You are on page 1of 7

18428 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No.

70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION information claimed to be Confidential SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
AGENCY Business Information (CBI) or other telephone number is (404) 562–9042.
information whose disclosure is Ms. Harder can also be reached via
40 CFR Part 52 restricted by statute. Do not submit electronic mail at harder.stacy@epa.gov.
[EPA–R04–OAR–2005–AL–0002–200623; through www.regulations.gov or e-mail, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FRL–8298–1] information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The Table of Contents
Approval and Promulgation of www.regulations.gov Web site is an I. What Action Is EPA Proposing?
Implementation Plans: Alabama: ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which II. Why Is EPA Proposing This Action?
Proposed Approval of Revisions to the means EPA will not know your identity III. What Is the Rationale for This SIP
Visible Emissions Rule or contact information unless you Revision?
IV. What Does the Visible Emissions Rule in
provide it in the body of your comment.
AGENCY: Environmental Protection the Current SIP Require, and What
If you send an e-mail comment directly Changes Are Requested by ADEM?
Agency (EPA). to EPA without going through V. What Changes Does EPA Recommend to
ACTION: Proposed rule. www.regulations.gov, your e-mail the Submittal?
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve address will be automatically captured VI. What Technical Analysis Was Used To
and included as part of the comment Support Approval of This SIP Revision?
the Visible Emissions portion of the VII. What Happens Next?
State Implementation Plan (SIP) that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you VIII. Proposed Action
revision submitted to EPA, by the IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Alabama Department of Environmental submit an electronic comment, EPA
Management (ADEM), on September 11, recommends that you include your I. What Action Is EPA Proposing?
2003 (the ‘‘2003 ADEM submittal’’), name and other contact information in EPA is proposing an approval, under
provided it is revised as described in the body of your comment and with any Section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act
this action and submitted as a SIP disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA (CAA), of the Visible Emissions portion
revision. The open burning portion of cannot read your comment due to of the Alabama SIP revision submitted
the submittal was previously approved technical difficulties and cannot contact on September 11, 2003. This proposed
in a separate action on March 9, 2006 you for clarification, EPA may not be approval is contingent upon Alabama
(71 FR 12138). able to consider your comment. submitting a revised SIP submission
Electronic files should avoid the use of addressing EPA’s concerns regarding
DATES: Comments must be received on
special characters, any form of impacts of the rule changes on
or before June 11, 2007.
encryption, and be free of any defects or attainment of the National Ambient Air
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
viruses. For additional information Quality Standards (NAAQS). Because
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
OAR–2005–AL–0002, by one of the the necessary revisions would
Docket Center homepage at http:// materially alter both the existing SIP
following methods: www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
(a) www.regulations.gov: Follow the approved rule and the submitted
Docket: All documents in the revision, the State must make a SIP
on-line instructions for submitting electronic docket are listed in the
comments. submittal to effect the changes noted by
www.regulations.gov index. Although EPA below. As with any SIP revision,
(b) E-mail: harder.stacy@epa.gov.
(c) Fax: 404–562–9019. listed in the index, some information is the State must provide public notice of
(d) Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2005–AL– not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other and a public hearing on the proposed
0002,’’ Regulatory Development Section, information whose disclosure is changes. If, after consideration of public
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and restricted by statute. Certain other comments, EPA determines the revised
Toxics Management Division, U.S. material, such as copyrighted material, SIP submission meets the requirements
Environmental Protection Agency, is not placed on the Internet and will be of the CAA and is consistent with the
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., publicly available only in hard copy recommended changes outlined in this
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. form. Publicly available docket action, the Agency may proceed to
(e) Hand Delivery or Courier: Stacy materials are available either publish its approval of the revised SIP
Harder, Regulatory Development electronically in www.regulations.gov in the Federal Register. Alabama’s
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, or in hard copy at the Regulatory revised submittal must be consistent
Pesticides and Toxics Management Development Section, Air Planning with the changes discussed in this
Division, 12th floor, U.S. Environmental Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics action for EPA to approve its
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Management Division, U.S. incorporation into the SIP. If the revised
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303– Environmental Protection Agency, language does not conform specifically
8960. Such deliveries are only accepted Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., to the recommended changes, EPA will
during the Regional Office’s normal Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA need to re-evaluate Alabama’s submittal
hours of operation. The Regional requests that if at all possible, you and, if the changes are approvable, re-
Office’s official hours of business are contact the person listed in the FOR propose approval of the SIP submittal.
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
excluding federal holidays. schedule your inspection. The Regional II. Why Is EPA Proposing This Action?
Instructions: Direct your comments to Office’s official hours of business are EPA is taking this action in response
Docket ID No. ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2005– Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, to a request from ADEM to revise the
AL–0002.’’ EPA’s policy is that all excluding legal holidays. Visible Emissions portion of Alabama’s
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS

comments received will be included in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SIP rule pertaining to sources of
the public docket without change and Stacy Harder, Regulatory Development particulate matter (PM) emissions. The
may be made available online at Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, request, submitted to EPA on September
http://www.regulations.gov, including Pesticides and Toxics Management 11, 2003, would revise Alabama SIP rule
any personal information provided, Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 335–3–4–.01 (‘‘Visible Emissions’’) by
unless the comment includes Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, amending the requirements for units

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:48 Apr 11, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18429

that operate continuous opacity purpose of that rule revision was to quarter. If, for a source subject to the
monitoring systems (COMS) and that are make the State’s regulation consistent new standard, the number of unexcused
not subject to any opacity limits other with what had been its practice in opacity exceedances is in excess of two
than those in rule 335–3–4–.01(1) exercising enforcement discretion with percent of the source operating time for
(‘‘Visible Emissions Restrictions for respect to use of COMS data since the which the opacity standard was
Stationary Sources’’). early 1980’s. applicable during the quarter, formal
Under section 110(l) of the CAA, EPA In addition to requiring corrective enforcement action may proceed.
may not approve revisions to SIPs if the actions and prompt reporting of Opacity limitations have typically
revisions would interfere with any deviations from permit terms, the State accompanied periodic Reference
applicable requirement concerning has other oversight procedures in place Method 5 particulate matter compliance
attainment and reasonable further that ensure long, continuous periods of tests (Method 5 tests) in SIPs. That is,
progress (RFP), or any other applicable high opacity are properly addressed by where Method 5 tests are used to
requirement of the CAA. In determining the source. ADEM receives quarterly demonstrate compliance with filterable
whether to approve a requested emissions reports from plants that PM mass emission limitations, opacity
revision, EPA considers the relevant utilize COMS, which indicate the limits and associated monitoring are
impacts of the proposed change in light opacity of the emissions from sources commonly used as an indirect monitor
of the type of requirement affected by subject to this rule revision. ADEM for PM emissions and as indicators of
the requested revision. In this instance, reviews the information and determines good PM control equipment operation
the State is proposing revisions to its if further action should be taken due to during the periods between Method 5
opacity requirements. We define opacity any opacity exceedances. The data is tests. EPA has long recognized opacity
as the degree to which emissions reduce required to be in a format that includes monitoring as a method of ensuring
the transmission of light and obscure source operating time, monitor proper control device operation. See 39
the view of an object in the background. operating time, exempt opacity FR 9308, 9309 (Mar. 8, 1974) (NSPS
(See 40 CFR 60.2). exceedances, and non-exempt opacity Additions and Miscellaneous
A change in opacity standards may exceedances. The reports include daily Amendments discussing opacity as an
not necessarily impact on a State’s opacity exceedances as well as a indicator of whether control equipment
ability to meet the PM NAAQS or any summary of the data for the entire is properly maintained and operated).
other applicable requirement of the Act quarter. In these reports, the sources With use of continuous opacity
because, as discussed further in this also calculate the percentage of monitors it is possible to have a
action, a reliable and direct correlation operating time in which they had non- continuous stream of opacity data. This
between opacity and PM emissions exempt opacity exceedances as well as results in the collection of many
cannot be established without the percentage of operating time with individual, short-term opacity
significant site-specific simultaneous any (total of exempt and non-exempt) measurements that reflect the full range
testing of both PM emissions and opacity exceedances. of control device operating variability
opacity, particularly for short-term ADEM has developed a program that and, depending upon the amount of
periods (e.g., 24 hours or less). takes the summary data from the variability, may or may not be indicative
Nonetheless, because there is at least an quarterly opacity reports and calculates of poor operation of control equipment
indirect relationship between opacity the percentage of source operating time and excess PM emissions. For example,
and PM emissions, including the use of that the opacity of emissions from coal-fired power generation facilities
opacity to track the effectiveness of PM individual units (or multiple units with may experience sporadic opacity
control equipment operation, we a common stack) exceeded the opacity exceedances caused by variations in the
considered the impact of Alabama’s standard due to non-exempt reasons constituents of coal burned. The revised
proposed revision on the NAAQS for during the calendar quarter. As a check Alabama rule shifts emphasis from
PM10 and PM2.5, and on other on the quarterly calculations from the isolated six-minute periods to longer
applicable requirements. No changes are source, this program also calculates the periods that are more indicative of
being proposed to revise the particulate percentage of operating time that the excess PM emissions and problems with
mass limits in the Alabama SIP, and opacity of emissions from individual operation and maintenance of control
sources must continue to meet units exceeded the opacity standard for devices. As noted above, under the
applicable emissions limits. EPA any reason. With this program, ADEM proposed revised rule, with the changes
proposes to approve Alabama’s revision, compares the performance of each unit discussed in this action, an emissions
with our recommended changes, to the historical performance of that unit unit is allowed: (1) Up to 100 percent
because we determined that, with the as well as compares it to the opacity during periods of startup,
changes specified in this action, the SIP performance of the other units at that shutdown, load change, and rate change
revision will not interfere with plant and other similar plants in the or other short, intermittent periods upon
attainment of either of the PM NAAQS State, and the performance of the unit terms approved by ADEM’s Director and
or with other applicable requirements. to the two percent threshold in the included in a state-issued permit; (2) up
Alabama submittal. If the performance to 100 percent opacity for up to two
III. What Is the Rationale for This SIP of a unit is not consistent with its percent of the operating time on a
Revision? historical performance or the quarterly basis (less the exempted
Monitoring opacity by use of COMS performance of other similar units in the periods approved by ADEM’s Director
provides far more data than EPA State, ADEM can review the daily and included in a state-issued permit),
Reference Method 9, the compliance exceedances of the opacity standard for for no more than 10 percent of the time
determination method specified by most the unit in question to determine if the on a daily basis; and (3) up to 20 percent
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS

SIPs, including Alabama’s. Alabama exceedances were sporadic, or grouped opacity for the rest of the time in a
adopted into the State’s regulations the in consecutive hours or consecutive quarter. EPA believes this approach,
rule revision contained in the 2003 days. ADEM may also ask the company along with the monitoring and oversight
ADEM submittal on August 26, 2003, for a detailed explanation of the safeguards discussed above, make
and has since operated under it as a exceedances (or a subset of appropriate use of COMS data for
State-only enforceable provision. The exceedances) during the calendar ensuring compliance with PM limits.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:48 Apr 11, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1
18430 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Proposed Rules

IV. What Does the Visible Emissions (2) Compliance with opacity standards in periods qualifying under the previous
Rule in the Current SIP Require, and this Rule shall be determined by conducting two instances.
What Changes Are Requested by observations in accordance with Reference
Method 9 in Appendix A, 40 CFR Part 60, as V. What Changes Does EPA
ADEM?
the same may be amended requiring a six (6) Recommend to the Submittal?
The subject Visible Emissions rule is minute average as determined by twenty-four As described above, under the
in Chapter 335–3–4 (‘‘Control of (24) consecutive readings, at intervals of
fifteen (15) seconds each.
Alabama SIP, Method 9 is the method
Particulate Emissions’’) of the Alabama specified for determining compliance
SIP. The currently approved Alabama with the 20 percent opacity limit. COMS
The 2003 ADEM submittal would add
Rule 335–3–4–.01, ‘‘Visible Emissions,’’ are not specified as the method to
three new paragraphs, (3), (4), and (5),
has a generally applicable limit of 20 determine compliance with the
to Alabama Rule 335–3–4–.01 that apply
percent on opacity level and provides numerical opacity limit, although
only to those emissions units that use
that one six-minute period per hour of COMS data can be credible evidence of
COMS for measuring opacity, that
up to 40 percent opacity is exempted 1 opacity. Opacity, both as measured by
operate such systems according to
from the 20 percent limit. The Director Federal specifications, and that are Method 9 and COMS, has been used as
of ADEM may also grant, as part of a subject only to those opacity limits of a proxy for particulate emissions and to
permit issued by the State, exemptions the State’s SIP (e.g., not subject to indicate whether a company is
to the 20 percent limit during startup, opacity limits under any following good air pollution control
shutdown, load change and rate change preconstruction permit or other practices. ADEM has proposed
or other short, intermittent periods that regulation). The revision provides that amending its SIP to allow up to two
are in addition to the hourly six-minute these units will not be in violation of percent of COMS readings to exceed 20
40 percent exemption. These the State’s generally applicable opacity percent opacity during non-exempt
exemptions are provided by limitation if the non-exempt excess periods, in part since the Alabama SIP
subparagraphs (1)(b) and (1)(c), emissions periods do not exceed two provides no other exemption from the
respectively. Additional exemptions for percent of the source operating hours for standard for malfunction.
circumstances not relevant to this which the opacity standard is applicable The use of COMS increases data
rulemaking are provided by and for which the COMS is indicating availability and provides a greater
subparagraphs (1)(d) 2 and (1)(e).3 The valid data, on a quarterly basis. The text degree of reliability compared to the
text of the current rule reads, in relevant of the proposed change reads as follows: Method 9 procedure. Nonetheless, as
part, as follows: currently written, the revision would
(3) The conditions in paragraph (4) of this allow a source to emit at a higher
(1) Visible Emissions Restrictions for Rule apply to each emissions unit that meets
Stationary Sources. allowable average opacity percent level
all of the following requirements:
(a) Except as provided in subparagraphs (a) A Continuous Opacity Monitoring
(as measured by COMS in six-minute
(b), (c), (d), or (e) of this paragraph, no person System (COMS) is used for indication of increments) on a quarterly basis as well
shall discharge into the atmosphere from any opacity of emissions; as allowing higher short term excursions
source of emission, particulate of an opacity (b) With respect to opacity limitations, the than the current approved SIP allows.
greater than that designated as twenty units are subject only to the opacity Because this potential for higher average
percent (20%) opacity, as determined by a six provisions stated in paragraph (1) of this opacity on a quarterly basis could
(6) minute average. Rule; and
(b) During one six (6) minute period in any
indicate an increase in particulate
(c) The COMS system utilized is required matter emissions, and in the absence of
sixty (60) minute period, a person may to comply with the requirements of 40 CFR
discharge into the atmosphere from any a supporting demonstration of
60.13 or 40 CFR 75.14 (if applicable) and is compliance with CAA requirements
source of emission, particulate of an opacity required to be certified in accordance with
not greater than that designated as forty the requirements of 40 CFR 60, Appendix B,
from the State, we believe that the 2003
percent (40%) opacity. Performance Specification 1. SIP submittal is not approvable as
(c) The Director may approve exceptions to (4) During each calendar quarter, the submitted. The submission is also not
this Rule or specific sources which hold permittee will not be deemed in violation of clear about whether the new opacity
permits under Chapter 335–3–14; provided Rule 335–3–4–.01(1) if the non-exempt standard for certain sources with COMS
however, such exceptions may be made for excess emissions periods do not exceed 2.0 at 335–3–4–.01(3)–(5) applies in
startup, shutdown, load change, and rate percent of the source operating hours for
change or other short, intermittent periods of
addition to, or in lieu of, the existing
which the opacity standard is applicable and opacity standard in paragraphs 335–3–
time upon terms approved by the Director for which the COMS is indicating valid data.
and made a part of such permit. 4–.01(1)(a)–(b), as measured under
(5) Nothing in paragraph (4) of this Rule
* * * * * paragraph 335–3–4–.01(2). In addition,
shall be construed to supercede the validity
of opacity readings taken under paragraph (2) the purpose behind new paragraph 335–
1 Alabama Rule 335–3–4–.01, ‘‘Visible of this Rule. 3–4–.01(5) is not clear.
Emissions,’’ provides four specific ‘‘exceptions’’ to EPA believes the State can revise the
compliance with the generally applicable opacity In summary, under the 2003 2003 ADEM submittal by amending it to
limit at subparagraphs 335–3–4–.01(b), (c), (d), and submission, sources operating COMS ensure that the allowable average
(e). To be consistent with more common
terminology, in this notice we refer to these as
would not be deemed in violation of the quarterly opacity is at least as stringent
‘‘exemptions.’’ standard where emissions in excess of as (i.e., equal to or lower than) that
2 Subparagraph (d) provides that ADEM’s Director the 20 percent opacity were limited to: allowed by the current approved SIP,
may approve exceptions to this Rule in the form of (1) One six-minute average per hour of and by being clear that only a single
source-specific adjustments to the opacity standard, up to 40 percent opacity; (2) periods of version of the standard applies to any
provided certain conditions are met demonstrating
startup, shutdown, load change and rate unit (although any credible evidence of
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS

to the Director’s satisfaction that, with the


adjustment, the source would continue to comply change or other short intermittent opacity could be used to assess
with its SIP particulate matter mass emissions limit. periods upon terms approved by compliance with the applicable version
3 Subparagraph (e) provides that the provisions of
ADEM’s Director and included in a of the standard). Accordingly, this
this Rule do not apply to combustion sources in
single-family and duplex dwellings where such
State-issued permit; and (3) no more proposed approval is contingent upon
sources are used for heating or other domestic than two percent of the remaining Alabama’s submission of a revised rule
purposes. operating time after subtracting out all with certain changes. The revision

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:48 Apr 11, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18431

would clearly indicate that a unit is Where currently any source may the operating time on a quarterly basis
covered by either the existing opacity exceed the opacity limit for six minutes (where the amount of operating time
standard at paragraphs 335–3–4– out of every hour (i.e., 10 percent of the does not include the exempted periods
.01(1)(a)–(b), as measured under time, on an hourly basis), under the approved by ADEM’s Director and
paragraph 335–3–4–.01(2), or by the revision EPA is proposing would be included in a state-issued permit), but
new standard established in paragraphs approvable, a source using COMS for no more than ten percent of the time
335–3–4–.01(1)(a), (3)–(4), as measured subject to the new standard could on a daily basis; and (3) up to 20 percent
by the COMS referenced in those exceed the opacity limit for 10 percent opacity for the rest of the time in a
paragraphs—but not both.4 The revision of the time on a daily basis (i.e., up to quarter. The current federally-approved
would also provide that the hourly 40 2.4 hours of consecutive opacity SIP opacity limit remains in effect. Any
percent exemption under Alabama rule exceedances per calendar day), but for new exceptions proposed in this action
335–3–4–.01(1)(b) does not apply to only two percent of the time on a do not take effect until EPA takes final
sources subject to the new paragraphs quarterly basis. Under the current action. Furthermore, any final rule
335–3–4–.01(3) and 335–3–4–.01(4). standard, the 40 percent opacity limit in would be prospective only. In addition,
Thus, the 40 percent exemption for up theory allows a source to emit a total of this proposal is not intended to affect
to 24 six-minute periods per day on an approximately 219 hours of emissions on-going enforcement actions against
hourly basis would be replaced by the in a quarter at up to 40 percent opacity, sources that may be subject to the new
generally applicable 20 percent if the source uses one six-minute standard, nor does it relieve affected
standard. The revision would allow a exemption for every hour of operation. sources in Alabama of their obligations
source to exceed the 20 percent Under the proposed revision, a source to comply with any other federal, state,
standard (up to 100 percent opacity) would be allowed to emit no more than or local opacity requirements, or
during no more than 24 six-minute 44 hours of excess emissions in a particulate matter control requirements.
periods per day. In part this revision quarter (and no more than 2.4 hours in
VI. What Technical Analysis Was Used
a day), but those emissions could have
would replace the existing provision To Support Approval of This SIP
up to 100 percent opacity.6
allowing one six-minute exceedance per As a result, the final rule would have Revision?
hour at 40 percent opacity with a the potential to increase the impact of The existing Alabama SIP specifies
provision allowing up to 24 six-minute opacity exceedances on a short-term Method 9 as the method for determining
exceedances per calendar day at 100 basis by allowing exceedances of up to compliance with the generally
percent opacity. However, under the 100 percent opacity and also allowing applicable opacity limit for sources of
revised provision, these exceedances those periods of excess opacity to be PM emissions. See Ala. Admin. Code r.
would be part of, not in addition to, the aggregated in up to 24 consecutive six- 335–3–4–.01(2). More frequent readings
exceedances allowed under 335–3–4– minute periods per day (as opposed to with COMS help determine whether a
.01(4) (i.e., two percent of operating the current approved rule which source is following good air pollution
time). provides an hourly 40 percent control practices between Method 9 or
Thus, under the current SIP, a source exemption, also for a total of 24 six- Method 5 tests. With the additional
is required to maintain 20 percent minute periods per day). However, the restrictions described above, the
opacity, except that it may emit at up to long-term cap of two percent serves to proposed SIP revision can be shown to
40 percent opacity for one six-minute restrict the total amount of time a source be no less stringent in terms of average
average per hour, and may have is allowed to exceed the standard. As quarterly opacity than the existing SIP.
emissions of up to 100 percent opacity discussed below, EPA believes that the Today, we propose to approve
as specified in a permit. Under the 2003 reduction in total duration of Alabama’s SIP revision contingent upon
submission, certain sources using exceedances will reduce average opacity the revision including our
COMS would, in addition to the current as compared to the current standard, recommended changes, based on a
SIP exemptions, also be allowed even taking into consideration that the finding that the revision would not
emissions of up to 100 percent opacity exemption in the current standard limits increase average quarterly opacity levels
exceedances to 40 percent (not 100 and thus would not interfere with
for up to two percent of the quarterly
percent) opacity. attainment or maintenance of a NAAQS,
operating time that they are otherwise
Thus, under the proposed revised RFP, or any other requirement of the
subject to the 20 percent opacity limit.
rule, with the changes discussed in this Act. The relationship between changes
Under the revision proposed for
notice, an emissions unit covered by the in opacity and increases or decreases in
approval in this notice, these sources
new standard would be allowed: (1) Up ambient PM2.5 levels cannot be
still would be allowed emissions of up quantified readily and is particularly
to 100 percent opacity during periods of
to 100 percent opacity for up to two uncertain for short term and site-
startup, shutdown, load change, and
percent of quarterly operating time that specific analyses. There are several
rate change or other short, intermittent
they are subject to the 20 percent contributors to this uncertainty
periods upon terms approved by
opacity limit (but not to exceed 10 including (1) differences between
ADEM’s Director and included in a
percent of a calendar day), and they combustion technology characteristics
state-issued permit; (2) up to 100
would not be allowed the 40 percent and fuel components, (2) differences in
percent opacity for up to two percent of
hourly exemption.5 control technology types, temperatures
6 The director’s discretion provisions under at which they operate, and load
4 As noted elsewhere, the exemptions in Alabama rule 335–3–4–.01(1)(c) and (d) would be characteristics, (3) the recognition that
paragraphs 335–3–4–.01(1)(c)–(e) are not impacted unchanged by this SIP revision, so periods of excess
both opacity and mass emissions are
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS

by the 2003 SIP revision and would continue to emissions allowed in a permit pursuant to those
apply to either the existing or the revised standard. provisions would continue to be allowed, in subject to significant variability over
5 Although this new opacity standard would only addition to the emissions allowed by the new short periods of time and fluctuations in
apply to certain sources using COMS, EPA notes provisions discussed herein. EPA notes that, as the one may not track fluctuations in the
that, consistent with EPA’s and ADEM’s credible director’s discretion provisions are not being
evidence rules, nothing in the rule should preclude revised by ADEM or reviewed by EPA at present,
other, and (4) differences between what
the use of COMS to enforce the existing standard nothing in this notice should be considered as the ambient sampler collects and the
or the use of Method 9 to enforce the new standard. approving those provisions. mass of particles that exists at the point

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:48 Apr 11, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1
18432 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Proposed Rules

of COMS measurement (e.g., in the emissions readings were consistently average daily opacity levels under the
stack) and the direct PM2.5 that forms below its allowable limit (20 percent) current rule and the proposed rule
immediately upon exiting the stack (that while PM emissions significantly because a generally applicable
are related to fuel components more exceeded the NSPS due to broken bags relationship between opacity and PM
than to control technology). in its baghouse. Finally, a number of mass emissions cannot be specified over
In addition to these uncertainty States have incorporated similar short averaging times (e.g., 24 hours or
factors, opacity is directly related to provisions into their regulations. (See, less). Even with extensive testing, it is
particle size, with particles of an e.g., Indiana Administrative Code, 326 very difficult to establish reliable
aerodynamic diameter of approximately IAC 5–1–5(b); Wisconsin NR 431.07; correlations between the magnitude of
1.0 micrometer having the greatest Pima County, Arizona 2–8–300(C)). opacity measurements and PM mass
potential for impairment of visibility, or The contributions to uncertainty emissions for short averaging times (e.g.,
increased opacity. (See, e.g., Malm, described above lessen when applied to 24 hours or less) that will remain
William C. ‘‘Introduction to Visibility,’’ longer term averages and the reliable over a longer period of record
Cooperative Institute for Research in the relationship between ambient PM2.5 (i.e., that will establish a direct daily
Atmosphere, May 1999, Chap. 2, p. 8). measurements and changes in opacity correlation over a longer period, such as
As particles increase in size, their are more reliable than for shorter term three or more months). Therefore,
impact on opacity diminishes, despite (e.g., daily) assessments. Therefore, for opacity may not be a reliable indicator
the fact that their mass may increase. purposes of this proposal, EPA focused of short-term emissions, or for use in
Thus for PM emissions of a given mass on analyzing the effects of the proposed projecting changes in short-term PM
level, opacity can be greater or less change in the opacity limitations for ambient air quality concentrations.
depending on the particle size facilities covered by the rule over Accordingly, we conclude that the
distribution. quarterly periods. EPA believes that a proposed change in the allowed opacity
Several past instances and State and quarterly basis is appropriate because will have no effect on attainment of the
Federal rules are instructive regarding correlations between opacity and PM 24-hour PM NAAQS (35 µg/m3 for PM2.5
the uncertainties in relating opacity to control device operation are more and 150 µmg/m3 for PM10) or (based on
PM concentrations. EPA recognized and readily generalized over a longer-term the quarterly stringency comparison) the
accounted for these uncertainties as basis and, therefore, a quarterly average annual PM NAAQS (15.0 µg/m for
early as the 1970s by permitting sources is more likely to reflect impacts on the PM2.5).
to adjust source-specific opacity ambient PM levels accurately than a We can calculate the average
standards under new source daily average, and because ADEM’s allowable quarterly opacity for a unit by
performance standards (NSPS) when proposed rule includes a quarterly limit. multiplying an allowed level of opacity
they could demonstrate that they were By calculating and comparing the by the duration for which that level of
in compliance with applicable PM average quarterly opacities allowed by opacity is allowed, summing those
limits at times when opacity limits were the current SIP approved rule, the 2003 products for each allowed level of
being exceeded. See, e.g., 44 FR 37960, ADEM submittal, and the 2003 ADEM opacity occurring over a quarter, and
37961 (June 29, 1979). In EPA’s own submittal with required changes then dividing that total by the number
NSPS for glass manufacturing plants, specified, we can determine which of six-minute periods in a quarter. The
(40 CFR 60.293(e)), and national proposed SIP change, if any, provides average quarterly opacity for a unit is an
emission standard for Inorganic Arsenic an average quarterly opacity equivalent opacity value equivalent with one
Emissions from Glass Manufacturing with, or more stringent than, the average single, constant opacity value emitted
Plants (40 CFR 61.163), EPA has written quarterly opacity allowed by the current for each and every six-minute period of
specific provisions into its standards SIP approved rule. Proposed changes the quarter, allowing us to compare a
permitting source owners or operators to that provide average quarterly opacities unit with a longer period of lower
redetermine opacity limitations where more stringent than (or equivalent with) opacity to one with a shorter period of
they can demonstrate compliance with those allowed by the existing SIP rule higher opacity.
emission limits in the applicable rules. are expected to be more stringent than The general formula for calculating
More recently, when examining a study (or equivalent to) the existing SIP rule. the allowable average quarterly opacity
of COMS at a portland cement kiln, we EPA is not performing similar (i.e., the average opacity (percent)
have found that the plant’s visible calculations comparing stringency of allowed by rule over a quarter) is:

∑ ( opacity ) ∗ ( duration )
n n
Allowable average quarterly opacity = i =1

21, 900

Where: quarter, we chose to use the maximum assumption provides a consistent basis
n = specific period of quarterly operation, opacity allowed for each condition, the for comparisons.
opacity = opacity (percent) related to that
maximum duration allowed for each Usually calculation of allowable
specific period,
duration = number of six-minute average condition, and the maximum amount of average quarterly opacity can be readily
periods related to the specific period, time for unit operation when calculating ascertained, since opacity limits and
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS

and the average allowable quarterly opacity. their associated condition durations are
21,900 = number of six-minute average Although operation with opacity at the known explicitly. However, because
periods per quarter. maximum level for the longest period ADEM allows an exemption from
For the Alabama analysis, using the allowed under a rule is not reflective of opacity limits during periods of startup,
above general formula to determine the actual operations, such a conservative shutdown, load change and rate change
EP12AP07.010</MATH>

allowable average opacity over a or other short, intermittent periods upon

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:48 Apr 11, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18433

terms approved by ADEM’s Director and contains durations of about 400 periods percent of the non-exempt time of the
included in a state-issued permit, and per quarter for this exemption. quarter’s duration at 100 percent
because the duration of those periods is Relying on the variable T1, calculation opacity, and the balance of the non-
not known, we used a variable, T1, to of allowable average quarterly opacities exempt time of the quarter’s duration at
represent the duration of those periods. becomes straightforward. By way of 20 percent opacity, all divided by the
In theory, the duration of those periods example, the allowable average number of six-minute periods in the
could range from 0, meaning no periods quarterly opacity for the 2003 ADEM quarter. The equation shown below
of exemption for a quarter, to 21,900, Submittal is the sum of the ten percent provides the allowable average quarterly
meaning all periods of the quarter are of the quarter’s duration at 40 percent opacity for the 2003 ADEM Submittal
exempt.7 In practice, one sample of opacity, the time (T1) at 100 percent for T1 values of 0 to 19,710:
units subject to the current SIP rule opacity due to exemptions, the two

Allowable average quarterly opacity =


  21, 900    21, 900  2   21, 900  98 
   ∗ 40  + ( T1 ∗100 ) +  21, 900 − − T1  ∗ ∗100  +  21, 900 − − T1  ∗ ∗ 20  
  10    10  100   10  100 ⋅
 21, 900 
 
 

We derived allowable average ADEM submittal, substituted various corresponding allowable average
quarterly opacity equations for the exemption durations (T1) in the quarterly opacities, and organized the
current SIP-approved rule and the 2003 equations, determined the results as shown in Table 1 below.

TABLE 1.—CALCULATED ALLOWABLE AVERAGE QUARTERLY OPACITY LEVELS, FOR VARIOUS STARTUP, SHUTDOWN, LOAD
CHANGE, AND RATE CHANGE DURATIONS (T1), USING ALABAMA’S CURRENT SIP-APPROVED RULE, AND THE 2003
ADEM SUBMITTAL
Calculated allowable average quarterly opacity (percent) for various startup, shut-
down, load change and rate change durations (T1)

T1 = 0 T1 = 1,000 T1 = 10,000 T1 = 17,520 T1 = 19,710 T1 = 21,900

Current SIP Approved Rule ............................................. 22.00 25.65 58.53 86.00 94.00 100.00
2003 ADEM Submittal ..................................................... 23.44 27.02 59.24 86.16 94.00 100.00

As can be seen, under these periods of startup, shutdown, load exemption for six-minutes at up to 40
conservative assumptions, the 2003 change and rate change, i.e. for where percent opacity for up to ten percent of
ADEM submittal would result in those durations are less than 19,710 six- the operating time. The allowable
allowable average quarterly opacity minute averages. average quarterly opacity for the 2003
levels that are slightly higher than those In order to be approvable, we have ADEM Submittal With Required
calculated from the current SIP rule for recommended that ADEM eliminate the Changes Specified for all T1 values =

  2   98 
 ( T1 ∗100 ) + ( 21, 900 − T1 ) ∗ 100 ∗100  + ( 21, 900 − T1 ) ∗ 100 ∗ 20  
    ⋅
 21, 900 
 
 

We derived allowable average equations, determined the quarterly opacity equivalent to or less
quarterly opacity equations for the corresponding allowable average than the allowable average quarterly
current SIP approved rule and the 2003 quarterly opacities, and organized the opacity calculated from the current SIP
ADEM submittal with recommended results as shown in Table 2 below. As rule in all cases.
changes specified, substituted various shown, the proposed revision to the SIP
exemption durations (T1) in the rule yields an allowable average
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS

EP12AP07.011</MATH> EP12AP07.012</MATH>

7 EPA does not intend to indicate that it would an extended period of time, but rather is utilizing met. EPA does not anticipate that a source would,
be appropriate or consistent with the SIP for an conservative assumptions for the purpose of in fact, operate at 100% opacity for all permissible
exemption period under 335–3–4.01(1)(c) to last for ensuring the requirements of section 110(l) will be excursion periods.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:48 Apr 11, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1
18434 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 70 / Thursday, April 12, 2007 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 2.—CALCULATED ALLOWABLE AVERAGE QUARTERLY OPACITY LEVELS, FOR VARIOUS STARTUP, SHUTDOWN, LOAD
CHANGE, AND RATE CHANGE DURATIONS (T1), USING ALABAMA’S CURRENT SIP-APPROVED RULE AND THE PRO-
POSED SIP REVISION WITH RECOMMENDED CHANGES SPECIFIED

Calculated allowable average quarterly opacity (percent) for various startup, shut-
down, load change and rate change durations (T1)

T1 = 0 T1 = 1,000 T1 = 10,000 T1 = 17,520 T1 = 19,710 T1 = 21,900

Current SIP Approved Rule ............................................. 22.00 25.65 58.53 86.00 94.00 100.00
2003 ADEM Submittal with Recommended Changes
Specified ....................................................................... 21.60 25.18 57.40 84.32 92.16 100.00

Therefore, by incorporating these 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations provided that they meet the criteria of
recommended changes, Alabama would That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, the CAA. In this context, in the absence
reduce uncertainties related to whether Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May of a prior existing requirement for the
such a change could interfere with 22, 2001). This proposed action merely state to use voluntary consensus
attainment, RFP or any other proposes to approve state law as standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
requirement of the Act. Accordingly, we meeting Federal requirements, and to disapprove a SIP submission for
conclude that the revision of Alabama’s imposes no additional requirements failure to use VCS. It would thus be
SIP rule to incorporate the 2003 ADEM beyond those imposed by state law. inconsistent with applicable law for
submittal with our recommended Accordingly, I hereby certify that this EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission
changes specified in this action would proposed rule will not have a significant to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
not interfere with requirements of the economic impact on a substantial that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
CAA and would be approvable. Further number of small entities under the the CAA. Thus, the requirements of
details of this analysis are contained in Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 section 12(d) of the National
the technical support document. et seq.). Because this action proposes to Technology Transfer and Advancement
approve requirements under state law Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not
VII. What Happens Next? and does not impose any additional apply. This proposed rule does not
EPA anticipates Alabama will submit enforceable duty beyond that required impose an information collection
a revised rule revision reflecting the by state law, it does not contain any burden under the provisions of the
changes discussed in section IV above. unfunded mandate or significantly or Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
If Alabama’s revised rule is submitted uniquely affect small governments, as U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
and considered approvable, after described in the Unfunded Mandates
considering any comments received on Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
today’s proposed approval, EPA will This proposed rule also does not have Environmental protection, Air
publish a final rule in the Federal tribal implications because it will not pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Register approving the State’s requested have a substantial direct effect on one or Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
rule revision and will also address in more Indian tribes, on the relationship dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
that rulemaking any comments received between the Federal Government and Reporting and recordkeeping
on this proposed approval. In addition, Indian tribes, or on the distribution of requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
we plan to develop further criteria to aid power and responsibilities between the organic compounds.
EPA Regional Offices in evaluating Federal Government and Indian tribes, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
future revisions to rules such as as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 97249, November 9, 2000). This Dated: April 4, 2007.
Alabama’s and, in this regard, we expect
to publish in the near future a request proposed action also does not have J.I. Palmer, Jr.,
for information that will assist us in that Federalism implications because it does Regional Administrator, Region 4.
effort. not have substantial direct effects on the [FR Doc. E7–6948 Filed 4–11–07; 8:45 am]
States, on the relationship between the BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VIII. Proposed Action national government and the States, or
EPA is proposing to approve the on the distribution of power and
Visible Emissions portion of a SIP responsibilities among the various ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
revision submitted to EPA by Alabama levels of government, as specified in AGENCY
on September 11, 2003, provided it is Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
revised as described in section IV of this August 10, 1999). This action merely 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
action and submitted as a SIP revision proposes to approve State rule as
[EPA–R03–OAR–2006–0917; FRL–8298–3]
in accordance with the requirements of consistent with Federal standards, and
the CAA. does not alter the relationship or the Approval and Promulgation of Air
distribution of power and Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
IX. Statutory and Executive Order
responsibilities established in the CAA. Redesignation of the Richmond-
Reviews
This proposed rule also is not subject to Petersburg 8-Hour Ozone
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS

Nonattainment Area To Attainment and


51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed Children from Environmental Health Approval of the Associated
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base-Year
action’’ and therefore is not subject to April 23, 1997), because it is not Inventory
review by the Office of Management and economically significant.
Budget. For this reason, this action is In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s AGENCY: Environmental Protection
also not subject to Executive Order role is to approve state choices, Agency (EPA).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:48 Apr 11, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12APP1.SGM 12APP1

You might also like