Document ID: EPA-R02-OAR-2018-0621-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: New Jersey; Approval of Source-Specific Air Quality Implementation Plans
Posted Date: 2018-10-29T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 209 (Monday, October 29, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54300-54303]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23575]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R02-OAR-2018-0621, FRL-9985-87-Region 2]

Approval of Source-Specific Air Quality Implementation Plans; New 
Jersey

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve source-specific revisions to the New Jersey State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) for 8-hour ozone for Paulsboro Refining, 
Buckeye Port Reading Terminal, Buckeye Pennsauken Terminal, and 
Phillips 66 Company's Linden facility. The source-specific SIPs address 
the Reasonably Available Control Technology for volatile organic 
compounds (VOCs) for external floating roof tanks. The intended effect 
of these revisions is to address how facilities should meet state 
regulatory obligations for external floating roof tanks that store VOCs 
with vapor pressure three (3) or more pounds per square inch absolute 
to be equipped with a domed roof.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 28, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-
R02-OAR-2018-0621, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or withdrawn. The EPA may publish any comment received to its 
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you 
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia 
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written 
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, such as 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: Linda Longo, Air Programs Branch, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 
New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-3565, or by email at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. The EPA's Evaluation of New Jersey's Submittals
    a. Paulsboro Refining
    b. Buckeye Port Reading Terminal and Buckeye Pennsauken Terminal
    c. Phillips 66 Company
III. Proposed Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve 
revisions to the New Jersey State Implementation Plan (SIP) for 
attainment and maintenance of the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the following major volatile organic 
compound (VOC) facilities: Paulsboro Refining, Buckeye Port Reading 
Terminal, Buckeye Pennsauken Terminal, and Phillips 66 Company's Linden 
facility. Specifically, under New Jersey Administrative Code (NJAC), 
Title 7, Chapter 27, Subchapter 16 (``Control and Prohibition of Air 
Pollution by Volatile Organic Compound''), Section 2 (``VOC Stationary 
Storage Tanks''), all external floating roof tanks (EFRTs) in Range III 
with vapor pressure three (3) or more pounds per square inch absolute 
(psia) and that were in existence on May 18, 2009 must be equipped with 
a domed roof the first time the tank is degassed after May 19, 2009, 
and by no later than May 1, 2020. See NJAC 7:27-16.2(l)(4). In 
addition, NJAC 7:27-16.17(a-q) establishes procedures and standards for 
alternative and facility-specific VOC control requirements. The four 
relevant facilities were in existence on May 18, 2009, and so absent 
the currently proposed SIP revisions would be required to dome all 
EFRTs in accordance with NJAC 7:27-16.2(l)(4), which has already been 
approved by the EPA into the New Jersey SIP. See 75 FR 45483 (August 3, 
2010). However, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 
(NJDEP) reviewed and approved for these facilities alternative VOC 
control plans and respective Reasonably Available Control Technology 
(RACT), i.e., analysis of the lowest economically feasible emission 
limitation, for their EFRTs.
    Following NJDEP's review and approval, the EPA reviewed the four 
facilities' alternative VOC control plans and RACT analyses that 
include (1)

[[Page 54301]]

installing domes on 25 out of the 51 EFRTs, and leaving the remaining 
26 EFRTs without domes based on the facilities' RACT cost analysis 
despite the NJAC 7:27-16.2(l)(4) requirements, and (2) installing eight 
domes after the regulatory due date.
    In its SIP revision submittals from all four facilities, NJDEP also 
identified alternative, non-doming emission reduction strategies for 
VOC and nitrogen oxides (NOX) beyond what would be achieved 
by doming the 26 EFRTs that would not receive domes under this SIP 
revision. However, NJDEP did not request that the EPA approve these 
additional non-doming measures into the New Jersey SIP revision, and 
therefore the EPA did not evaluate them for approvability. A full 
summary of doming and non-doming measures is included in the technical 
support document (TSD) that is contained in the EPA's docket assigned 
to this Federal Register notice.

Ozone Requirements

    In 1997, the EPA revised the health-based NAAQS for 8-hour ozone, 
setting it at 0.084 parts per million (ppm) averaged over an 8-hour 
time frame. See 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997). The EPA revised the 8-hour 
ozone standard twice since 1997; in March 2008, the EPA revised the 
standard to 0.075 ppm, and in October 2015 the EPA revised it to 0.070 
ppm while retaining the 2008 ozone indicators. See 73 FR 16436 (March 
27, 2008); 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015). After the EPA establishes a 
new or revised NAAQS, the Clean Air Act directs the EPA and the states 
to take steps to ensure that the new or revised NAAQS are met. One of 
the first steps, known as the initial area designations, involves 
identifying areas of the country that are not meeting the new or 
revised NAAQS, as well as the nearby areas that contain emissions 
sources that contribute emissions to the areas not meeting the NAAQS.
    The entire State of New Jersey has been designated as nonattainment 
since the adoption of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and is divided into 
two nonattainment areas. The two nonattainment areas in New Jersey are 
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City (PA-NJ-MD-DE) and New York-
Northern New Jersey-Long Island (NY-NJ-CT). These areas are designated 
as marginal nonattainment and as moderate nonattainment, respectively, 
for the newest 0.070 ppm 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\1\ As such, New Jersey has 
developed ozone SIPs to attain the standards and will consider source-
specific SIPs as necessary. A source-specific SIP is submitted by a 
facility to request approval for source-specific emission limitations, 
and if approved by the state and the EPA, is incorporated into the 
state's ozone SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Classifications of these areas for the current and previous 
ozone NAAQS can be found at 40 CFR 81.331.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

RACT Requirements

    RACT is defined as the lowest emission limit that a source is 
capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is 
reasonably available considering technological and economic 
feasibility. Clean Air Act (CAA) sections 172(c)(1), 182(b)(2) and 
182(f) require nonattainment areas that are designated as moderate or 
above to adopt RACT. The entire State of New Jersey is subject to this 
requirement (1) due to nonattainment area designations for the 8-hour 
ozone standards (40 CFR 81.331), and (2) because the State of New 
Jersey is located within the Ozone Transport Region (OTR), a region in 
which the Clean Air Act requires that state SIPs implement RACT 
requirements. See CAA Sec.  184(b)(1)(B).
    In November 2005, the EPA published the final rule that discusses 
the RACT requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and outlined 
the SIP requirements and deadlines for various areas designated as 
moderate nonattainment. See 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005) (the 
``Phase 2 Rule'').
    On August 1, 2007, the NJDEP finalized RACT revisions to its SIP to 
address the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and the EPA approved those revisions on 
May 15, 2009. See ``RACT for the Eight-Hour Ozone NAAQS and other 
Associated SIP Revisions for the Fine Particulate Matter, Regional 
Haze, and Transport of Air Pollution,'' available at http://www.nj.gov/dep/baqp/sip/8-hrRACT-Final.pdf; ``Approval and Promulgation of 
Implementation Plans; New Jersey Reasonable Further Progress Plans, 
Reasonably Available Control Technology, Reasonably Available Control 
Measures and Conformity Budgets; Final Rule'', 74 FR 22837. The NJDEP 
believes that significantly higher costs are warranted and should be 
considered reasonable with respect to available technology than were 
discussed in the Phase 2 Rule. Although no dollar amount is suggested, 
the NJDEP identifies five considerations it plans to apply to sources 
when determining RACT:
    (1) Past New Jersey costs for retrofitting a given control;
    (2) Average RACT cost (dollars per tons reduced) for a control 
technology and maximum RACT cost. Once a reasonable number of sources 
in a source category achieve a lower emission level, other sources 
should do the same;
    (3) The seriousness of the Region's ozone air quality exceedance. 
For nonattainment areas with higher ozone levels, higher costs for 
controls are reasonable;
    (4) The seriousness of the need to reduce transported air 
pollution. As an OTR state, higher costs for RACT are justified; and
    (5) The NJDEP plan for addressing economic feasibility in RACT 
rules.
    The NJDEP's intent is to specify RACT at the lowest emission limit 
that a reasonable number of similar facilities have already 
successfully implemented for each source category.

II. The EPA's Evaluation of New Jersey's Submittals

    New Jersey regulations at NJAC 7:27-16.2(l)(4), already approved 
into the ozone SIP, set forth requirements to dome existing EFRTs in 
Range III on or before May 1, 2020. See 75 FR 45483 (August 3, 2010). 
The four facilities' source-specific SIP revisions are before the EPA 
for approval because they would allow 26 EFRTs to avoid doming and 
would extend the deadline for installing eight domes. The NJDEP 
submittal relies on documents submitted by the four facilities to New 
Jersey reviewing the cost, feasibility, and projected emissions 
reductions of doming tanks similar in diameter when deciding which 
tanks are optimal for doming. Some of the facilities' tanks are smaller 
in dimension and contain organic liquids of lower VOC concentrations, 
and thus doming these tanks would result in spending comparatively much 
more for a substantially smaller reduction in VOC emissions.
    The EPA has determined that the doming analyses identified in the 
source-specific SIP revisions are consistent with the NJDEP's VOC RACT 
regulation, which is incorporated into the NJ SIP. The reader is 
referred to the TSD for a detailed discussion of the EPA's evaluation 
of the source-specific SIP submittal. Below is a summary:
a. Paulsboro Refining
    On December 10, 2015, the NJDEP submitted to the EPA proposed 
revisions to the New Jersey SIP for ozone specifically providing an 
alternative VOC control plan for the Paulsboro Refining facility 
located at 800 Billingsport Road, Paulsboro, New Jersey. Paulsboro 
Refining owns and operates 21 EFRTs in Range III with vapor pressure 
three (3) or more psia.

[[Page 54302]]

According to the facility's RACT analysis, doming the total inventory 
of 21 EFRT is estimated to cost between $19,000 and $149,000 per ton of 
VOC emissions reduced. The cost per ton to dome all 21 EFRTs exceeds 
what the state defines as economically feasible for RACT.

Proposed Paulsboro Refining Source-Specific Doming Requirements

    The EPA is proposing to approve a source-specific SIP revision 
allowing the facility not to dome eleven of its 21 EFRTs that are in 
Range III, and to allow the facility to complete doming of five EFRTs 
beyond the regulatory deadline of May 1, 2020. Paulsboro Refining has 
already installed three domes (Tanks 724, 1319, and 1115), and will 
install two additional domes (Tanks 2173 and 1064 \2\) by the 
regulatory deadline. The facility is scheduled to install five more 
domes by 2028 according to the following schedule:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ At the time NJDEP submitted its source-specific SIP revision 
for Paulsboro Refining, Tank 1064 was scheduled for doming by 
December 31, 2024. However, recent facility developments confirmed 
by NJDEP indicate that Tank 1064 was taken out of service, rebuilt, 
and is scheduled for doming by the end of 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Tank 1063 by Dec. 31, 2021
     Tank 1116 by Dec. 31, 2023
     Tank 1320 by Dec. 31, 2025
     Tank 1065 by Dec. 31, 2026
     Tank 1066 by Dec. 31, 2028
    In total, under the proposed source-specific SIP revision, the 
facility will dome ten out of 21 EFRTs in Range III, including Tanks 
724, 1319, 1115, 2173, 1064, 1063, 1116, 1320, 1065 and 1066. The 
eleven EFRTs not to be domed are Tanks 725, S02, 1023, 1027, 2869, 
2940, 2941, 3174, SSO, SSI, and SS2.
b. Buckeye Port Reading Terminal and Buckeye Pennsauken Terminal
    On August 15, 2014, the NJDEP submitted to the EPA proposed 
revisions to the New Jersey SIP for ozone specifically providing an 
alternative VOC control plan for both the Buckeye Port Reading Terminal 
and Pennsauken Terminal, located at 750 Cliff Road, Woodbridge, New 
Jersey and 123 Derousse Avenue, Pennsauken, New Jersey respectively. 
Buckeye owns and operates eight EFRTs in Range III with vapor pressure 
three (3) or more psia at its Port Reading Terminal that are part of 
this proposed SIP revision,\3\ and one such EFRT at its Pennsauken 
Terminal. According to company's Port Reading RACT analysis, doming the 
facility's total inventory of eight EFRTs is estimated at $60,000 per 
ton of VOC emissions reduced, which exceeds what the state defines as 
economically feasible for RACT. The company's Pennsauken RACT analysis 
likewise estimated the cost of doming its single EFRT at $60,000 per 
ton of VOC emissions reduced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Port Reading terminal previously had one additional 
EFRT. However, under the proposed SIP revision Buckeye retrofitted 
that Port Reading EFRT to an internal floating roof tank (Tank 1177) 
due to changes in facility operational needs (and an internal 
floating roof tank does not require a dome). Eight EFRTs now remain 
at the facility that are covered by the proposed SIP revision.
    In addition, the Port Reading Terminal has at least two 
additional EFRTs (Tanks 7943 and 7944) that are not part of the 
proposed SIP revision. In approximately 2012, the company fitted 
these two Port Reading EFRTs with domes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Buckeye Source-Specific Doming Requirements

    The EPA is proposing to approve a source-specific SIP revision 
allowing the Port Reading facility not to dome four EFRTs that are in 
Range III and to complete doming of two EFRTs beyond the regulatory 
deadline of May 1, 2020.\4\ Of the eight relevant Port Reading EFRTs, 
Buckeye has already domed one EFRT (Tank 7935) and will install one 
additional dome (Tank 1222) by the regulatory deadline. Under this SIP 
revision, the Buckeye facilities are scheduled to install domes on the 
following EFRTs in Range III by 2028 according to the following 
schedule:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As discussed in the prior footnote, the proposed SIP 
revision also includes conversion of Tank 1177 to an internal 
floating roof tank that is no longer subject to doming requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Tank 1219 by March 8, 2027
     Tank 1178 by Sept. 25, 2028
    In addition, the EPA is proposing to approve a source-specific SIP 
revision allowing the Pennsauken facility not to dome its single 
relevant EFRT (Tank 2018).
    In total, the two facilities will dome four out of nine EFRTs in 
Range III, including Tanks 7935, 1222, 1219, and 1178. The 5 EFRTs not 
to be domed are Tanks 7930, 7934, 7937, 7945, and 2018.
c. Phillips 66 Company
    On June 15, 2016, the NJDEP submitted to the EPA proposed revisions 
to the New Jersey SIP for ozone specifically providing an alternative 
VOC control plan for the Phillips 66 Company facility located at 1400 
Park Avenue, Linden, New Jersey (the Linden facility). At the Linden 
facility, Phillips 66 Company owns and operates 21 EFRTs in Range III 
with vapor pressure three (3) or more psia. According to the facility's 
RACT analysis, doming the total inventory of 21 EFRTs is estimated to 
cost between $29,000 and $440,000 per ton of VOC emissions reduced, 
which exceeds what the state defines as economically feasible for RACT.

Proposed Phillips 66 Company's Linden Facility Source-Specific Doming 
Requirements

    The EPA is proposing to approve a source-specific SIP revision 
allowing the Linden facility not to dome ten EFRTs that are in Range 
III and to complete doming of one EFRT beyond the regulatory deadline 
of May 1, 2020. The Linden facility has already installed domes on two 
EFRTs (Tanks T233 and T239); three additional EFRTs are currently out 
of service and ready for doming (Tanks T243, T351, and T250) and the 
facility will install five additional domes (Tanks T241, T352, T235, 
T249, and T353) by the regulatory deadline. The Linden facility is 
scheduled to install a dome on one additional tank (Tank T234) by 
December 31, 2024, beyond the regulatory due date.
    In total, the facility will dome a total of eleven out of 21 EFRTs 
in Range III, including Tanks T233, T239, T243, T351, T250, T241, T352, 
T235, T249, T353 and T234. The 10 EFRTs not to be domed are Tanks T52, 
TI05, TI19, TI43, T224, T349, T350, T354, T355, and T356.

III. Proposed Action

    The NJDEP determined that the four facilities discussed above could 
avoid doming 26 EFRTs because it was not economically feasible to dome 
the four facilities' total inventory of 51 EFRTs. Specifically, the EPA 
proposes to approve the NJDEP SIP revisions for 8-hour ozone to allow 
the Paulsboro facility not to dome eleven EFRTs; the Buckeye facilities 
not to dome five EFRTs; and the Phillips 66 Company facility not to 
dome ten EFRTs. The EPA is also proposing to approve a deadline 
extension for doming nine EFRTs, as previously discussed. This SIP 
revision would still require the facilities to dome 25 EFRTs (and 
convert one EFRT to an internal floating roof tank).
    Additional non-doming measures will be implemented to make up the 
foregone VOC emission reductions that would have occurred in doming the 
full inventory of EFRTs. However, the NJDEP did not request that the 
EPA approve the additional non-doming measures into the New Jersey SIP, 
therefore the EPA did not evaluate them for approvability and proposes 
no action on these measures today.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, we are proposing to include in a final rule 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by

[[Page 54303]]

reference. In accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are 
proposing to incorporate by reference the provisions described above in 
Section III (Proposed Action).
    The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents 
generally available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov 
and in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES 
section of this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, 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 Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     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 the 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, because the SIP is not approved to 
apply in Indian country located in the state, and the EPA notes that it 
will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or 
preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this 
action.

List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Nitrogen Dioxide, Intergovernmental Relations, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile Organic Compounds.

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

    Dated: October 18, 2018.
Peter D. Lopez,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2018-23575 Filed 10-26-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P