[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 145 (Monday, August 2, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41426-41432]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16279]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2021-0380; FRL-8694-01-R3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality 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

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 twenty-four major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and/
or nitrogen oxides (NOX) pursuant to the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania's conditionally approved RACT regulations. In this
rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to approve source-specific (also
referred to as ``case-by-case'') RACT determinations for sources at
twenty-four major NOX and VOC emitting facilities submitted
by PADEP. These RACT evaluations were submitted to meet RACT
requirements for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour 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 September 1,
2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2021-0380 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Riley Burger, Permits Branch
(3AD10), Air & Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Mr. Burger can also be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 7, 2020, PADEP submitted a revision
to its SIP to address case-by-case NOX and/or VOC RACT for
sources at numerous major NOX and VOC emitting facilities
located in the Commonwealth, including the twenty-four facilities in
this action. This SIP revision is intended to address the
NOX and/or VOC RACT requirements under sections 182 and 184
of the CAA for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Table 1 of this
document lists the SIP submittal date and the facilities included in
PADEP's submittal. Although submitted in one SIP revision by PADEP, EPA
views each facility as a separable SIP revision and may take separate
final action on one or more facilities.
    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 No. EPA-R03-OAR-2021-
0380.

    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)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5/7/2020...................  Anvil International, LLC (formerly Grinnell
                              Corporation) (Lancaster).
                             ArcelorMittal Plate LLC Conshohocken Plant
                              (formerly Bethlehem Lukens Plate)
                              (Montgomery).
                             Braskem America Inc. Marcus Hook (formerly
                              Epsilon Products Co.--Marcus Hook)
                              (Delaware).
                             Buck Co Inc. Quarryville (formerly Buck
                              Company Inc) (Lancaster).
                             Calumet Karns City Refining LLC (formerly
                              Penreco--Karns City) (Butler).
                             Clarion Bathware Marble (Clarion).
                             Domtar Paper Company Johnsonburg Mill
                              (formerly Willamette Industries,
                              Johnsonburgh Mill) (Elk).
                             Exelon Generation Company LLC Croydon
                              Generating Station (formerly PECO Energy
                              Co.--Croydon Generating Station) (Bucks).
                             Georgia-Pacific Panel Products LLC Mt.
                              Jewell MDF Plant (McKean).
                             GE Transportation Grove City Engine
                              (formerly GE Transportation Systems)
                              (Mercer).
                             GrafTech USA LLC St Marys (formerly The
                              Carbide/Graphite Group, Inc) (Elk).
                             Haysite Reinforced Plastics LLC Erie
                              (Erie).
                             INMETCO Ellwood City (formerly The
                              International Metals Reclamation Co)
                              (Lawrence).
                             International Waxes Inc Farmers Valley
                              (formerly Petrowax Refining) (McKean).
                             Jeld Wen Fiber Division PA (Bradford).
                             Mars Wrigley Confectionery US LLC
                              Elizabethtown (Lancaster).
                             Molded Fiber Glass Company Union City
                              (formerly Molded Fiber Glass) (Erie).
                             Monroe Energy LLC Trainer (formerly Conoco
                              Phillips Company) (Delaware).
                             Nova Chemicals Company Beaver (formerly
                              Nova Chemicals, Inc.) (Beaver).
                             Sasol Chemicals USA LLC (formerly Merisol
                              Antioxidants LLC) (Venango).
                             Silberline Manufacturing Company Lincoln
                              Drive Plant (formerly Silberline
                              Manufacturing Co) (Schuylkill).
                             Superior Tube Company Lower Providence
                              (formerly Superior Tube Company)
                              (Montgomery).
                             Victaulic Company Alburtis Facility
                              (Lehigh).
                             Victaulic Forks Facility (Northampton).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

A. 1997 and 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

    Ground level ozone is not emitted directly into the air but is
created by chemical reactions 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. EPA has designated two moderate 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). See 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 potential to emit (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 (November 29, 2005).
    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 8-hour
ozone NAAQS and the 2008 8-hour 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, 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 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 8-
hour 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 1979 1-hour and/or 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS may not need to
implement additional controls to meet the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS RACT
requirement. See 80 FR 12278 and 12279 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ EPA's NOX RACT guidance ``Nitrogen Oxides
Supplement to the General Preamble'' (57 FR 55620; 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 https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-07/documents/eipfin.pdf. In addition, as
mentioned previously, the D.C. Cir. Court upheld the use of
NOX averaging to meet RACT requirements for 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, No. 15-1115
(D.C. Cir. February 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 based on the area's current classification(s). In the case of
Pennsylvania, sources located outside of moderate or above ozone
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, through PADEP,
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 for both the 1997
and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Pennsylvania. Specifically, the May 16,
2016 SIP submittal intended 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.
    \6\ EPA's conditional approval of PADEP's May 16, 2016 SIP
revision covered relevant sources located in both Philadelphia and
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 for
both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Pennsylvania. PADEP's May
16, 2016 SIP revision intended to address certain outstanding 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 major sources of VOC and
NOX. 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 PADEP's May 16, 2016
``presumptive'' RACT II rule SIP revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ These requirements were initially approved as RACT for
Pennsylvania under the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS. The RACT I Rule was
approved by EPA into the SIP on March 23, 1998. 63 FR 13789.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 9, 2019, EPA conditionally approved the RACT II rule based
on PADEP's September 26, 2017 commitment letter.\8\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ On August 27, 2020, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals
issued a decision vacating EPA's approval of three provisions of
Pennsylvania's presumptive RACT II rule applicable to certain coal-
fired power plants. Sierra Club v. EPA, No. 19-2562 (3rd Cir. August
27, 2020). None of the sources in this proposed rulemaking are
subject to the three presumptive RACT II provisions at issue in that
Sierra Club decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, as authorized in CAA section 110(k)(3) and (k)(4),
Pennsylvania was required to 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). Through multiple

submissions between 2017 and 2020, PADEP has submitted to EPA for
approval various SIP submissions to implement its RACT II case-by-case
determinations and averaging plans. This proposed rulemaking is based
on EPA's review of one of these SIP revisions.

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 of this
document, on May 7 2020, PADEP submitted to EPA, a SIP revision
pertaining to Pennsylvania's case-by-case NOX and/or VOC
RACT determinations for sources located at numerous major
NOX and VOC emitting facilities 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
NOX and VOC emitting facilities subject to 25 Pa. Code
129.99.
    In the Pennsylvania RACT SIP revision, PADEP included a case-by-
case RACT determination for the existing emissions units at each of
these major sources of NOX and/or VOC that required a source
specific RACT determination. 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 supersede the
previous Federally-approved provisions.
    EPA, in this action, is taking action on sources at twenty-four
major NOX and/or VOC emitting facilities in Pennsylvania,
subject to Pennsylvania's case-by-case RACT requirements, as summarized
in Table 2.

Table 2--Twenty-Four 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 source?    Major source  pollutant     RACT II permit
        Major source (county)                  (RACT I)                (NOX and/or VOC)        (effective date)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anvil International, LLC (formerly    Yes.......................  VOC.......................  36-05019
 Grinnell Corporation) (Lancaster).                                                           (2/1/2019)
ArcelorMittal Plate LLC Conshohocken  Yes.......................  NOX and VOC...............  46-00011
 Plant (formerly Bethlehem Lukens                                                             (1/26/2018)
 Plate) (Montgomery).
Braskem America Inc. Marcus Hook      Yes.......................  VOC.......................  23-00012
 (formerly Epsilon Products Co.--                                                             (3/2/2020)
 Marcus Hook) (Delaware).
Buck Co Inc. Quarryville (formerly    Yes.......................  VOC.......................  36-05053
 Buck Company Inc) (Lancaster).                                                               (4/1/2020)
Calumet Karns City Refining LLC       Yes.......................  VOC.......................  10-027H
 (formerly Penreco--Karns City)                                                               (11/29/2018)
 (Butler).
Clarion Bathware Marble (Clarion)...  No........................  VOC.......................  16-00133
                                                                                (12/19/2020)
Domtar Paper Company Johnsonburg      Yes.......................  NOX and VOC...............  24-00009
 Mill (formerly Willamette                                                                    (2/25/2020)
 Industries, Johnsonburgh Mill)
 (Elk).
Exelon Generation Company LLC         Yes.......................  NOX.......................  09-00016
 Croydon Generating Station                                                                   (4/11/2018)
 (formerly PECO Energy Co.--Croydon
 Generating Station) (Bucks).
Georgia-Pacific Panel Products LLC    Yes.......................  NOX and VOC...............  42-158R
 Mt. Jewell MDF Plant (McKean).                                                               (1/2/2019)
GE Transportation Grove City Engine   Yes.......................  NOX and VOC...............  43-00196
 (formerly GE Transportation                                                                  (11/7/2019)
 Systems) (Mercer).
GrafTech USA LLC St Marys (formerly   Yes.......................  VOC.......................  24-00012
 The Carbide/Graphite Group, Inc)                                                             (5/1/2019)
 (Elk).
Haysite Reinforced Plastics LLC Erie  No........................  VOC.......................  25-00783
 (Erie).                                                                                (7/24/2019)
INMETCO Ellwood City (formerly The    Yes.......................  NOX and VOC...............  37-00243
 International Metals Reclamation                                                             (12/6/2019)
 Co) (Lawrence).
International Waxes Inc Farmers       Yes.......................  NOX and VOC...............  42-00011
 Valley (formerly Petrowax Refining)                                                          (2/21/2020)
 (McKean).
Jeld Wen Fiber Division PA            Yes.......................  NOX and VOC...............  08-00003
 (Bradford).                                                                                (9/21/2018)
Mars Wrigley Confectionery US LLC     Yes.......................  VOC.......................  36-05142
 Elizabethtown (Lancaster).                                                                   (7/18/2019)
Molded Fiber Glass Company Union      Yes.......................  VOC.......................  25-00035
 City (formerly Molded Fiber Glass)                                                           (2/5/2020)
 (Erie).
Monroe Energy LLC Trainer (formerly   Yes.......................  NOX and VOC...............  23-00003
 Conoco Phillips Company) (Delaware).                                                         (6/5/2017)
Nova Chemicals Company Beaver         Yes.......................  VOC.......................  04-00033
 (formerly Nova Chemicals, Inc.)                                                              (4/2/2020)
 (Beaver).
Sasol Chemicals USA LLC (formerly     Yes.......................  VOC.......................  61-00011
 Merisol Antioxidants LLC) (Venango).                                                         (2/16/2020)
Silberline Manufacturing Company      Yes.......................  VOC.......................  54-00041
 Lincoln Drive Plant (formerly                                                                (3/16/2020)
 Silberline Manufacturing Co)
 (Schuylkill).
Superior Tube Company Lower           Yes.......................  VOC.......................  46-00020
 Providence (formerly Superior Tube                                                           (2/5/2020)
 Company) (Montgomery).
Victaulic Company Alburtis Facility   Unknown *.................  VOC.......................  39-00069
 (Lehigh).                                                                                (10/24/2017)

Victaulic Forks Facility              Unknown **................  VOC.......................  48-0009
 (Northampton).                                                                               (10/24/2017)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* PADEP records indicate that Victaulic Company Alburtis Facility may have been subject to RACT I requirements
  because PADEP technical review memos and operating permits issued to the facility in the past reference RACT I
  requirements. However, in reviewing the facility's files, PADEP could not produce a RACT I permit nor any
  files specific to the issuance of RACT I. Furthermore, RACT I requirements were never incorporated into the
  Pennsylvania SIP for Victaulic Alburtis. See PADEP comment and response document dated January 2020.
** PADEP records indicate that Victaulic Forks Facility may have been subject to RACT I requirements because
  PADEP technical review memos and operating permits issued to the facility in the past reference RACT I
  requirements. However, in reviewing the facility's files, PADEP could not produce a RACT I permit nor any
  files specific to the issuance of RACT I. Furthermore, RACT I requirements were never incorporated into the
  Pennsylvania SIP for Victaulic Forks. See PADEP comment and response document dated January 2020.

    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 II permits) issued by PADEP to the source. The RACT II
permits, which revise or adopt additional source-specific controls,
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). The
RACT II permits submitted by PADEP are listed in the last column of
Table 2 of this document, along with the permit effective date, and are
part of the docket for this rulemaking, which is available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EPA-R03-OAR-2021-0380.\9\ EPA
is proposing to incorporate by reference in the Pennsylvania SIP, via
the RACT II permits, source-specific RACT determinations under the 1997
and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for certain sources at major NOX
and VOC emitting facilities.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The RACT II permits are redacted versions of a facility's
Federally enforceable permits and reflect the specific RACT
requirements being approved into the Pennsylvania SIP.
    \10\ While the prior SIP-approved RACT I permit will remain part
of the SIP, this RACT II rule will incorporate by reference the RACT
II requirements through the RACT II permit and clarify the ongoing
applicability of specific conditions in the RACT I permit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. EPA's Evaluation of SIP Revisions

    After thorough review and evaluation of the information provided by
PADEP for sources at twenty-four major NOX and/or VOC
emitting facilities in Pennsylvania included in its SIP revision
submittal, 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 subject sources of NOX and/or VOC in Pennsylvania,
as they are not covered by or cannot meet Pennsylvania's presumptive
RACT regulation.
    EPA also finds that all the proposed revisions to previously SIP
approved RACT requirements, under the 1979 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 interfere with other
applicable CAA requirement in section 110(l) of the CAA.
    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-2021-0380.

IV. Proposed Action

    Based on EPA's review, EPA is proposing to approve the Pennsylvania
SIP revisions for case-by-case RACT determinations for individual
sources at twenty-four major NOX and VOC emitting facilities
listed in Table 2 of this document and incorporate by reference in the
Pennsylvania SIP, via the RACT II permits, source specific RACT
determinations under the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for those
sources. 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.

V. 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 source specific RACT determinations via the RACT II permits
as described in Sections II and III--Summary of SIP Revisions and EPA's
Evaluation of SIP Revisions in this document. 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).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the 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);
     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 rulemaking, addressing the
NOX and VOC RACT case-by-case requirements for individual
sources at twenty-four facilities in Pennsylvania for the 1997 and 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS, 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.

    Dated: July 22, 2021.
Diana Esher,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2021-16279 Filed 7-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 32 (Tuesday, February 18, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9097-9100]
[FR Doc No: 2014-03434]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2010-1055; FRL-9906-65-Region 6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
New Mexico; Transportation Conformity and General Conformity
Requirements for Bernalillo County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the Governor of New Mexico on November 18, 2010, May 24,
2011 and October 11, 2012 on behalf of the Albuquerque-Bernalillo
County Air Quality Control Board (AQCB). These revisions serve to
incorporate recent changes to the Federal Transportation Conformity and
General Conformity rules into the state conformity SIP for Bernalillo
County. EPA is approving these revisions in accordance with the
requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This rule is effective on April 21, 2014 without further notice,
unless EPA receives relevant adverse comment by March 20, 2014. If EPA
receives such comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take
effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2010-1055, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions.
     Email: Michelle Peace at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail or delivery: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning
Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2010-1055. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
through http://www.regulations.gov or email, if you believe that it is
CBI or otherwise protected from disclosure. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means that EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment along with any disk or CD-ROM
submitted. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters and any form of encryption and should be free of any
defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 6,
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all documents in the
docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material),
and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI).
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with
the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph
below or Mr. Bill Deese at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The State submittal is also available for public inspection at the
State Air Agency listed below during official business hours by
appointment:
    City of Albuquerque Environmental Health Department, Air Quality
Division, Office of Air Quality, One Civic Plaza Northwest,
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Peace, telephone (214) 665-
7430, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, fax
number<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we''
``us'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.

Outline

I. What is transportation conformity?
II. What is general conformity?
III. What is the background for this action?
IV. What did the state submit and how did we evaluate it?
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is transportation conformity?

    Transportation conformity is required under section 176(c) of the
Clean Air Act to ensure that Federally supported highway and transit
projects are consistent with (conform to) the purpose of the approved
SIP. Conformity currently applies to areas that are designated
nonattainment, and those areas redesignated to attainment after 1990
(maintenance areas), with plans developed under section 175A of the
Clean Air Act for the following transportation related criteria
pollutants: Ozone, particulate matter (PM2.5 and
PM10), carbon monoxide (CO), and nitrogen dioxide
(NO2). Conformity with the purpose of the SIP means that
transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The Federal
transportation

conformity regulations are found in 40 CFR part 93 and provisions
related to conformity SIPs are found in 40 CFR 51.390.

II. What is general conformity?

    General conformity is also required under section 176(c) of the
Clean Air Act to ensure that all other Federally supported actions
outside of highway and transit projects are consistent with the purpose
of the approved SIP. General conformity requirements currently apply to
the following criteria pollutants: Ozone, particulate matter
(PM2.5 and PM10), carbon monoxide (CO), and
nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2) and
Lead. The Federal general conformity regulations are found in 40 CFR
part 93 and provisions related to general conformity SIPs are found in
40 CFR 51.851.

III. What is the background for this action?

    States adopt transportation conformity SIPs to enable an area to
implement and enforce the Federal transportation conformity
requirements per 40 CFR part 51 subpart T and 40 CFR part 93 subpart A.
The AQCB initially complied with this requirement by submitting a SIP
to EPA on December 19, 1994; we approved this SIP on November 8, 1995
(60 FR 56241). Since the November 8, 1995 approval, the Governor of New
Mexico has submitted a number of revisions to the conformity SIP. The
most recent of these revisions were submitted on November 18, 2010, and
October 11, 2012. The November 18, 2010 submittal consists of
amendments to 20.11.3 NMAC, Transportation Conformity reflecting
federally promulgated changes that affect PM 2.5 and PM 10
nonattainment and maintenance areas (75 FR 14260). The October 11, 2012
Transportation Conformity submittal includes the current transportation
conformity rule that reflects all transportation conformity rulemakings
promulgated by EPA as of April 2012, including the Restructuring
Amendments final rulemaking (77 FR 14979).
    States adopt general conformity SIPs to enable an area to implement
and enforce the Federal general conformity requirements per 40 CFR part
51 subpart W and 40 CFR part 93 subpart B. The AQCB initially complied
with this requirement by submitting a SIP to EPA on October 1, 2002 and
approved by EPA on December 30, 2004 (69 FR 78314). EPA promulgated
amendments to the Federal general conformity rule on April 5, 2010 (75
FR 17254). AQCB's May 24, 2011 revision serves to update Albuquerque's
regulations found in 20.11.4 NMAC, General Conformity and bring them in
line with these most recent changes to the Federal general conformity
rule. Because 40 CFR part 51, subpart W (Sec. Sec.  51.850-51.860)
essentially duplicates the regulations promulgated at 40 CFR part 93,
subpart B (Sec. Sec.  93.150-93.160), EPA has deleted all of subpart W
except for Sec.  51.851. In the revision to Sec.  51.851, EPA requires
that if a state or tribe submits a General Conformity SIP or TIP that
it be consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR part 93, subpart B.
The EPA added paragraph (f) to 40 CFR 51.851 to allow the states and
tribes to develop their own ``presumed to conform'' list for actions
covered by their conformity SIPs or TIPs.'' AQCB has not used this
provision to develop a ``presumed to conform'' list for its conformity
SIP.

IV. What did the state submit and how did we evaluate it?

    On November 18, 2010 and October 11, 2012, the Governor of New
Mexico submitted a revision to the Bernalillo County, New Mexico State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for Transportation Conformity purposes. The
November 18, 2010 SIP revision consists of language to address the
April 23, 2010 federal changes to address PM2.5 and
PM10 nonattainment areas. The October 11, 2012 submittal
addresses EPA's March 14, 2012 revisions to the Federal rule by
restructuring two sections of the conformity rule, <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC (40
CFR 93.109) and <IP_ADDRESS> NMAC (40 CFR 93.119), so that the existing
rule requirements clearly apply to areas designated for future new or
revised NAAQS.
    On May 24, 2011, The Governor of New Mexico submitted a revision to
the Bernalillo County SIP for General Conformity purposes. The SIP
revision consists of language to address the April 5, 2010 federal
changes to update and streamline the general conformity determination
process.
    The practice of the AQCB is to incorporate federal language into
its local rules and customize such rules to meet the standard required
by the New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) style guidance, rather
than to incorporate by reference the federal rules. This approach is
consistent with 40 CFR 51 subparts T and W, which allow a state's
conformity SIPs to contain criteria and procedures more stringent than
the federal requirements. EPA reviewed the sections of the NMAC found
in Tables 1 and 2 for consistency with the Federal Regulations. We
found that the revised NMAC sections accurately reflect the current
content of corresponding sections of the Federal transportation and
general conformity rules they are intended to address, as well as adds
specific language to further clarify roles and responsibilities in the
Bernalillo County consultation process. Table 1 highlights the sections
of NMAC Chapter 20 that were revised to address EPA's March 24, 2010
federal transportation conformity rulemaking (75 FR 14260). Table 2
highlights the sections of NMAC Chapter 20 that were revised to address
EPA's March 14, 2012 federal transportation conformity rulemaking (77
FR 14979). Table 3 highlights the sections of NMAC Chapter 20 that
correspond to the revisions to the federal general conformity rules
which became effective on July 6, 2010. These NMAC revisions are
reflected in the AQCB's May 24, 2011 submittal.

 Table 1--November 18, 2010 Revisions to NMAC Chapter 20, Transportation
        Conformity, and Corresponding Sections of 40 CFR Part 93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       NMAC Ch. 20                           40 CFR 93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<IP_ADDRESS>...............................................          93.102
<IP_ADDRESS>...............................................          93.101
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.103
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.104
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.105
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.106
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.107
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.108
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.109
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.110
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.111
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.112
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.113
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.114
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.115
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.116
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.117
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.118
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.119
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.120
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.121
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.122
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.123
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.124
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.125
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.126
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.127
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.128
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.129
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Table 2--October 11, 2012 Revisions to NMAC Chapter 20, Transportation
        Conformity, and Corresponding Sections of 40 CFR Part 93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       NMAC Ch. 20                           40 CFR 93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<IP_ADDRESS>...............................................          93.101
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.109

<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.118
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.119
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Table 3--May 24, 2011 Revisions to NMAC Chapter 20, General Conformity,
              and Corresponding Sections of 40 CFR Part 93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       NMAC Ch. 20                           40 CFR 93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<IP_ADDRESS>...............................................          93.150
<IP_ADDRESS>...............................................          93.100
<IP_ADDRESS>...............................................          93.152
<IP_ADDRESS>...............................................          93.104
<IP_ADDRESS>..............................................          93.105
<IP_ADDRESS>..............................................          93.106
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.153
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.154
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.155
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.156
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.157
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.158
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.159
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.160
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.161
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.162
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.163
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.164
<IP_ADDRESS>.............................................          93.165
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The complete federal conformity rules of 40 CFR part 93 and the
complete NMAC Chapter can be found at the following Web sites: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html for the federal rules and http://www.nmcpr.state.nm.us/nmac/index.htm for the local rules.

V. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Bernalillo County SIP revisions for
Transportation Conformity, which were submitted on November 18, 2010
and October 11, 2012. AQCB's revisions amend rule 20.11.3 NMAC
Transportation Conformity by updating it to bring it into compliance
with the amended Federal transportation conformity rule. EPA is also
approving AQCB's revision to the Albuquerque SIP submitted to EPA on
May 24, 2011. AQCB's revision amends rule 20.11.4 NMAC General
Conformity to update the general conformity rule in its entirety to
meet state and federal requirements. We have evaluated the State's
submittals and have determined that they meet the applicable
requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA regulations, and are
consistent with EPA policy.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because we view
this as a non-controversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if relevant adverse
comments are received. This rule will be effective on April 21, 2014
without further notice unless we receive adverse comment by March 20,
2014. If we receive adverse comments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule
will not take effect. We will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will not institute
a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in
commenting must do so now. Please note that if we receive adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as
added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this
rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House
of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States
prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
section 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 21, 2014. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: January 28, 2014.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart GG--New Mexico

0
2. In Sec.  52.1620, the second table in paragraph (c) entitled, ``EPA
Approved Albuquerque/Bernalillo County, NM Regulations,'' is amended by
revising the entries for Part 3 (20.11.3 NMAC), Transportation
Conformity, and Part 4 (20.11.4 NMAC), General Conformity to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.1620  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
* * * * *

                           EPA Approved Albuquerque/Bernalillo County, NM Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State approval/
          State citation              Title/subject     effective date   EPA approval date       Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) Title 20--Environment Protection Chapter 11--Albuquerque/Bernalillo County
                                            Air Quality Control Board
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Part 3 ( 20.11.3 NMAC)...........  Transportation       11/18/2010; 10/ 2/18/2014 [Insert
                                    Conformity.                11/2012   FR page number
                                                                         where document
                                                                         begins].
Part 4 (20.11.4 NMAC)............  General Conformity.       5/24/2011  2/18/2014 [Insert    ...................
                                                                         FR page number
                                                                         where document
                                                                         begins].

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-03434 Filed 2-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: November 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 226)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 65909-65911]
[DOCID:fr26no07-9]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0228; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-107-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-200 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD)
for certain Boeing Model 737-200 series airplanes. This proposed AD
would require repetitive inspections to detect cracking of the support
fittings of the Krueger flap actuators, and corrective actions if
necessary. This proposed AD also would require eventual replacement of
any existing aluminum support fitting on each wing with a steel
fitting, and modification of the aft attachment of the actuator. Doing
these actions would terminate the repetitive inspection requirements.
This proposed AD results from reports of cracking due to fatigue and
stress corrosion of the support fittings of the Krueger flap actuator.
We are proposing this AD to prevent cracking of the support fittings,
which could result in fracturing of the actuator attach lugs,
separation of the actuator from the support fitting, severing of the
hydraulic lines, resultant loss of hydraulic fluids, and consequent
reduced controllability of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 10,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
 Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing
Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
; or in person at the Docket Management Facility

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Marsh, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
917-6440; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2007-0228;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-107-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We

will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We have received reports of cracks in the support fitting of the
Krueger flap actuator mounted on the front spar of eight affected
airplanes. On one airplane, the lugs on the No. 1 Krueger flap actuator
support fitting severed completely, the actuator separated from the
front spar, and the hydraulic lines were severed. On another airplane,
both actuator attach lugs of a No. 1 flap support fitting were also
completely severed. The cracking is attributed to fatigue and stress
corrosion, and it is suspected that high clamp-up stresses may be
contributing to cracks in the actuator attach lugs. Cracking of the
support fittings, if not corrected, could result in fracturing of the
actuator attach lugs, separation of the actuator from the support
fitting, severing of the hydraulic lines, resultant loss of hydraulic
fluids, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

Other Relevant Rulemaking

    On July 31, 2000, we issued AD 2000-15-18, amendment 39-11851 (65
FR 48371, August 8, 2000). That AD applies to certain Boeing Model 737-
100 and -200 series airplanes, line numbers 001 through 813 inclusive.
That AD requires inspections to detect cracking of the support fittings
of the Krueger flap actuator; and, if necessary, replacement of
existing fittings with new steel fittings and modification of the aft
attachment of the actuator. That AD also requires eventual replacement
of any existing aluminum Krueger flap actuator support fitting on each
wing with a steel fitting, which terminates the repetitive inspection
requirements. That AD resulted from reports of cracking due to fatigue
and stress corrosion of the support fittings of the Krueger flap
actuator. The actions in that AD are intended to prevent such cracking,
which could result in fracturing of the actuator attach lugs,
separation of the actuator from the support fitting, severing of the
hydraulic lines, and

resultant loss of hydraulic fluids. These conditions, if not corrected,
could result in possible failure of one or more hydraulic systems, and
consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.
    Since we issued AD 2000-15-18, we have determined that the same
unsafe condition addressed in that AD exists on certain additional
Model 737-200 series airplanes. We were advised that Model 737-200
series airplanes, line numbers 814 through 826 inclusive, are also
subject to the same unsafe condition addressed in AD 2000-15-18.

Relevant Service Information

    We have reviewed Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-57-
1129, Revision 3, dated March 19, 2007. The service bulletin describes
procedures for repetitive high frequency eddy current (HFEC)
inspections to detect cracking of the support fittings of the Krueger
flap actuators, and corrective actions if necessary. The corrective
actions are replacement of existing fittings with new steel fittings
and modification of the aft attachment of the actuator. This
replacement and modification eliminates the need for the repetitive
inspection requirements. Accomplishing the actions specified in the
service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe
condition.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an
unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes
of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD,
which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service
information described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    There are about 13 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for
U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
                Action                   Work hours     Average labor       Parts          Cost per airplane       registered           Fleet cost
                                                        rate per hour                                               airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection...........................               5             $80              $0  $400, per inspection                   3  $1,200, per inspection
                                                                                cycle.                                    cycle.
Replacement..........................              88             $80         $29,642  $36,682.................               3  $110,046.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Boeing: Docket No. FAA-2007-0228; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-
107-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by January
10, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-200 series airplanes,
line numbers 814 through 826 inclusive, certificated in any
category.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of cracking due to fatigue and
stress corrosion of the support fittings of the Krueger flap
actuator. We are issuing this AD to prevent cracking of the support
fittings, which could result in fracturing of the actuator attach
lugs, separation of the actuator from the support fitting, severing
of the hydraulic lines, resultant loss of hydraulic fluids, and
consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Repetitive Inspections

    (f) Within 12 months after the effective date of this AD, do a
high frequency eddy current (HFEC) inspection to detect cracking of
the support fittings of the Krueger flap actuator on each wing, in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Special
Attention Service Bulletin 737-57-1129, Revision 3, dated March 19,
2007.

    (1) If no cracking is detected, repeat the inspection thereafter
at intervals not to exceed 3,000 flight hours until the terminating
action required by paragraph (g) of this AD is accomplished.
    (2) If any cracking is detected, before further flight, do the
replacement and modification specified in paragraph (g) of this AD.

Terminating Action

    (g) Within 60 months after the effective date of this AD:
Replace any existing Krueger flap actuator aluminum support fitting
on each wing with a steel fitting, and modify the actuator aft
attachment, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-57-1129, Revision 3,
dated March 19, 2007. Doing this replacement and modification
terminates the repetitive inspection requirements of paragraph (f)
of this AD.

Parts Replacement

    (h) As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install
on any airplane any aluminum support fitting (actuator support
assembly) identified in the ``Existing Part Number'' column of
paragraph 2.C. of Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 737-57-
1129, Revision 3, dated March 19, 2007.

Actions Accomplished in Accordance With Previous Revisions of Service
Bulletin

    (i) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the service bulletins listed in Table 1 of this AD,
are acceptable for compliance with the corresponding requirements of
this AD.

                                Table 1.--Previous Revisions of Service Bulletins
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Boeing service bulletin                    Revision level                            Date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
737-57-1129...........................  1..................................  October 30, 1981.
737-57-1129...........................  2..................................  May 28, 1998.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (j)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in
accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an
Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes
Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized
by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair
method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis
of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this
AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 13, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-22926 Filed 11-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P