preliminarily concurs with the 

remainder of the changes to the rule 

because they are editorial revisions that 

do not alter the substance of the NC 

BART Rule. 

For the reasons described above, EPA 

preliminarily concludes that the NC 

BART Rule changes do not alter the 

State’s authority and ability to continue 

to implement and enforce BART in 

North Carolina, are consistent with 

federal BART requirements, and do not 

interfere with any applicable 

requirement concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress or any other 

applicable CAA requirement.11

2. Federal Land Manager (FLM) Review 

In accordance with 40 CFR 

51.308(i)(4), Section 11 of the State’s 

December 17, 2007, regional haze SIP 

contains procedures for continuing 

consultation between the State and 

FLMs on the implementation of the 

State’s visibility protection program. 

North Carolina provided the SIP 

revision to the FLMs to review pursuant 

to the State’s regional haze SIP and 40 

CFR 51.308(i)(2), and the FLMs have not 

provided any comments. 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with the 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

North Carolina rule 15A NCAC 02D 

.0543 entitled ‘‘Best Available Retrofit 

Technology,’’ state effective November 

1, 2020, which removes outdated 

provisions and makes minor editorial 

changes. EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these materials 

generally available through 

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region 4 office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA proposes to approve the SIP 

revision containing changes to 15 NCAC 

02D .0543 because they are consistent 

with the BART requirements set forth in 

the RHR and CAA and the applicable 

requirements in CAA section 110. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. This action merely proposes to 

approve state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this proposed action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2022 / Proposed Rules 24933 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: April 19, 2022. 

Daniel Blackman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2022–08899 Filed 4–26–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1