Federal Register, Volume 74, Number 9, January 14, 2009, Pages 1871-2292 Page: 1,923
vii, 2292, ii p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 9/Wednesday, January 14, 2009/Rules and Regulations
and whether they would advance the
area's attainment date. The state may
reject measures as not meeting RACM,
however, if they would not advance the
attainment date, would cause
substantial widespread and long-term
adverse impacts, or would be
economically or technologically
infeasible. Additionally, potential
measures requiring intensive and costly
implementation efforts are not RACM.
Sierra Club v. EPA at 162-163 (DC Cir.
2002); Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735
(5th Cir. 2002); BCCA Appeal Group v.
EPA, 355 F.3d 817 (5th Cir. 2003). To
demonstrate measures that advance
attainment of the ozone standard, the
emission reductions from the measures
must occur no later than the start of the
2008 ozone season-i.e., by March 1,
2008, in order to advance attainment.
Because there are no measures that
could have been adopted and
implemented by a date that has now
passed, we believe it is appropriate to
conclude that additional measures are
not RACM.
EPA expects States to prepare a
reasoned justification for rejection of
any available control measure. The
resulting available control measures
should then be evaluated for
reasonableness considering their
technological and economical
feasibility, and whether they will
advance attainment. In the case of the
DFW SIP, TCEQ performed an analysis
to determine whether all RACM were
included in the SIP.
To evaluate RACM for VOC measures,
the State looked to all available RACM
analyses and guidance for all the types
of source categories in the DFW area
and their potential controls. The State's
analysis included evaluation of the
potential RACM RTO control
technology for cement kilns in the DFW
area as VOC RACM. The State's
photochemical modeling, however,
indicated that the implementation of
RTO technology on cement kilns in the
DFW area would not advance
attainment. The State's analyses
indicated that it would take extremely
large reductions of VOC emissions, over
100 tpd, to reduce the ozone level at the
Denton monitor 13 in the DFW area by
13 To determine whether a measure would be
reasonable to require for implementation, we
calculated the magnitude of emissions reductions
that would advance the attainment date at the
monitors with the highest future design values
(DVs), which are the Denton and Frisco monitors.
Of these two monitors, the Denton monitor has the
higher DV (2005-2007) of 94 ppb, although it
should be noted that the DV for the DFW area for
20052007 is 95 ppb. However, considering the
Denton monitor, if implementation of a particularmeasure would result in a decrease of 1 ppb at the
Denton monitor in 2008, we would consider such1 ppb. Thus only measures that will
provide approximately 100 tpd of VOC
emissions reductions will timely
advance attainment. We were unable to
identify any potential RACM measures
in the State's submittal that would
provide 100 tpd or more of VOC
reductions; this review also examined
the use of RTO in cement kilns.
In addition to reviewing the State's
submittal, EPA reviewed the State's
2005 and 2007 Emissions Inventories for
Point Sources. This review showed that
the cement kilns do not emit sufficient
amounts of VOCs to achieve 100 tpd in
emissions reductions. See the
Supplemental TSD for more details.
Consequently, EPA agrees with the State
that there are no additional RACM for
stationary source VOC emissions in the
DFW area. Based upon this review, EPA
concludes that the use of RTO on
cement kilns would not advance timely
attainment.
While we agree that one of the sources
in the cement kiln source category uses
the RTO technology-TXI #5 (Kiln 5),
we do not extrapolate from this that use
of the RTO technology on the other
cement kilns in the DFW area will
advance attainment of the 1997 ozone
standard. See our previous comments
and the Supplemental TSD for
additional information.
To evaluate RACM for NOx measures,
the TCEQ looked to all available RACM
analyses and guidance for all the types
of source categories in the DFW area
and their potential controls. The State's
analysis also included evaluation of
Low Temperature Oxidation
Technology (LoTOx), SCR and Selective
Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) as
potential NOx RACM for cement kilns.
The State's modeling analyses indicate
that reducing on-road mobile and area/
non-road sources of NOx is most
effective in reducing ozone levels at the
Denton and Frisco monitors. Our
evaluation of the State's analyses found
that reductions of NOx emissions of at
least 40 tpd would have the potential to
advance the attainment date. See pages
2-29 to 2-30 of the TCEQ SIP Narrative.
Thus, only measures that will provide
approximately 40 tpd of NOx emissions
reductions will timely advance
attainment. Neither the State nor EPA
was able to identify any potential RACM
measures that would provide 40 tpd or
more in NOx emissions reductions.
TCEQ had additional sensitivity
modeling performed for cement kilns,
which showed that the most stringent
controls on the kilns would not advancea measure as having the potential to advance the
attainment date in the DFW area.the attainment date. See the
Supplemental TSD for more detail.
The Fifth Circuit in Sierra Club v.
EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 745 (5th Cir. 2002)
impressed upon EPA the duty to (1)
demonstrate that it has examined
relevant data, and (2) provide a
satisfactory explanation for its rejection
of a proposed RACM and why the
proposed RACM, individually and in
combination, would not advance the
area's attainment date. See Ober, 243
F.3d at 1195 (quoting American Lung
Ass'n v. EPA, 134 F.3d 388, 392-93 (DC
Cir. 1998)). We reviewed the State's
analysis and discussed our evaluation of
it in the July 2008 TSD and the
December 2008 Supplemental TSD for
this rulemaking; both TSDs are in the
docket for this rulemaking. EPA
evaluated the State's analysis and
explained in the TSDs why we agree
with the State that no additional
measures are RACM for the DFW area
and therefore the RACM requirement of
the Act is met. We performed an
independent analysis by reviewing all
available data to determine whether
RTO and NOx controls achieving 80-
90% reduction are RACM for cement
kilns in the DFW area; we agree with the
State that additional control measures
would not advance the attainment date.
G. Comments on the Failure-To-Attain
Contingency Measures Plan
Comment: Some commenters merely
state that the contingency measures are
insufficient without providing any
support. Others comment that the four
failure-to-attain contingency measures
are insufficient because they will not
result in demonstrative, verifiable, and
enforceable emission reductions.
Response: Some of the comments
simply allege that the contingency
measures are insufficient and the
commenters provide no support,
rationale or data for their claim. EPA
explained why we believe the
contingency measures are sufficient in
the proposed rule and the commenters
have not substantively questioned EPA's
rationale. Therefore, no further response
is necessary.
Other commenters claim that the
contingency measures will not result in
demonstrative, verifiable and
enforceable emission reductions. EPA
interpreted sections 172 and 182 of the
Act in the General Preamble (57 FR
13498, 13510) to require States with
moderate or above ozone nonattainment
areas to include contingency measures
to implement additional emission
reductions of 3% of the adjusted base
year inventory in the year following the
year in which the failure has beenidentified. The state must specify the
1923
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
United States. Office of the Federal Register. Federal Register, Volume 74, Number 9, January 14, 2009, Pages 1871-2292, periodical, January 14, 2009; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc132871/m1/60/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.