[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 147 (Wednesday, July 31, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37167-37173]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16330]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0290; FRL-9997-69-Region 3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
Determinations for Case-by-Case Sources Under the 1997 and 2008 8-Hour
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Part 1

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve

multiple state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These revisions were submitted by the
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) to
establish and require reasonably available control technology (RACT)
for 26 major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen
oxides (NOX) pursuant to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's
conditionally approved RACT regulations. In this rulemaking action, EPA
is only proposing to approve source-specific (also referred to as
``case-by-case'') RACT determinations for 21 of the 26 major sources
submitted by PADEP. These RACT evaluations were submitted to meet RACT
requirements for the 1997 and 2008 ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS). This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act
(CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 30, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2017-0290 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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: Ms. Emily Bertram, Permits Branch
(3AD10), Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Ms. Bertram can also be reached
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On multiple dates, PADEP submitted multiple
revisions to its SIP to address case-by-case NOX and/or VOC
RACT for 26 major facilities. These SIP revisions are intended to
address the NOX and/or VOC RACT requirements under sections
182 and 184 of the CAA for the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS. Table 1 below
lists each SIP submittal date and the facilities included in its
submittals. Although submitted in multiple packages by PADEP, EPA views
each facility as a separable SIP revision and may take separate final
action on one or more facilities. In this rulemaking action, EPA is
only proposing to approve case-by-case RACT determinations for 21 of
the 26 sources submitted to EPA by PADEP. The remaining five major
sources are either now exempt from the source-specific RACT
requirements or will be acted on in a future rulemaking action, once
resubmitted to EPA by PADEP.
    For additional background information on Pennsylvania's
``presumptive'' RACT II SIP see 84 FR 20274 (May 9, 2019) and on
Pennsylvania's source-specific or ``case-by-case'' RACT determinations
see the appropriate technical support document (TSD) which is available
online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-
0290.

    Table 1--PADEP SIP Submittals for Major NOX and/or VOC Sources in
 Pennsylvania Subject to Source-Specific RACT Under the 1997 and 2008 8-
                           Hour Ozone Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        SIP  submittal  date                Major source  (county)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8/14/2017...........................  Exelon Generation--Fairless Hills
                                       (Bucks).
11/21/2017..........................  The Boeing Co. (Delaware).
                                      Cherokee Pharmaceuticals, LLC
                                       (Northumberland).
                                      Dominion Transmission--Finnefrock
                                       Station (Clinton).\a\
                                      First Quality Tissue, LLC
                                       (Clinton).
                                      JW Aluminum Company (Lycoming).
                                      Transco--Salladasburg Station 520
                                       (Lycoming).
                                      Ward Manufacturing, LLC (Tioga).
                                      Wood-Mode Inc. (Snyder).
4/26/2018...........................  Foam Fabricators Inc. (Columbia).
                                      Novipax (Berks).\b\
                                      Resilite Sports Products Inc.
                                       (Northumberland).
                                      Sunoco Partners Marketing &
                                       Terminals (Delaware).
                                      Texas Eastern--Bernville (Berks).
                                      Truck Accessories Group
                                       (Northumberland).\c\
6/26/2018...........................  Texas Eastern--Shermans Dale
                                       (Perry).
                                      Texas Eastern--Perulack (Juniata).
                                      Texas Eastern--Grantville
                                       (Dauphin).
                                      NRG Energy Center Paxton, LLC
                                       (Dauphin).
                                      Texas Eastern--Bechtelsville
                                       (Berks).
                                      Merck, Sharp & Dohme Corporation
                                       (Montgomery).\d\
10/29/2018..........................  Containment Solutions/Mt. Union
                                       Plant (Huntingdon).
                                      Armstrong World Ind./Marietta
                                       Ceiling Plant (Lancaster).
                                      Jeraco Enterprises Inc.
                                       (Northumberland).
                                      Global Advanced Metals USA Inc.
                                       (Montgomery).\e\
                                      Blommer Chocolate Company
                                       (Montgomery).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Dominion Transmission--Finnefrock Station was withdrawn from EPA
  consideration on August 27, 2018. PADEP determined this source was no
  longer subject to source-specific RACT requirements for the 1997 and
  2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
\b\ Novipax will be acted on in a future rulemaking action.
\c\ Truck Accessories Group was withdrawn from EPA consideration on July
  11, 2019. EPA will be taking action on this source in a future
  rulemaking action, once resubmitted by PADEP for approval into the PA
  SIP.
\d\ Merck, Sharp & Dohme Corporation was withdrawn from EPA
  consideration on July 11, 2019. EPA will be taking action on this
  source in a future rulemaking action, once resubmitted by PADEP for
  approval into the PA SIP.
\e\ Global Advanced Metals USA Inc. will be acted on in a future
  rulemaking action.

I. Background

A. 1997 and 2008 Ozone NAAQS

    Ground level ozone is not emitted directly into the air but is
created by chemical reaction between NOX and VOC in the
presence of sunlight. Emissions from industrial facilities, electric
utilities, motor vehicle exhaust, gasoline vapors, and chemical
solvents are some of the major sources of NOX and VOC.
Breathing ozone can trigger a variety of health problems, particularly
for children, the elderly, and people of all ages who have lung
diseases such as asthma. Ground level ozone can also have harmful
effects on sensitive vegetation and ecosystems.
    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a standard for ground level ozone
based on 8-hour average concentrations. 62 FR 38856. The 8-hour
averaging period replaced the previous 1-hour averaging period, and the
level of the NAAQS was changed from 0.12 parts per million

(ppm) to 0.08 ppm. On April 30, 2004, EPA designated two nonattainment
areas in Pennsylvania under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, namely
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE (the Philadelphia
Area) and Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley (the Pittsburgh Area). The remaining
14 areas in Pennsylvania were designated marginal nonattainment areas.
See 69 FR 23858 and 23931; see also 40 CFR 81.339.
    On March 12, 2008, EPA strengthened the 8-hour ozone standards, by
revising its level to 0.075 ppm averaged over an 8-hour period (2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS). On May 21, 2012, EPA designated five marginal
nonattainment areas in Pennsylvania for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS:
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, Lancaster, Reading, the Philadelphia Area,
and the Pittsburgh Area. 77 FR 30088; see also 40 CFR 81.339.
    On March 6, 2015, EPA announced its revocation of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for all purposes and for all areas in the country,
effective on April 6, 2015. 80 FR 12264. EPA has determined that
certain nonattainment planning requirements continue to be in effect
under the revoked standard for nonattainment areas under the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, including RACT.

B. RACT Requirements for Ozone

    The CAA regulates emissions of NOX and VOC to prevent
photochemical reactions that result in ozone formation. RACT is an
important strategy for reducing NOX and VOC emissions from
major stationary sources within areas not meeting the ozone NAAQS.
    Areas designated nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS are subject to
the general nonattainment planning requirements of CAA section 172.
Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA provides that SIPs for nonattainment areas
must include reasonably available control measures (RACM) for
demonstrating attainment of all NAAQS, including emissions reductions
from existing sources through the adoption of RACT. Further, section
182(b)(2) of the CAA sets forth additional RACT requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas classified as moderate or higher.
    Section 182(b)(2) of the CAA sets forth requirements regarding RACT
for the ozone NAAQS for VOC sources. Section 182(f) subjects major
stationary sources of NOX to the same RACT requirements
applicable to major stationary sources of VOC.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A ``major source'' is defined based on the source's
potential to emit (PTE) of NOX or VOC, and the applicable
thresholds for RACT differs based on the classification of the
nonattainment area in which the source is located. See sections
182(c)-(f) and 302 of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA applies the RACT requirements in
section 182(b)(2) to nonattainment areas classified as marginal and to
attainment areas located within ozone transport regions established
pursuant to section 184 of the CAA. Section 184(a) of the CAA
established by law the current Ozone Transport Region (OTR) comprised
of 12 eastern states, including Pennsylvania. This requirement is
referred to as OTR RACT. As noted previously, a ``major source'' is
defined based on the source's PTE of NOX, VOC, or both
pollutants, and the applicable thresholds differ based on the
classification of the nonattainment area in which the source is
located. See sections 182(c)-(f) and 302 of the CAA.
    Since the 1970's, EPA has consistently defined ``RACT'' as the
lowest emission limit that a particular source is capable of meeting by
the application of the control technology that is reasonably available
considering technological and economic feasibility.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See December 9, 1976 memorandum from Roger Strelow,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Waste Management, to Regional
Administrators, ``Guidance for Determining Acceptability of SIP
Regulations in Non-Attainment Areas,'' and also 44 FR 53762
(September 17, 1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has provided more substantive RACT requirements through
implementation rules for each ozone NAAQS as well as through guidance.
In 2004 and 2005, EPA promulgated an implementation rule for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS in two phases (``Phase 1 of the 1997 Ozone
Implementation Rule'' and ``Phase 2 of the 1997 Ozone Implementation
Rule''). 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004) and 70 FR 71612 (November 29,
2005), respectively. Particularly, the Phase 2 Ozone Implementation
Rule addressed RACT statutory requirements under the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 70 FR 71652
    On March 6, 2015, EPA issued its final rule for implementing the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (``the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule''). 80
FR 12264. At the same time, EPA revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
effective on April 6, 2015.\3\ The 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule
provided comprehensive requirements to transition from the revoked 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS to the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, as codified in 40
CFR part 51, subpart AA, following revocation. Consistent with previous
policy, EPA determined that areas designated nonattainment for both the
1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS at the time of revocation, must retain
implementation of certain nonattainment area requirements (i.e., anti-
backsliding requirements) for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS as specified
under section 182 of the CAA, including RACT. See 40 CFR 51.1100(o). An
area remains subject to the anti-backsliding requirements for a revoked
NAAQS until EPA approves a redesignation to attainment for the area for
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. There are no effects on applicable
requirements for areas within the OTR, as a result of the revocation of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Thus, Pennsylvania, as a state within the
OTR, remains subject to RACT requirements for both the 1997 ozone NAAQS
and the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ On February 16, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Cir. Court) issued an opinion
on the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule. South Coast Air Quality
Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, No. 15-1115 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 16, 2018). The D.C.
Cir. Court found certain parts reasonable and denied the petition
for appeal on those. In particular, the D.C. Cir. Court upheld the
use of NOX averaging to meet RACT requirements for 2008
ozone NAAQS. However, the Court also found certain other provisions
unreasonable. The D.C. Cir. Court vacated the provisions it found
unreasonable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addressing RACT, the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule is
consistent with existing policy and Phase 2 of the 1997 Ozone
Implementation Rule. In the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule, EPA
requires RACT measures to be implemented by January 1, 2017 for areas
classified as moderate nonattainment or above and all areas of the OTR.
EPA also provided in the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule that RACT
SIPs must contain adopted RACT regulations, certifications where
appropriate that existing provisions are RACT, and/or negative
declarations stating that there are no sources in the nonattainment
area covered by a specific control technique guidelines (CTG) source
category. In the preamble to the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule, EPA
clarified that states must provide notice and opportunity for public
comment on their RACT SIP submissions, even when submitting a
certification that the existing provisions remain RACT or a negative
declaration. States must submit appropriate supporting information for
their RACT submissions, in accordance with the Phase 2 of the 1997
Ozone Implementation Rule. Adequate documentation must support that
states have considered control technology that is economically and
technologically feasible in determining RACT, based on information that
is current as of the time of development of the RACT SIP.
    In addition, in the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule, EPA clarified
that states can use weighted average NOX

emissions rates from sources in the nonattainment area for meeting the
major NOX RACT requirement under the CAA, as consistent with
existing policy.\4\ EPA also recognized that states may conclude in
some cases that sources already addressed by RACT determinations for
the 1-hour and/or 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS may not need to implement
additional controls to meet the 2008 ozone NAAQS RACT requirement. See
80 FR 12278-12279.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ [thinsp]EPA's NOX RACT guidance ``Nitrogen Oxides
Supplement to the General Preamble'' (57 FR 55625; November 25,
1992) encouraged states to develop RACT programs that are based on
``area wide average emission rates.'' Additional guidance on area-
wide RACT provisions is provided by EPA's January 2001 economic
incentive program guidance titled ``Improving Air Quality with
Economic Incentive Programs,'' available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/eipfin.pdf. In addition, as mentioned previously,
the D.C. Cir. Court recently upheld the use of NOX
averaging to meet RACT requirements for 2008 ozone NAAQS. South
Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, No. 15-1115 (D.C. Cir. Feb.
16, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Applicability of RACT Requirements in Pennsylvania

    As indicated earlier, RACT requirements apply to any ozone
nonattainment areas classified as moderate or higher (serious, severe
or extreme) under CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f). Pennsylvania has
outstanding ozone RACT requirements for both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. The entire Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is part of the OTR
established under section 184 of the CAA and thus is subject statewide
to the RACT requirements of CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f), pursuant
to section 184(b).
    At the time of revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (effective
April 6, 2015), only two moderate nonattainment areas remained in the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for this standard, the Philadelphia and
the Pittsburgh Areas. As required under EPA's anti-backsliding
provisions, these two moderate nonattainment areas continue to be
subject to RACT under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Given its location
in the OTR, the remainder of the Commonwealth is also treated as
moderate nonattainment area under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for any
planning requirements under the revoked standard, including RACT. The
OTR RACT requirement is also in effect under the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS throughout the Commonwealth, since EPA did not designate any
nonattainment areas above marginal for this standard in Pennsylvania.
Thus, in practice, the same RACT requirements continue to be applicable
in Pennsylvania for both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. RACT
must be evaluated and satisfied as separate requirements under each
applicable standard.
    RACT applies to major sources of NOX and VOC under each
ozone NAAQS or any VOC sources subject to CTG RACT. Which
NOX and VOC sources in Pennsylvania are considered ``major''
and are therefore subject to RACT is dependent on the location of each
source within the Commonwealth. Sources located in nonattainment areas
would be subject to the ``major source'' definitions established under
the CAA. In the case of Pennsylvania, sources located in any areas
outside of moderate or above nonattainment areas, as part of the OTR,
shall be treated as if these areas were moderate.
    In Pennsylvania, the SIP program is implemented primarily by the
PADEP, but also by local air agencies in Philadelphia County (the City
of Philadelphia's Air Management Services [AMS]) and Allegheny County,
(the Allegheny County Health Department [ACHD]). These agencies have
implemented numerous RACT regulations and source-specific measures in
Pennsylvania to meet the applicable ozone RACT requirements.
Historically, statewide RACT controls have been promulgated by PADEP in
Pennsylvania Code Title 25--Environmental Resources, Part I--Department
of Environmental Protection, Subpart C--Protection of Natural
Resources, Article III--Air Resources, (25 Pa. Code) Chapter 129. AMS
and ACHD have incorporated by reference Pennsylvania regulations, but
have also promulgated regulations adopting RACT controls for their own
jurisdictions. In addition, AMS and ACHD have submitted separate
source-specific RACT determinations as SIP revisions for sources within
their respective jurisdictions, which have been approved by EPA. See 40
CFR 52.2020(d)(1).
    States were required to make RACT SIP submissions for the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS by September 15, 2006. PADEP submitted a SIP revision
on September 25, 2006, certifying that a number of previously approved
VOC RACT rules continued to satisfy RACT under the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for the remainder of Pennsylvania.\5\ PADEP has met its
obligations under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for its CTG and non-CTG
VOC sources. See 82 FR 31464 (July 7, 2017). RACT control measures
addressing all applicable CAA RACT requirements under the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS have been implemented and fully approved in the
jurisdictions of ACHD and AMS. See 78 FR 34584 (June 10, 2013) and 81
FR 69687 (October 7, 2016). For the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, states
were required to submit RACT SIP revisions by July 20, 2014. On May 16,
2016, PADEP submitted a SIP revision addressing RACT under both the
1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Pennsylvania. Specifically, the May
16, 2016 SIP submittal intends to satisfy sections 182(b)(2)(C),
182(f), and 184 of the CAA for both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for Pennsylvania's major NOX and VOC non-CTG sources,
except ethylene production plants, surface active agents manufacturing,
and mobile equipment repair and refinishing.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The September 15, 2006 SIP submittal initially included
Pennsylvania's certification of NOX RACT regulations;
however, NOX RACT portions were withdrawn by PADEP on
June 27, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. EPA's Conditional Approval for Pennsylvania's RACT Requirements
Under the 1997 and 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

    On May 16, 2016, PADEP submitted a SIP revision addressing RACT
under both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Pennsylvania.
PADEP's May 16, 2016 SIP revision intended to address certain
outstanding non-CTG VOC RACT, VOC CTG RACT, and major NOX
RACT requirements under the CAA for both standards. The SIP revision
requested approval of Pennsylvania's 25 Pa. Code 129.96-100, Additional
RACT Requirements for Major Sources of NOX and VOCs (the
``presumptive'' RACT II rule). Prior to the adoption of the RACT II
rule, Pennsylvania relied on the NOX and VOC control
measures in 25 Pa. Code 129.92-95, Stationary Sources of NOX
and VOCs, (the RACT I rule) to meet RACT for non-CTG major VOC sources
and major NOX sources. The requirements of the RACT I rule
remain in effect and continue to be implemented as RACT.\7\ On
September 26, 2017, PADEP submitted a supplemental SIP revision which
committed to address various deficiencies identified by EPA in their
May 16, 2016 ``presumptive'' RACT II rule SIP revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ These requirements were initially approved as RACT for
Pennsylvania under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 9, 2019, EPA conditionally approved the RACT II rule based
on PADEP's September 26, 2017 commitment letter. See 84 FR 20274. In
EPA's final conditional approval, EPA noted that PADEP would be
required to submit, for EPA's approval, SIP

revisions to address any facility-wide or system-wide averaging plan
approved under 25 Pa. Code 129.98 and any case-by-case RACT
determinations under 25 Pa. Code 129.99. PADEP committed to submitting
these additional SIP revisions within 12 months of EPA's final
conditional approval, specifically May 9, 2020.
    Therefore, as authorized in CAA section 110(k)(3) and (k)(4),
Pennsylvania shall submit the following as case-by-case SIP revisions,
by May 9, 2020, for EPA's approval as a condition of approval of 25 Pa.
Code 128 and 129 in the May 16, 2016 SIP revision: (1) All facility-
wide or system-wide averaging plans approved by PADEP under 25 Pa. Code
129.98 including, but not limited to, any terms and conditions that
ensure the enforceability of the averaging plan as a practical matter
(i.e., any monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping, or testing
requirements); and (2) all source-specific RACT determinations approved
by PADEP under 25 Pa. Code 129.99, including any alternative compliance
schedules approved under 25 Pa. Code 129.97(k) and 129.99(i); the case-
by-case RACT determinations submitted to EPA for approval into the SIP
should include any terms and conditions that ensure the enforceability
of the case-by-case or source-specific RACT emission limitation as a
practical matter (i.e., any monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping, or
testing requirements). See May 9, 2019 (84 FR 20274).

II. Summary of SIP Revisions

    In order to satisfy a requirement from EPA's May 9, 2019
conditional approval, PADEP has submitted to EPA, SIP revisions
addressing case-by-case RACT requirements for major sources in
Pennsylvania subject to 25 Pa. Code 129.99. As noted in Table 1, on
multiple dates PADEP submitted to EPA, five separate SIP revisions
pertaining to Pennsylvania's case-by-case NOX and/or VOC
RACT determinations for 26 major sources located in the Commonwealth.
PADEP provided documentation in its SIP revisions to support its case-
by-case RACT determinations for affected emission units at each major
source subject to 25 Pa. Code 129.99. Specifically, in these SIP
submittals, PADEP evaluated a total of 26 major NOX and/or
VOC source in Pennsylvania for case-by-case RACT.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As noted previously, EPA will only be proposing approval for
21 of the 26 case-by-case RACT determinations submitted by PADEP in
the applicable five SIP revisions. See Table 1 for information
specific to each SIP revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Pennsylvania RACT SIP revisions, PADEP included a case-by-
case RACT determination for each of the existing emissions units at
each of these major sources of NOX and/or VOC. In PADEP's
RACT determinations an evaluation was completed to determine if
previously SIP-approved, case-by-case RACT requirements (herein
referred to as RACT I) were more stringent and required to be retained
in the sources Title V air quality permit and subsequently, the
Federally-approved SIP, or if the new case-by-case RACT requirements
are more stringent and replace the previous Federally-approved
provisions.
    In its five SIP submittals, PADEP identified, and EPA is taking
action on 21 major sources of NOX and/or VOC in
Pennsylvania, subject to Pennsylvania's case-by-case RACT requirements,
as summarized in Table 2.

 Table 2--Twenty-One Major NOX and/or VOC Sources in Pennsylvania Subject to Case-by-Case RACT II Under the 1997
                                           and 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  1-Hour ozone RACT      Major source pollutant (NOX and/      RACT II permit
   Major source  (county)         source? (RACT I)                   or VOC)                  (effective date)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exelon Generation--Fairless   Yes.....................  NOX..............................    09-00066 (01/27/17)
 Hills (Bucks).
The Boeing Co. (Delaware)...  Yes.....................  NOX and VOC......................    23-00009 (01/03/17)
Cherokee Pharmaceuticals,     Yes.....................  VOC..............................    49-00007 (04/24/17)
 LLC (Northumberland).
First Quality Tissue, LLC     No......................  VOC..............................    18-00030 (09/18/17)
 (Clinton).
JW Aluminum Company           No......................  VOC..............................    41-00013 (03/01/17)
 (Lycoming).
Transco--Salladasburg         Yes.....................  NOX and VOC......................    41-00001 (06/06/17)
 Station 520 (Lycoming).
Ward Manufacturing, LLC       No......................  VOC..............................    59-00004 (01/10/17)
 (Tioga).
Wood-Mode Inc. (Snyder).....  Yes.....................  VOC..............................    55-00005 (07/12/17)
Foam Fabricators Inc.         No......................  VOC..............................    19-00002 (12/20/17)
 (Columbia).
Resilite Sports Products      Yes.....................  VOC..............................    49-00004 (08/25/17)
 Inc. (Northumberland).
Sunoco Partners Marketing &   Yes.....................  NOX and VOC......................    23-00119 (01/20/17)
 Terminals (Delaware).
Texas Eastern--Bernville      Yes.....................  VOC..............................    06-05033 (03/16/18)
 (Berks).
Texas Eastern--Shermans Dale  Yes.....................  NOX..............................    50-05001 (03/26/18)
 (Perry).
Texas Eastern--Perulack       Yes.....................  NOX and VOC......................    34-05002 (03/27/18)
 (Juniata).
Texas Eastern--Grantville     Yes.....................  NOX..............................    22-05010 (03/16/18)
 (Dauphin).
NRG Energy Center Paxton,     Yes.....................  NOX..............................    22-05005 (03/16/18)
 LLC (Dauphin).
Texas Eastern--Bechtelsville  Yes.....................  NOX..............................    06-05034 (04/19/18)
 (Berks).
Containment Solutions/Mt.     Yes.....................  VOC..............................    31-05005 (07/10/18)
 Union Plant (Huntingdon).
Armstrong World Ind./         Yes.....................  VOC..............................    36-05001 (06/28/18)
 Marietta Ceiling Plant
 (Lancaster).
Jeraco Enterprises Inc.       Yes.....................  VOC..............................    49-00014 (01/26/18)
 (Northumberland).
Blommer Chocolate Company     No......................  VOC..............................    46-00198 (01/26/17)
 (Montgomery).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The case-by-case RACT determinations submitted by PADEP consist of
an evaluation of all reasonably available controls at the time of
evaluation for each affected emissions unit, resulting in a PADEP
determination of what specific control requirements, if any, satisfy
RACT for that particular unit. The adoption of new or additional
controls or the revisions to existing controls as RACT were specified
as requirements in new or revised Federally enforceable permits
(hereafter RACT permits) issued by PADEP to the source. The new or
revised RACT permits have been submitted as part of the Pennsylvania
RACT SIP revisions for EPA's approval in the Pennsylvania SIP under 40
CFR 52.2020(d)(1) for which PADEP is revising or adopting additional
source-specific controls, the revised RACT permits, once approved by
EPA, will supersede those permits currently approved into the SIP. All
new or revised RACT permits submitted by PADEP are listed in the last
column of Table 2, along with the permit effective date.
    As part of the case-by-case RACT determinations, PADEP is also
certifying for certain emissions units at major sources subject to
case-by-case RACT determinations under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, which
are part of the Pennsylvania SIP at 40 CFR 52.2020(d)(1).

III. EPA's Evaluation of SIP Revisions

    After thorough review and evaluation of the information provided by
PADEP in its five SIP revisions for 21 major sources of NOX
and/or VOC in Pennsylvania, EPA finds that PADEP's case-by-case RACT
determinations and conclusions provided are reasonable and
appropriately considered technically and economically feasible controls
while setting lowest achievable limits. EPA finds that the proposed
source-specific RACT controls for the sources subject to this
rulemaking action adequately meet the CAA RACT requirements for the
1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the major sources of
NOX and/or VOC in Pennsylvania, as they are not covered by
Pennsylvania's presumptive RACT regulation.
    EPA also finds that all the proposed revisions to previously SIP
approved RACT requirements, under the 1-hour ozone standard (RACT I),
as discussed in PADEP's SIP revisions will result in equivalent or
additional reductions of NOX and/or VOC emissions and should
not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment or
reasonable further progress with the NAAQS or interfered with other
applicable CAA requirement in section 110(l) of the CAA.
    In the case of PADEP's removal of RACT I requirements from the SIP
that are no longer applicable, as the sources have been permanently
removed, EPA finds these SIP revisions to also be adequate and will not
have any adverse impact on air quality. EPA's complete analysis of
PADEP's case-by-case RACT SIP revisions is included in the TSD
available in the docket for this rulemaking action and available online
at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0290.

IV. Proposed Action

    Based on EPA's review, EPA is proposing to approve the Pennsylvania
SIP revisions for the 21 case-by-case RACT facilities listed in Table
2. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
As EPA views each facility as a separable SIP revision, should EPA
receive comment on one facility but not others, EPA may take separate,
final action on the remaining facilities.

IV. 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 requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the permits described in Section II--Summary of SIP Revisions
and EPA Analysis. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
materials generally available through https://www.regulations.gov and
at the EPA Region III Office (please contact the person identified in
the For Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more
information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
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 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 proposed rule, addressing the NOX and
VOC RACT requirements for 21 case-by-case facilities for the 1997 and
2008 ozone NAAQS (Part 1), does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: July 23, 2019.
Diana Esher,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2019-16330 Filed 7-30-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 68 (Tuesday, April 11, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17517-17518]
[FR Doc No: 2017-07161]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2015-0094, Notice 2]

Decision That Certain Nonconforming Model Year 1996 and 1997
Ferrari F50 Passenger Cars Are Eligible for Importation

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces a decision by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration that certain model year (MY) 1996 and
1997 Ferrari F50 passenger cars (PC) manufactured prior to September 1,
1997 that were not originally manufactured to comply with all
applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) are eligible
for importation into the United States because those vehicles have
safety features that comply with, or are capable of being altered to
comply with, all applicable FMVSS.

DATES: This decision became effective on March 21, 2017.

ADDRESSES: For further information, contact George Stevens, Office of
Vehicle Safety Compliance, NHTSA<PHONE_NUMBER>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C 30141(a)(1)(B), a motor vehicle that was not
originally manufactured to conform to all applicable FMVSS shall be
refused admission into the United States unless NHTSA has decided its
safety features comply with, or are capable of being altered to comply
with, all applicable FMVSS based on destructive test data or such other
evidence that NHTSA decides to be adequate.
    Petitions for eligibility decisions may be submitted by either
manufacturers or importers who have registered with NHTSA pursuant to
49 CFR part 592. As specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA publishes notice
in the Federal Register of each petition that it receives, and affords
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the petition. At the
close of the comment period, NHTSA decides, on the basis of the
petition and any comments that it has received, whether the vehicle is
eligible for importation. The agency then publishes this decision in
the Federal Register.
    J. K. Technologies, LLC (J.K.), Inc. of Baltimore, Maryland
(Registered Importer R-90-006) petitioned NHTSA to decide whether
nonconforming 1996 and 1997 Ferrari F50 PC's are eligible for
importation into the United States. NHTSA published a notice of the
petition on October 16, 2016 (81 FR 72852) to afford an opportunity for
public comment. No comments were received in response to this notice.
The reader is referred to the notice for a thorough description of the
petition.

NHTSA Conclusions

    In its petition, J.K. noted that the original manufacturer,
Ferrari, S.p.A., certified the MY 1995 F50 PCs to all applicable FMVSS
and offered those vehicles for sale in the United States. J.K. also
contends that the non-U.S certified MY 1996 and 1997 Ferrari F50 PCs
share the same platform with the U.S.-certified MY 1995 Ferrari F50 PC,
and on that basis compares the non-U.S. certified model to those
vehicles to establish its conformity with many applicable FMVSS.
Because there is no U.S.-certified counterpart for the MY 1997 Ferrari
F50 PC, the petitioner acknowledged that it could not base its petition
solely on the substantial similarity of those vehicles to the U.S.-
certified MY 1995 Ferrari F50 PC. Instead, the petitioner chose to
establish import eligibility on the basis that the vehicles have safety
features that comply with, or are capable of being modified to comply
with, the FMVSS based on destructive test data or such other evidence
that NHTSA decides to be adequate as set forth in 49 U.S.C.
30141(a)(1)(B). Nevertheless, the petitioner contends that the non-U.S.
certified MY 1997 Ferrari F50 PCs use the same components as the U.S.-
certified MY 1995 Ferrari F50 PCs in virtually all of the systems
subject to applicable FMVSS.
    NHTSA has reviewed the petition and has concluded that the
nonconforming versions of the MY 1996 and 1997 Ferrari F50 PCs are
similar to the U.S.-certified versions of the MY 1995 Ferrari F50 PCs
and are capable of being readily altered to comply with all applicable
FMVSS with respect to all FMVSS applicable prior to September 1, 1997.
    NHTSA has limited this decision to vehicles manufactured prior to
September 1, 1997, because the U.S.-certified MY 1995 Ferrari F50 PCs
that are the basis for this decision were not required to conform to
the air bag system requirements of FMVSS No. 208 Occupant Crash
Protection and the petitioner made no representation as to compliance
with air bag system requirements of FMVSS No. 208 for the subject
vehicles.
    NHTSA has long taken the position that RIs are not subject to the
requirements of standards that are being phased in, but must comply
with those requirements once they apply to 100 percent of a
manufacturer's production. The requirement for air bags to be installed
at the driver's and front outboard passenger's seating position applies
to 100 percent of passenger cars manufactured on or after September 1,
1997. As a consequence, an RI can meet the automatic protection
requirements of the standard by installing conforming automatic seat
belts in passenger cars manufactured prior to that date. Therefore,
J.K. or another RI could meet the standard by installing automatic seat
belts in 1996 and 1997 Ferrari F50 passenger cars manufactured prior to
September 1, 1997. Vehicles manufactured on or after that date would
require the installation of U.S.-model air bag systems to meet the
standard. The agency further notes that conformity packages submitted
for vehicles imported under this decision must demonstrate that the
vehicle is equipped with components that allow it to achieve compliance
with the standard. Any modification or replacement of components
necessary to meet the requirements of the standard must be shown to
bring the vehicle into compliance. Such proof must be submitted by an
RI as part of any conformity package submitted for nonconforming 1996
and 1997 Ferrari F50 passenger cars.

Decision

    Accordingly, on the basis of the foregoing, NHTSA hereby decides
that MY 1996 and 1997 Ferrari F50 passenger cars manufactured prior to
September 1, 1997 that were not originally manufactured to comply with
all applicable FMVSS, are capable of being altered to conform to all
applicable FMVSS.

Vehicle Eligibility Number for Subject Vehicles

    The importer of a vehicle admissible under any final decision must
indicate on the form HS-7 accompanying entry the appropriate vehicle
eligibility number indicating that the vehicle is eligible for entry.
VCP-62 is assigned to MY 1996 and 1997 Ferrari F50 passenger cars
manufactured prior to September 1, 1997 are admissible under this
notice of final decision.

    Authority: (49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: delegations of authority at
49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8).

Jeffrey M. Giuseppe,
Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2017-07161 Filed 4-10-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P