Proposed Rule2024-30648
Air Plan Approval; AK, Fairbanks North Star Borough; 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Serious Area and 189(d) Plan
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
January 8, 2025
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Alaska (Alaska or the State) on December 4, 2024, to address Clean Air Act requirements for the 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM<INF>2.5</INF>) national ambient air quality standards in the Fairbanks North Star Borough Serious PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment area. Alaska's submission includes SIP revisions to meet nonattainment planning requirements for emissions inventories, modeling and sulfur dioxide precursor demonstration for major stationary sources, control measures, attainment projections and progress to attainment and associated motor vehicle emissions budgets, and contingency measures. The EPA is also starting the adequacy process for the budgets.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1600-1634]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30648]
[[Page 1599]]
Vol. 90
Wednesday,
No. 5
January 8, 2025
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 52
Air Plan Approval; AK, Fairbanks North Star Borough; 2006 24-Hour PM2.5
Serious Area and 189(d) Plan; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 5 / Wednesday, January 8, 2025 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 1600]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R10-OAR-2024-0595; FRL-12391-02-R10]
Air Plan Approval; AK, Fairbanks North Star Borough; 2006 24-Hour
PM2.5 Serious Area and 189(d) Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of Alaska (Alaska or the State) on December 4, 2024, to address
Clean Air Act requirements for the 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter
(PM<INF>2.5</INF>) national ambient air quality standards in the
Fairbanks North Star Borough Serious PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment
area. Alaska's submission includes SIP revisions to meet nonattainment
planning requirements for emissions inventories, modeling and sulfur
dioxide precursor demonstration for major stationary sources, control
measures, attainment projections and progress to attainment and
associated motor vehicle emissions budgets, and contingency measures.
The EPA is also starting the adequacy process for the budgets.
DATES: Comments. Written comments must be received on or before
February 7, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2024-0595, at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from <a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew Jentgen, EPA Region 10, 1200
Sixth Avenue, Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553-0340,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#117b747f6576747f3f7c706565797466517461703f767e67"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="afc5cac1dbc8cac181c2cedbdbc7cad8efcadfce81c8c0d9">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Review of the SIP Revisions to the Fairbanks Serious Plan and
Fairbanks 189(d) Plan
A. Emissions Inventory
B. Pollutants Addressed
C. Control Strategy
D. Attainment Demonstration and Modeling
E. Reasonable Further Progress
F. Quantitative Milestones
G. Contingency Measures
H. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity
III. Summary of Proposed Action
A. Proposed Approval
B. Adequacy Process
IV. Interim Final Determination and Deferral of Sanctions
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
In 2009, the EPA designated a portion of the Fairbanks North Star
Borough as ``nonattainment'' for the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF>
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), which is set at the
level of 35 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) (Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area) (74 FR 58688, November 13,
2009).\1\ Effective July 2, 2014, the EPA classified the area as
``Moderate'' (79 FR 31566, June 2, 2014). Subsequently, Alaska
submitted, and the EPA approved, a plan to meet the Moderate
nonattainment area requirements (82 FR 42457, September 8, 2017)
(Fairbanks Moderate Plan).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 40 CFR 81.302.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 10, 2017, the EPA determined that the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area failed to attain the 2006 24-hour
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the area by the outermost statutory Moderate
area attainment date of December 31, 2015 (82 FR 21711). The outermost
attainment date is the latest date by which an area can attain the
NAAQS per statute. As a result, the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area was reclassified as a ``Serious'' nonattainment area
by operation of law.
Upon reclassification as a Serious PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment
area, the State was required to submit a Serious area attainment plan
satisfying the requirements of Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) sections 172,
189(b), and 189(c) and 40 CFR 51.1003(b). In accordance with CAA
section 188(c)(2), the outermost attainment date for a Serious area is
no later than the end of the tenth calendar year following designation
(i.e., December 31, 2019).
Alaska submitted a plan to address the Serious PM<INF>2.5</INF>
nonattainment area requirements on December 13, 2019 (Fairbanks Serious
Plan).\2\ Along with the required planning elements, the Fairbanks
Serious Plan included more stringent performance and operating
requirements for residential and commercial heating devices, new
regulations for wood sellers, and some requirements for stationary
sources in the nonattainment area. The Fairbanks Serious Plan is
comprised of revisions to Title 18, Chapter 50, of the Alaska
Administrative Code (18 AAC 50) and the State Air Quality Control Plan,
adopted and incorporated by reference into State law at 18 AAC
50.030(a).\3\ On January 9, 2020, in accordance with CAA section
110(k)(1)(B), the EPA determined that the Fairbanks Serious Plan was
administratively and technically complete (85 FR 7760, February 11,
2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ We note that Alaska submitted a SIP revision on October 25,
2018, to address the preconstruction permitting new source review
(NSR) requirements for the Fairbanks Serious nonattainment area,
among other things. The EPA approved the submission as meeting the
nonattainment NSR requirements for the Fairbanks Serious Plan on
August 29, 2019 (84 FR 45419).
\3\ We note that 18 AAC 50.030(a) is not submitted, rather
Alaska submits the adopted provisions separately for EPA approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Within the Fairbanks Serious Plan, the State sought an extension of
the otherwise applicable attainment date through CAA section 188(e). On
September 2, 2020, the EPA determined that the area failed to attain by
the Serious area attainment date and denied the State's Serious area
attainment date extension request (85 FR 54509). As a result, Alaska
was required to submit a revised SIP submission to meet both the
Serious area attainment plan requirements and the additional
requirements set forth in CAA section 189(d) by December 31, 2020.\4\
Alaska submitted the revised plan on December 15, 2020 (Fairbanks
189(d) Plan). The Fairbanks 189(d) Plan updated a number of chapters of
the narrative portion of the State Air Quality Control Plan, adopted
and incorporated by reference into State law at 18 AAC 50.030(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 40 CFR 51.1003(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 24, 2021, the EPA approved the 2013 base year
emissions inventory and the PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursor
[[Page 1601]]
demonstration elements of the Fairbanks Serious Plan as meeting the
Serious area planning requirements (86 FR 52997). In the same action,
the EPA approved other plan components as SIP strengthening, including:
(1) the updated Fairbanks Emergency Episode Plan \5\ that the State
adopted on November 18, 2020, and submitted on December 15, 2020; and
(2) the regulatory control measures included in the SIP submissions on
October 25, 2018, and November 28, 2018 (in addition to the December
13, 2019, submission).\6\ The EPA did not determine as part of the
September 24, 2021, approval whether these SIP strengthening components
met specific nonattainment plan requirements, including control
strategy requirements in CAA section 189 and 40 CFR 51.1010 or the
contingency measure requirements in CAA section 172(c)(9) and 40 CFR
51.1014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.12
(i.e., Alaska's planning chapter related to air quality forecasting
and curtailment levels).
\6\ For a description of the specific control measures addressed
across the State's SIP submissions, see 86 FR 52997, September 24,
2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, on December 5, 2023, the EPA acted on the remaining
elements required for a Serious nonattainment area that failed to
attain by the Serious area attainment date. Table 1 of this preamble
provides a summary of the December 5, 2023, final rule approving in
part and disapproving in part the Fairbanks Serious Plan and Fairbanks
189(d) Plan.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023.
Table 1--Summary of the EPA's December 5, 2023, Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of CAA planning
requirement Approval Disapproval
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base year emissions inventory Approval of the
for Serious areas subject to 2013 base year
CAA section 189(b) * (CAA emissions
section 172(c)(3); \8\ 40 CFR inventory.
51.1008(b)(1)).
Base year emissions inventory Approval of the
for areas subject to CAA 2019 base year
section 189(d) (CAA section emissions
172(c)(3); 40 CFR inventory.
51.1008(c)(1)).
Attainment projected emissions .................. Disapproval.
inventory (CAA section
172(c)(1); \9\ 40 CFR
51.1008(c)(2)).
Serious area nonattainment plan Partial approval Disapproval of the
control strategy that ensures of the control control strategy
that best available control strategy as BACM and BACT
measures (BACM), including best meeting BACM and requirements (CAA
available control technologies BACT requirements section
(BACT), for the control of under CAA section 189(b)(1)(B) \13\
direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 189(b)(1)(B) \11\ and 40 CFR
precursors are implemented in and 40 CFR 51.1010(a)) for
the nonattainment area (CAA 51.1010(a) for the following
section 189(b)(1)(B); \10\ 40 the solid fuel emissions source
CFR 51.1010(a)). home heating categories: (1)
device source Requirements for
category and wood sellers; (2)
residential and Coal-fired
commercial fuel heating devices;
oil combustion (3) Coffee
source category; roasters; (4)
Partial approval Weatherization
of the control and energy
strategy approved efficiency
as meeting BACM measures; (5)
and BACT Mobile source
requirements category
under CAA section (disapproving for
189(b)(1)(B) \12\ lack of vehicle
and 40 CFR anti-idling
51.1010(a) for requirements);
the charbroiler, Disapproval of the
used oil burner, control strategy
and mobile source BACM and BACT
categories requirements (CAA
(except for section
rejection of 189(b)(1)(B) \14\
vehicle anti- and 40 CFR
idling 51.1010(a)) for
requirements);. PM2.5 and sulfur
Approval of dioxide (SO2) for
specific the Doyon-Fort
regulations under Wainwright
18 AAC 50.075 Central Heating
through 077 and Power Plant,
(except the University of
requirements for Alaska Fairbanks
dry wood sellers Campus Power
under 18 AAC Plant, Zehnder
50.076(k)), and Power Plant, and
Fairbanks North Pole Power
Emergency Episode Plant.
Plan (except the
contingency
measure portion);.
Partial approval
as meeting
applicable
control strategy
BACM and BACT
requirements (CAA
section
189(b)(1)(B) and
40 CFR
51.1010(a)) for
ammonia (NH3) for
the Chena Power
Plant, Doyon-Fort
Wainwright
Central Heating
and Power Plant,
University of
Alaska Fairbanks
Campus Power
Plant, Zehnder
Power Plant, and
North Pole Power
Plant;
Partial approval
of Alaska's PM2.5
and NH3 BACT
determinations
for the Doyon-
Fort Wainwright
Central Heating
and Power Plant;
PM2.5 and NH3
BACT
determination for
the University of
Alaska Fairbanks
Campus Power
Plant, except for
the three small
diesel fired
engines (EUs 23,
26, and 27);
PM2.5 and NH3
BACT
determinations
for the Zehnder
Power Plant;
PM2.5 and NH3
BACT
determinations
for the North
Pole Power Plant.
Additional measures (beyond .................. Disapproval.
those already adopted in
previous nonattainment plan SIP
submissions for the area as
RACM/RACT, BACM/BACT, and Most
Stringent Measures (MSM) \15\
(if applicable)) that provide
for attainment of the NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable
and, from the date of such
submission until attainment,
demonstrate that the plan will
at a minimum achieve an annual
five percent reduction in
emissions of direct PM2.5 or
any PM2.5 plan precursor. (CAA
section 189(d); \16\ 40 CFR
51.1010(c)).
Attainment demonstration and .................. Disapproval.
modeling (CAA sections
188(c)(2) and 189(b)(1)(A);
\17\ 40 CFR 51.1003(c) and
51.1011).
Reasonable further progress .................. Disapproval.
(RFP) provisions (CAA section
172(c)(2); \18\ 40 CFR 51.1012).
Quantitative milestones (CAA .................. Disapproval.
section 189(c); \19\ 40 CFR
51.1013).
[[Page 1602]]
Motor vehicle emission budgets .................. Disapproval.
(CAA section 176, 40 CFR
51.1003(d) and 93.118).
An adequate evaluation by the Approval of the
state of sources of all four State's
PM2.5 precursors for comprehensive
regulation, and implementation PM2.5 precursor
of controls on all such demonstrations
precursors, unless the state for NOX and VOC
provides a demonstration emissions.
establishing that it is either
not necessary to regulate a
particular precursor in the
nonattainment area at issue in
order to attain by the
attainment date, or that
emissions of the precursor do
not make a significant
contribution to PM2.5 levels
that exceed the standard.* (CAA
section 189(e); \20\ 40 CFR
51.1006).
Contingency measures applicable .................. Disapproval of the
to Serious areas subject to CAA contingency
section 189(b) (CAA section measures
172(c)(9); \21\ 40 CFR 51.1014). requirements of
CAA section
172(c)(9) \22\
and 40 CFR
51.1014
applicable to
Serious areas
subject to CAA
sections 189(b)
and 189(d).
Contingency measures applicable .................. The EPA finalized
to Serious areas subject to CAA a limited
section 189(d) (CAA section disapproval of
172(c)(9); 40 CFR 51.1014). the Fairbanks
189(d) Plan
contingency
measure because
the contingency
measure did not
fully meet the
contingency
measure
requirements of
CAA section
172(c)(9) and 40
CFR 51.1014 but
otherwise
strengthened the
SIP.\23\
Nonattainment new source review Approval..........
provisions (CAA sections
172(c)(5), 189(b)(3), 189(d),
and 189(e), and 40 CFR 51.165,
40 CFR 51.1003(b)(1)(viii), and
40 CFR 51.1003(c)(1)(viii) \24\.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The EPA finalized approval of this requirement on September 24, 2021
(86 FR 52997).
On December 4, 2024, Alaska made a SIP submission (Fairbanks
Revised 189(d) Plan) intended to address the nonattainment requirements
that were disapproved as part of the EPA's December 5, 2023, final
rule. CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) and 110(l) require each state to
provide reasonable public notice and opportunity for public hearing
prior to the adoption and submission of a SIP or SIP revision to the
EPA. To meet this requirement, every SIP submission must include
evidence that the state provided adequate public notice and an
opportunity for a public hearing consistent with the EPA's implementing
regulations in 40 CFR 51.102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(3).
\9\ 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(1).
\10\ 42 U.S.C. 7513a(b)(1)(B).
\11\ 42 U.S.C. 7513a(b)(1)(B).
\12\ Id.
\13\ 42 U.S.C. 7513a(b)(1)(B).
\14\ 42 U.S.C. 7513a(b)(1)(B).
\15\ MSM is applicable if the EPA has previously granted an
extension of the attainment date under CAA section 188(e) for the
nonattainment area and NAAQS at issue. The EPA denied Alaska's
request to extend the Serious area attainment date for the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area.
\16\ 42 U.S.C. 7513a(d).
\17\ 42 U.S.C. 7513(c)(2) and 7513a(b)(1)(A).
\18\ 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(2).
\19\ 42 U.S.C. 7513a(c).
\20\ 42 U.S.C. 7513a(e).
\21\ 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(9).
\22\ 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(9).
\23\ The EPA finalized a limited approval of the Fairbanks
Emergency Episode Plan, State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II,
section III.D.7.12, as SIP-strengthening on September 24, 2021. 86
FR 52997, September 24, 2021, at pp. 52997, 53004.
\24\ 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(5), 7513a(b)(3), 7513a(d), and 7513a(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 11, 2024, Alaska notified the public of the opportunity to
review and comment on proposed regulatory changes related to the
Fairbanks nonattainment area and announced two formal public hearings
on April 10, 2024. The public comment period closed on May 10, 2024.
Later, on August 26, 2024, Alaska opened a public comment period to
solicit public review of amendments to numerous SIP sections and
appendices and to notify the public of two hearings scheduled on
September 26, 2024. On September 20 and 23, 2024, Alaska opened comment
periods for the public to review each proposed permit revision to
implement the State's proposed regulatory changes. The comment periods
closed on October 22 and 25, 2024, respectively. The SIP submission
includes evidence of the public notices and copies of written and oral
comments received, with the State's associated responses. Therefore, we
find that the submission meets the procedural requirements for public
notice and hearing in CAA sections 110(a) and 110(l) and 40 CFR 51.102.
CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) requires the EPA to determine whether a
SIP submission is complete within 60 days of receipt. This section also
provides that any plan that the EPA has not affirmatively determined to
be complete or incomplete will become complete by operation of law six
months after the date of submission. The EPA reviewed the submission
and finds it complete based on the EPA's SIP completeness criteria in
40 CFR part 51, appendix V.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See ``SIP Submittal Checklist for the Fairbanks North Star
Borough PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area--2024 SIP revision,''
EPA Region 10, Air and Radiation Division, included in the docket
for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section II of this document summarizes the EPA's review of Alaska's
SIP submission against the relevant CAA requirements. The EPA's
technical analysis is detailed in technical support documents in the
docket for this action.
II. Review of the SIP Revisions to the Fairbanks Serious Plan and
Fairbanks 189(d) Plan
A. Emissions Inventory
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
CAA section 172(c)(3) requires that states submit a comprehensive,
accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of
the relevant pollutant or pollutants in the nonattainment area as part
of a nonattainment plan for such area. On August 24, 2016, the EPA
finalized regulations implementing SIP requirements for states with
areas designated as nonattainment for the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.\26\
This rule is codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart Z and is referred to
herein as the PM<INF>2.5</INF> SIP Requirements Rule. The
PM<INF>2.5</INF> SIP Requirements Rule at 40 CFR 51.1008 contains the
requirements for emissions
[[Page 1603]]
inventories.\27\ The EPA has also issued additional guidance concerning
emissions inventories for PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment areas.\28\ In
accordance with 40 CFR 51.1008, the attainment plan must include a base
year emissions inventory and attainment projected emissions inventory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: State Implementation Plan Requirements, 81 FR 58010,
August 24, 2016, at p. 58149.
\27\ 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at pp. 58078-58079.
\28\ ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone
and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations,'' EPA, May 2017 (``Emissions
Inventory Guidance''), available at: <a href="https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/air-emissions-inventory-guidance-implementation-ozone-and-particulate">https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/air-emissions-inventory-guidance-implementation-ozone-and-particulate</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The base year emissions inventory for a Serious PM<INF>2.5</INF>
nonattainment area must be one of the three years for which the EPA
used monitored data to reclassify the area to Serious, or another
technically appropriate year justified by the state in its Serious area
nonattainment plan SIP submission.\29\ Similarly, the base year
emissions inventory for a nonattainment area subject to CAA section
189(d) must be one of the three years for which monitored data were
used by the EPA to determine the area failed to attain the
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the applicable Serious area attainment date,
or another technically appropriate year justified by the state in its
Serious area nonattainment plan SIP submission.\30\ The base year
emissions inventory should provide a state's best estimate of actual
emissions from all sources, i.e., all emissions that contribute to the
formation of PM<INF>2.5</INF>. The emissions must be either annual
total emissions, average-season day emissions, or both, as appropriate
for the relevant annual versus 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. The
state must include a rationale for providing annual or seasonal
emissions inventories, and justification for the period used for any
seasonal emissions calculations.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ 40 CFR 51.1008(b)(1).
\30\ 40 CFR 51.1008(c)(1).
\31\ 40 CFR 51.1008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to 40 CFR 51.1008, the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan must
include an attainment projected inventory for the nonattainment area.
The year of the projected inventory shall be the most expeditious year
for which projected emissions show modeled PM<INF>2.5</INF>
concentrations below the level of the NAAQS. The emissions values shall
be projected emissions of the same sources included in the base year
inventory for the nonattainment area (i.e., those only within the
nonattainment area) and any new sources. The state shall include in
this inventory projected emissions growth and contraction from both
controls and other causes during the relevant period. The temporal
period of emissions shall be the same temporal period (annual, average-
season-day, or both) as the base year inventory for the nonattainment
area. The same sources reported as point sources in the base year
inventory for the nonattainment area shall be included as point sources
in the attainment projected inventory for the nonattainment area.
Stationary nonpoint and mobile source projected emissions shall be
provided using the same detail (e.g., state, county, and process codes)
as the base year inventory for the nonattainment area. The same detail
of the emissions included shall be consistent with the level of detail
and data elements as in the base year inventory for the nonattainment
area (i.e., as required by 40 CFR part 51, subpart A). Consistent with
the base year inventory for the nonattainment area, the inventory shall
include direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions, separately reported
PM<INF>2.5</INF> filterable and condensable emissions, and emissions of
the scientific PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors, including precursors that
are not significant PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursors pursuant to a
precursor demonstration under 40 CFR 51.1006.
A state's SIP submission must include documentation explaining how
it calculated emissions data for the inventory and be consistent with
the data elements required by 40 CFR part 51, subpart A.\32\ In
estimating mobile source emissions, a state must use the latest
emissions models and planning assumptions available at the time the SIP
is developed.\33\ States are also required to use the EPA's
``Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors'' (``AP-42'') road dust
method for calculating re-entrained road dust emissions from paved
roads.<SUP>34 35</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ 40 CFR 51.1008(c); (a)(1)(v); 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016,
at pp. 58027-29.
\33\ See CAA section 172(c)(3).
\34\ The EPA released an update to AP-42 in January 2011 that
revised the equation for estimating paved road dust emissions based
on an updated data regression that included new emissions tests
results. 76 FR 6328 (February 4, 2011).
\35\ AP-42 has been published since 1972 as the primary source
of the EPA's emission factor information. <a href="https://www.epa.gov/air-emissionsfactors-and-quantification/ap-42-compilation-airemissions-factors">https://www.epa.gov/air-emissionsfactors-and-quantification/ap-42-compilation-airemissions-factors</a>. It contains emission factors and process information for
more than 200 air pollution source categories. A source category is
a specific industry sector or group of similar emitting sources. The
emission factors have been developed and compiled from source test
data, material balance studies, and engineering estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the EPA's Prior Rulemaking Regarding the Emissions
Inventory
On December 5, 2023, the EPA finalized approval of the base year
emissions inventory, but the EPA finalized disapproval of the projected
attainment year emissions inventory. The EPA stated that, due to the
insufficient control strategy, the attainment projected emissions
inventory did not necessarily take into consideration all required
emissions reductions.
3. Summary of the State's Submission Regarding the Emissions Inventory
Based on the EPA's approval of the initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan's
base year emissions inventory, Alaska retained State Air Quality
Control Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.6.2. However, Alaska has since
updated the modeling platform and included a 2020 base year emissions
inventory in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan. The modeling platform
includes key elements such as the meteorological modeling, air quality
modeling, and model emissions inventories. The base year planning
emissions inventory for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>2.5</INF>
precursors (nitrogen oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>), SO<INF>2</INF>, volatile
organic compounds (VOC), and ammonia (NH<INF>3</INF>)) and the
documentation for the inventory for the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area are located in the updated Fairbanks Emissions
Inventory section.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section
III.D.7.6.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For projecting attainment, the 2020 base year emissions inventory
incorporates the ambient monitoring data used to establish the baseline
design value. Alaska stated that the 2020 base year emissions inventory
accounts for emissions reductions from control measures adopted and
implemented through December 31, 2019. Projected control measure-driven
emissions reductions are then applied to evaluate the appropriate
attainment date. Alaska also noted that, for planning purposes, the
base year emissions inventory represents a baseline of nonattainment
area emissions to demonstrate five percent per year emissions
reductions.
Alaska stated that the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan includes an
entirely new photochemical modeling platform and, for the emissions
inventory, features a new, more current winter 2019-2020 modeling
episode. Episodic emissions for the 2020 base year inventory were based
on activity collected to represent this 74-day 2019-2020 period.
[[Page 1604]]
For point sources, day- and hour-specific fuel use for the new
2019-2020 modeling episode were obtained by Alaska from each of the
point source facilities within the nonattainment area. Alaska noted
that unlike the base year emissions inventories from earlier versions
of the nonattainment plan, which projected episodic emissions from 2008
to 2013 and 2019, respectively, Alaska stated that the 2020 base year
point source emissions inventory was based on the actual data during
the modeling episodes.
Alaska stated that, for space heating area sources, space heating
energy usage estimates for the 2020 base year emissions inventory were
based on a comprehensive new Fairbanks Home Heating survey, conducted
in the spring of 2023. Respondents were asked to provide information on
fuel usage by device in their household for the most recent two
calendar years (2021 and 2022) as well as the six-month winter period
between October 2022 and March 2023. Data from this 2023 survey were
used to replace projected space heating emissions developed under
previous SIP revisions using earlier 2011-2015 surveys. Alaska noted
that decreases in the fraction of wood devices used in the
nonattainment area and the amount of wood use per device from the
survey respondents tracked well with downward trajectories of wood use
expected from existing and on-going control programs such as the
Fairbanks North Star Borough's (FNSB) Wood Stove Change Out Program and
the Alaska DEC's Solid Fuel-Burning Appliance Curtailment Program.
Alaska stated that survey results were then back-casted to calendar
year 2020 to provide a more realistic estimate of wood-fired heating
use for the 2020 base year emissions inventory.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ For a description of the ``back-cast'' method, see
Kotchenruther, Robert. (November 21, 2024). Technical support
document for Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation's
amendments to: State Air Quality Control Plan, Emission Inventory
Data (version August 19, 2024). U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 10, Laboratory Services and Applied Science Division,
EPA-R10-OAR-2024-0595, section 1.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For on-road and non-road mobile sources, Alaska noted that the
previous base year emissions inventories included on-road vehicle
populations and age distributions based on 2014 and 2018 department of
motor vehicle (DMV) registration data, respectively. For the Fairbanks
Revised 189(d) Plan, 2020 DMV registration data were used to align with
the 2020 base year emissions inventory year. For on-road mobile
sources, these 2020 DMV data were used to develop vehicle population,
age distribution, and fuel type/technology inputs to the MOVES3 vehicle
emissions model. For aircraft activity specifically, a recent
adjustment to aircraft activity in the initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan
was made to reflect lower aircraft activity during the winter months.
Otherwise, the estimates of aircraft activity in the Fairbanks Revised
189(d) Plan were unchanged. Table 2 of this preamble includes a summary
of the base year emissions inventory.
Table 2--2020 Base Year Episode Average Daily Emissions by Source Sector
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2020 base year emissions inventory (tons/day)
Source sector ------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX SO2 VOC NH3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Sources............................................ 0.58 13.54 6.63 0.04 0.888
Area, Space Heating...................................... 1.97 2.17 3.61 6.66 0.109
Area, Space Heat, Wood................................... 1.89 0.23 0.04 6.55 0.067
Area, Space Heat, Oil.................................... 0.06 1.72 3.54 0.10 0.003
Area, Space Heat, Coal................................... 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Area, Space Heat, Other.................................. 0.02 0.22 0.02 0.01 0.039
Area, Other.............................................. 0.11 0.36 0.03 2.21 0.047
Mobile, On-Road.......................................... 0.07 1.18 0.000 1.42 0.040
Mobile, Aircraft......................................... 0.12 0.43 5.44 0.15 0.000
Mobile, Non-Road excluding aircraft...................... 0.09 0.29 0.00 2.64 0.0001
------------------------------------------------------
Totals............................................... 2.95 17.96 15.71 13.04 0.285
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.6, Table 7.6-9.
Alaska noted for PM<INF>2.5</INF> overall, the 2020 base year
emissions in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan are nine percent lower
than the 2019 base year emissions inventory in the initial Fairbanks
189(d) Plan, with differences coming from space heating and mobile
sources that are likely the result of on-going emissions controls.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ For more details of the 2019 base year emissions inventory,
see 88 FR 1454, January 10, 2023, at p. 1460.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska stated that NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> emissions in
the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan are 17 and nine percent higher
respectively than in the initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan. Alaska asserted
that these emissions increases are largely driven by changes in the
Point (and Other Area) source emissions, since the new 74-day 2019-2020
modeling episode was based on actual emissions. In addition, the
increases in NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> emissions for the Other
Area source sector under the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan are due to
moving stationary source emissions from Eielson AFB to this sector.
Under the previous base year emissions inventories, stationary source
emissions from Eielson were contained in the Point source portion of
the inventory.
The reductions in VOC emissions in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d)
Plan are due to mobile source sector reductions in the MOVES3 model.
The initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan inventory was based on an earlier
version of MOVES that reflected higher VOC emission factors. In
addition, Alaska stated that VOC reductions in the Space Heating sector
are likely the result of differences in the mix of wood use by device
between the two inventories. The Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan
inventory reflects higher usage fractions of certified and pellet-based
wood burning devices based on data from new 2023 Home Heating survey,
and these devices have lower VOC emission factors.
Finally, Alaska noted that the difference in overall NH<INF>3</INF>
emissions between the two base year inventories is very modest (one
percent lower under
[[Page 1605]]
the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) base year emissions inventory). These
source sector-specific variations mirror the adjustments made to
PM<INF>2.5</INF>, SO<INF>2</INF>, NO<INF>X</INF>, and VOC emissions
discussed earlier in this section II.A of this preamble.
Building from Alaska's new 2020 base year emissions inventory,
Alaska developed its attainment projections. As a first step, Alaska
constructed a 2027 baseline emissions inventory that reflected
projected activity growth factors, previously implemented control
measures, and other adjustments to point sources and wood usage.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.6,
Table 7.6-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a second step, Alaska developed the 2027 projected attainment
emissions inventory by adjusting the 2027 baseline inventory to account
for projected emissions reductions from the control strategy included
in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan. For a complete list of measures
included in Alaska's control strategy, see Table 4 in section II.D of
this preamble below. Notably, as part of the control strategy, the Wood
Stove Change Out Program and the Oil-To-Gas Conversion Program are
managed by the local Fairbanks North Star Borough. Direct
PM<INF>2.5</INF> reductions from these programs in 2020 through 2026
totaled over 1.3 tons per episode day. The State of Alaska manages the
Solid Fuel-Burning Appliance Curtailment Program as well as seven other
control measures for which emissions benefits were quantified and
incorporated into the 2027 attainment projected inventory. Notably, the
State recently increased the stringency of the curtailment program by
lowering the alert stages to 20 [mu]g/m\3\ and 30 [mu]g/m\3\,
respectively. Alaska also utilized funding from the 2019-2020 Targeted
Airshed Grant (TAG) to purchase three dynamic message highway signs and
an infrared camera and to expand staffing to increase compliance. For
details of these projected emissions reductions, see the spreadsheet
calculations in the State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.6.
Alaska concluded that, after considering the emissions reductions
from these control measures, the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area could demonstrate attainment by 2027, based on the
2027 attainment year emissions inventory, as summarized in Table 3 of
this preamble.
Table 3--2027 Projected Attainment Emissions Inventory, Average Daily Emissions by Source Sector
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2027 Projected attainment emissions inventory (tons/
day)
Source sector ------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX SO2 VOC NH3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Sources............................................ 0.62 14.60 7.15 0.04 0.095
Area, Space Heating...................................... 0.74 2.34 1.98 8.01 0.124
Area, Space Heat, Wood................................... 0.70 0.28 0.04 7.90 0.081
Area, Space Heat, Oil.................................... 0.02 1.83 1.91 0.10 0.004
Area, Space Heat, Coal................................... 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Area, Space Heat, Other.................................. 0.02 0.22 0.02 0.01 0.039
Area, Other.............................................. 0.13 0.40 0.03 2.33 0.051
Mobile, On-Road.......................................... 0.05 0.65 0.00 1.08 0.038
Mobile, Aircraft......................................... 0.12 0.45 5.70 0.17 0.000
Mobile, Nonroad excluding aircraft....................... 0.08 0.32 0.00 2.22 0.002
------------------------------------------------------
Totals............................................... 1.74 18.75 14.86 13.85 0.310
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.6, Table 7.6-19.
Alaska observed that the 2027 projected attainment emissions
inventory provides reductions in total PM<INF>2.5</INF> and
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions within the nonattainment area of 41 percent
and five percent respectively. Within the space heating sector, which
has a proportionally higher impact on ambient PM<INF>2.5</INF>, Alaska
noted that the 2027 projected attainment emissions inventory reductions
were 63 percent and 45 percent for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and
SO<INF>2</INF>, respectively.
4. EPA Evaluation and Proposed Action Regarding the Emissions Inventory
a. 2020 Base Year Emissions Inventory
The EPA proposes to approve the 2020 base year emissions inventory
as meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40 CFR
51.1008. The EPA is proposing to determine that Alaska has justified
that 2020 is a technically appropriate inventory year consistent with
40 CFR 51.1008(c)(1). The base year emissions inventory includes actual
emissions of all sources within the nonattainment area. The EPA
proposes to determine that a seasonal episode daily average inventory
is appropriate for the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area
because the area experiences episodic elevated concentrations of
PM<INF>2.5</INF> during wintertime cold weather events. The emissions
inventory includes direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions, separately
reported as filterable and condensable emissions, as well as all
scientific PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors (SO<INF>2</INF>, NO<INF>X</INF>,
VOC, and NH<INF>3</INF>). Alaska reported emissions for point sources
according to the point source emissions thresholds of the Air Emissions
Reporting Rule in 40 CFR part 51, subpart A. Finally, the emissions
inventory is consistent with the detail and data elements required by
40 CFR part 51, subpart A. For the EPA's full evaluation, see the EPA's
technical evaluation of Alaska's emissions inventory included in the
docket for this action.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ Kotchenruther, Robert. (November 21, 2024). Technical
support document for Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation's amendments to: State Air Quality Control Plan,
Emission Inventory Data (version August 19, 2024). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Laboratory Services and
Applied Science Division, EPA-R10-OAR-2024-0595.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. 2027 Projected Attainment Emissions Inventory
The EPA proposes to approve the 2027 projected attainment emissions
inventory as meeting the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 40
CFR 51.1008. The EPA is proposing to determine that 2027 is the most
expeditious year for which projected emissions show modeled
PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations below the level of the NAAQS. As
discussed in section II.D of this preamble, Alaska included a model
output for 2026 that resulted in emissions levels exceeding the 2006
24-
[[Page 1606]]
hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. The attainment projected inventory
includes the sources in the base year emissions inventory and accounts
for growth and contraction from both controls and other causes.
Consistent with the base year emissions inventory, the attainment
projected emissions inventory is based on episode average daily
emissions. The attainment projected emissions inventory includes direct
PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions, separately reported as filterable and
condensable emissions, as well as all scientific precursors. The
attainment projected emissions inventory includes the same level of
emissions detail for the same point sources and for mobile sources
reported in the base year emissions inventory. For the EPA's full
evaluation, see the EPA's technical evaluation of Alaska's emissions
inventory, included in the docket for this action.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Kotchenruther, Robert. (November 21, 2024). Technical
support document for Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation's amendments to: State Air Quality Control Plan,
Emission Inventory Data (version August 19, 2024). U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Laboratory Services and
Applied Science Division, EPA-R10-OAR-2024-0595.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Pollutants Addressed
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Regarding the Pollutants
Addressed
Under subpart 4 of part D, title I of the CAA and the
PM<INF>2.5</INF> SIP Requirements Rule, each state containing a
PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment area must evaluate all PM<INF>2.5</INF>
precursors for regulation unless, for any given PM<INF>2.5</INF>
precursor, the state demonstrates to the Administrator's satisfaction
that such precursor does not contribute significantly to
PM<INF>2.5</INF> levels that exceed the NAAQS in the nonattainment
area.\42\ The provisions of subpart 4 do not define the term
``precursor'' for purposes of PM<INF>2.5</INF>, nor do they explicitly
require the control of any specifically identified PM<INF>2.5</INF>
precursor. The statutory definition of ``air pollutant,'' however,
provides that the term ``includes any precursors to the formation of
any air pollutant, to the extent the Administrator has identified such
precursor or precursors for the particular purpose for which the term
`air pollutant' is used.'' \43\ The EPA has identified SO<INF>2</INF>,
NO<INF>X</INF>, VOCs, and NH<INF>3</INF> as precursors to the formation
of PM<INF>2.5</INF>.\44\ Accordingly, the attainment plan requirements
of part D, title I of the CAA and the PM<INF>2.5</INF> SIP Requirements
Rule apply to emissions of all four precursors and direct
PM<INF>2.5</INF> from all types of stationary, area, and mobile
sources, except as otherwise provided in CAA section 189(e).,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ 40 CFR 51.1006, 51.1010; See 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016,
at pp. 58017-58020.
\43\ CAA section 302(g).
\44\ 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at p. 58015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted in the EPA's Final Policy Assessment for the
reconsideration of the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, secondary particulate
matter is formed in the atmosphere by photochemical oxidation reactions
of both inorganic and organic gas-phase precursors. Precursor gases
include SO<INF>2</INF>, NO<INF>X</INF>, NH<INF>3</INF>, and VOC gases
of anthropogenic or natural origin. Anthropogenic SO<INF>2</INF> and
NO<INF>X</INF> are the predominant precursor gases in the formation of
secondary PM<INF>2.5</INF> sulfate and nitrate, and NH<INF>3</INF> is
the gas-phase precursor for PM<INF>2.5</INF> ammonium. PM<INF>2.5</INF>
ammonium formation is enhanced by particle acidity resulting from
sulfuric acid and nitric acid condensation onto particles. Atmospheric
oxidation of VOCs, both anthropogenic and biogenic, is an important
source of organic aerosols, particularly in summer. The semi-volatile
and nonvolatile products of VOC oxidation reactions can condense onto
existing particles or can form new particles.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ ``Policy Assessment for the Reconsideration of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter'' (EPA/452/R-
22-004), EPA, May 2022), p. 2-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the State, total wintertime PM<INF>2.5</INF>
concentrations in the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area are
a function of both primary PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and secondary
PM<INF>2.5</INF> formed from precursors (see State Air Quality Control
Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.8.1).
CAA section 189(e) requires that the control requirements for major
stationary sources of direct PM<INF>10</INF> \46\ and PM<INF>2.5</INF>
\47\ also apply to major stationary sources of PM<INF>10</INF> and
PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors, except where the Administrator determines
that such sources do not contribute significantly to PM<INF>10</INF> or
PM<INF>2.5</INF> levels that exceed the standard in the area. CAA
section 189(e) contains the only express exception to the control
requirements under subpart 4 (e.g., requirements for reasonably
available control measures (RACM) and reasonably available control
technology (RACT), BACM and BACT, Most Stringent Measures (MSM), and
New Source Review (NSR) for sources of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and
PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursor emissions). Although CAA section 189(e)
explicitly addresses only major stationary sources, the EPA interprets
this provision as authorizing it also to determine, under appropriate
circumstances, that regulation of specific PM<INF>10</INF> or
PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors from other source categories in a given
nonattainment area is not necessary.\48\ For example, under the EPA's
longstanding interpretation of the control requirements that apply to
stationary, area, and mobile sources of PM<INF>10</INF> precursors in
the nonattainment area under CAA section 172(c)(1) and subpart 4,\49\ a
state may demonstrate in a SIP submission that control of a certain
precursor pollutant is not necessary in light of its insignificant
contribution to ambient PM<INF>10</INF> or PM<INF>2.5</INF> levels in
the nonattainment area.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ The requirements for attainment plans for the 2006 24-hour
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS include the general nonattainment area
planning requirements in CAA section 172 of title I, part D, subpart
1 and the additional planning requirements specific to particulate
matter in CAA sections 188 and 189 of title I, part D, subpart 4. 81
FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at pp. 58012-58014.
\47\ The general attainment plan requirements of subpart 1, part
D, of title I of the CAA in addition to the specific requirements in
subpart 4, part D, of Title I of the CAA apply to both
PM<INF>10</INF> and PM<INF>2.5</INF>. See 81 FR 58010, August 24,
2016, at pp. 58013.
\48\ 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at pp. 58018-58019.
\49\ State Implementation Plan; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
(``General Preamble''), 57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992, at pp. 13539-
42.
\50\ 40 CFR 51.1006. See also 81 FR 58010, 58033. Courts have
upheld this approach to the requirements of subpart 4 for
PM<INF>10. See,</INF> e.g., Assoc. of Irritated Residents v. EPA, et
al., 423 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the PM<INF>2.5</INF> SIP Requirements Rule, a state may elect
to submit to the EPA a ``comprehensive precursor demonstration'' for a
specific nonattainment area to show that emissions of a particular
precursor from all existing sources located in the nonattainment area
do not contribute significantly to PM<INF>2.5</INF> levels that exceed
the NAAQS at issue in the nonattainment area.\51\ If the EPA determines
that the contribution of the precursor to PM<INF>2.5</INF> levels in
the area is not significant and approves the demonstration, then the
state is not required to control emissions of the relevant precursor
from existing sources in the attainment plan.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(1).
\52\ 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Relatedly, under the PM<INF>2.5</INF> SIP Requirements Rule, a
state may submit to the EPA a ``major stationary source precursor
demonstration'' for a specific nonattainment area that shows that
emissions of a particular precursor from all existing major stationary
sources located in the nonattainment area do not contribute
significantly to PM<INF>2.5</INF> levels that exceed the standard in
the area.\53\ If the EPA approves a major stationary source precursor
demonstration, then the state is not required to control emissions of
the relevant precursor from existing major stationary sources in the
current attainment plan.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(2).
\54\ 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(2)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 1607]]
In addition, in May 2019, the EPA issued the ``PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Precursor Demonstration Guidance'' (``PM<INF>2.5</INF> Precursor
Guidance''), which provides recommendations to states for analyzing
nonattainment area PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and developing such
optional precursor demonstrations, consistent with the PM<INF>2.5</INF>
SIP Requirements Rule.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ ``PM<INF>2.5</INF> Precursor Demonstration Guidance,'' EPA-
454/R-19-004, May 2019, including Memo dated May 30, 2019, from
Scott Mathias, Acting Director, Air Quality Policy Division and
Richard Wayland, Director, Air Quality Assessment Division, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), EPA to Regional Air
Division Directors, Regions 1-10, EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA evaluated the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan in accordance
with the presumption embodied within subpart 4 that the State must
address all PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors in the evaluation and
implementation of potential control measures, unless the State
adequately demonstrates that emissions of a particular precursor or
precursors do not contribute significantly to ambient PM<INF>2.5</INF>
levels that exceed the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the nonattainment
area. In reviewing any determination by the state to exclude a
PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursor from the required evaluation of potential
control measures, we consider both the magnitude of the precursor's
contribution to ambient PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations in the
nonattainment area and the sensitivity of ambient PM<INF>2.5</INF>
concentrations in the area to reductions in emissions of that
precursor.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(1)(i) and (ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the EPA's Prior Rulemaking Regarding the Pollutants
Addressed
On December 5, 2023, the EPA finalized approval of Alaska's
precursor demonstration that NO<INF>X</INF> and VOCs are not
significant precursors to PM<INF>2.5</INF> formation in the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at p. 84675.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Summary of the State's Submission Regarding the Pollutants Addressed
In the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, in accordance with 40 CFR
51.1006(a)(2), Alaska included a demonstration that SO<INF>2</INF>
emissions from major stationary sources do not significantly contribute
to PM<INF>2.5</INF> formation in the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area. As discussed in the State Air Quality Control Plan,
Vol. II, section III.D.7.8.15, Alaska stated that it utilized a new
model platform that accurately simulated the formation of precursors
into PM<INF>2.5</INF> in the Fairbanks environment. The new model
platform also demonstrated marked improvement in the simulation of
sulfate formation from SO<INF>2</INF> emissions as compared to prior
platforms used by Alaska. Using the new model platform, Alaska
performed a concentration-based contribution analysis using air quality
modeling with ``zero-out'' model runs. Alaska's analysis showed that
major stationary sources contributed 0.21 [mu]g/m\3\ PM<INF>2.5</INF>
at regulatory monitoring sites in Fairbanks including the North Pole
monitor (Hurst Road), which is below the 1.5 [mu]g/m\3\
PM<INF>2.5</INF> threshold included in the EPA's guidance.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II., section
III.D.7.8.15, Table 7.8.18-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to Alaska, the updated analysis of precursor impacts on
PM<INF>2.5</INF> utilized a photochemical grid model (PGM) that
accounted for the non-linear secondary effects of precursor gases. PGMs
account for the atmospheric chemistry, transport, and deposition of
pollutants using local emissions and meteorological data. The zero-out
approach compared a baseline model run with a model run where a
precursor's emissions are set to zero to determine the influence of
that precursor on PM<INF>2.5</INF> formation.
Alaska noted that a concentration-based analysis was completed that
excluded all sources of SO<INF>2</INF>. The monitored filter sulfate
and the concentrations from the 5-year design value showed total
sulfate from all sectors was 5.9 [mu]g/m\3\ or 21 percent of the
PM<INF>2.5</INF> at an air quality monitor located in the City of
Fairbanks (NCore) and 5.9 [mu]g/m\3\ or nine percent of the
PM<INF>2.5</INF> at the North Pole air quality monitor (Hurst Road).
When accounting for all emissions sources, SO<INF>2</INF> remained a
significant precursor to PM<INF>2.5</INF> formation in the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area.
After completing the first step, the major stationary source sector
SO<INF>2</INF> precursor model runs were then performed based on the
emissions for the 2020 base year and a model run that excluded
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions. The difference in sulfate for a model
simulation using base year emissions and a second model simulation with
major stationary-source SO<INF>2</INF> emissions set to zero was
compared with the 1.5 ug/m\3\ threshold. Alaska stated that this
concentration-based modeling demonstrated the insignificance of
SO<INF>2</INF> from major stationary sources when compared with the 1.5
[mu]g/m\3\ threshold in the EPA's guidance, and therefore, a
sensitivity-based contribution analysis was not needed, in accordance
with 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(2)(ii).
4. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action Regarding the Pollutants
Addressed
The EPA evaluated the State's precursor demonstration included in
the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan. The EPA proposes to determine that
Alaska's submission meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(2) and
is consistent with the EPA guidance.\59\ Regarding the State's
analytical approach, the EPA proposes to find that the State used
appropriate methods and data to evaluate PM<INF>2.5</INF> formation in
the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area from precursor
emissions. Consistent with 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(2), Alaska's submission
includes a concentration-based contribution analysis. The
concentration-based analysis shows that the SO<INF>2</INF> emissions
from major stationary sources do not significantly contribute to
PM<INF>2.5</INF> formation in the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area. Specifically, Alaska's analysis shows that
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions from major stationary sources contribute 0.21
[mu]g/m\3\ of PM<INF>2.5</INF> at the North Pole Hurst Road air quality
monitor--far below the 1.5 [mu]g/m\3\ threshold included in the EPA
guidance. For the EPA's full evaluation, see EPA's Technical Support
Document.\60\ Therefore, the EPA proposes to approve Alaska's precursor
demonstration submitted as part of the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan as
demonstrating that the contribution of SO<INF>2</INF> from existing
major stationary sources to PM<INF>2.5</INF> levels in the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area is not significant in accordance
with 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(2)(i). If the EPA finalizes approval as
proposed, Alaska will not be required to control SO<INF>2</INF>
emissions from existing major stationary sources in the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area, pursuant to CAA section 189 and 40
CFR 51.1010. For purposes of the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, the
PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursors are: NH<INF>3</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF>
for all sources except for major stationary sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ ``PM<INF>2.5</INF> Precursor Demonstration Guidance,'' EPA-
454/R-19-004, May 2019, including Memo dated May 30, 2019, from
Scott Mathias, Acting Director, Air Quality Policy Division and
Richard Wayland, Director, Air Quality Assessment Division, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), EPA to Regional Air
Division Directors, Regions 1-10, EPA.
\60\ Briggs, Nicole. (December 2, 2024). Review of Attainment
Demonstration Modeling and SO2 Precursor Demonstration in the 2024
State Implementation Plan Submission for the Fairbanks 24-hour PM2.5
Nonattainment Area. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10,
Laboratory Services and Applied Science Division, EPA-R10-OAR-2024-
0595.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with its past actions, if finalized, the EPA's approval
of Alaska's
[[Page 1608]]
precursor demonstration would not extend to nonattainment NSR
requirements for the area. Alaska previously determined that it was
appropriate to regulate NO<INF>X</INF>, SO<INF>2</INF>, VOCs, and
NH<INF>3</INF> as precursors to PM<INF>2.5</INF> with respect to
nonattainment NSR and submitted rule changes to that effect on October
25, 2018. The EPA approved the submitted revised program as meeting
nonattainment NSR requirements triggered upon reclassification of the
Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area to Serious (84 FR 45419,
August 29, 2019).
C. Control Strategy
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Regarding the Control Strategy
CAA section 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010(a) contain the control
measure requirements for Serious areas. CAA section 189(d) and 40 CFR
51.1010(c) contain the control measure requirements for Serious areas
that fail to attain.
Pursuant to CAA section 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010(a), the state
must identify, adopt, and implement best available control measures,
including best available control technologies, on sources of direct
PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and sources of emissions of PM<INF>2.5</INF>
plan precursors located in any Serious PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment
area or portion thereof located within the state. This level of control
stringency is commonly called ``BACM'' and ``BACT.'' The regulation at
40 CFR 51.1010(a) specifies the requirements states must meet to
identify potential control measures and in determining the measures
states must include in the control strategy as BACM or BACT for the
nonattainment area:
The state must identify all sources of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF>
emissions and sources of emissions of PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors in
the nonattainment area, in accordance with the emissions inventory
requirements in 40 CFR 51.1008(b).
The state must identify all potential control measures to reduce
emissions from all sources of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and
sources of emissions of PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursors in the
nonattainment area. The state must survey other NAAQS nonattainment
areas in the U.S. and identify any measures for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF>
and PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursors not previously identified by the
state during the development of the Moderate area or Serious area
attainment plan for the area.
The state must identify, adopt, and implement the best available
control measures for each emission source. However, the state may
demonstrate that any measure identified under 40 CFR 51.1010(a)(2) is
not technologically or economically feasible to implement in whole or
in part by the end of the tenth calendar year following the effective
date of designation of the area and may eliminate such whole or partial
measure from further consideration. Overall, economic feasibility is a
less significant factor in the BACM and BACT determination process.\61\
There are considerations for technological feasibility of a potential
control measure, where a state may consider factors including but not
limited to a source's processes and operating procedures, raw
materials, physical plant layout, and potential environmental impacts
such as increased water pollution, waste disposal, and energy
requirements.\62\ There are also considerations for economic
feasibility of a potential control measure where a state may consider
capital costs, operating and maintenance costs, and cost effectiveness
of the measure.\63\ In assessing whether a control measure or
technology is BACM or BACT, the state must consider emissions reduction
measures with higher costs per ton compared to the economic feasibility
criteria applied in their RACM or RACT analysis.\64\ With respect to
determining BACT pursuant to CAA section 189(b), the EPA expects that
states use the top-down BACT analysis process used in the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) Program.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ Id.
\62\ 40 CFR 51.1010(a)(3)(i); 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at
p. 58084.
\63\ 40 CFR 51.1010(a)(3)(ii); 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at
p. 58085.
\64\ 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at p. 58085.
\65\ Id. at p. 58080 (``Consistent with past policy, BACT
determinations for PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS implementation are to
follow the same process and criteria that are applied to the BACT
determination process for the PSD program.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to CAA section 189(b), a state with a Serious
nonattainment area must include provisions to assure the implementation
of BACM and BACT-level controls on sources of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF>
and PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursors no later than 4 years after the
date the area is classified (or reclassified) as a Serious area.
In the preamble to the final PM<INF>2.5</INF> SIP Requirements
Rule, the EPA recommended the following the 5-Step BACM/BACT selection
process that states should follow to satisfy the analytical and
substantive requirements of 40 CFR 51.1010(a) and CAA section 189(b):
\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ Id. at pp. 58084-85.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1: Develop a comprehensive inventory of sources and source
categories of directly emitted PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>2.5</INF>
precursors.
Step 2: Identify potential control measures for all such sources.
Step 3: Determine whether an available control measure or
technology is technologically feasible.
Step 4: Determine whether an available control measure or
technology is economically feasible.
Step 5: Determine the earliest date by which a control measure or
technology can be implemented in whole or in part in the area.
The EPA interprets CAA section 189(b) to require the state to
determine what is BACM or BACT for a particular source or source
category.\67\ The EPA's longstanding interpretation of the CAA is that
BACM and BACT determinations are to be generally independent of
attainment for purposes of implementing the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.\68\
The EPA interprets the CAA requirement to impose BACM/BACT level
control as requiring more emphasis on what controls are the best for
the relevant source and whether those controls are feasible rather than
on the attainment needs of the area.\69\ States also may not decline to
evaluate, or to control as necessary, sources or source categories on
the basis that they are de minimis.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ Id. at p. 58081.
\68\ State Implementation Plans for Serious PM-10 Nonattainment
Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM-10 Nonattainment Areas
Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation
of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (``Addendum to
the General Preamble''), 59 FR 41998, at p. 42011 (August 16, 1994);
81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at p. 58081.
\69\ Id.
\70\ Id. at p. 58082.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsequently, for a state with a Serious PM<INF>2.5</INF>
nonattainment area that has failed to attain by the applicable
attainment date, the state must submit a revised attainment plan with a
control strategy that demonstrates that each year the area will achieve
at least a five percent reduction in emissions of direct
PM<INF>2.5</INF> or a five percent reduction in emissions of a
PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursor based on the most recent emissions
inventory for the area; and that the area will attain the standard as
expeditiously as practicable consistent with the attainment date
requirements under 40 CFR 51.1004(a)(3).\71\ The regulation at 40 CFR
51.1010(c) specifies the following process the state must follow in
determining which measures must be included in the control strategy:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ CAA section 189(d), 42 U.S.C. 7513a(d), and 40 CFR
51.1010(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The state shall identify all sources of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF>
emissions and sources of
[[Page 1609]]
emissions of PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors in the nonattainment area in
accordance with the emissions inventory requirements in 40 CFR
51.1008(b).
The state shall identify all potential control measures to reduce
emissions from all sources of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and
sources of emissions of PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursors in the
nonattainment area. For the sources and source categories represented
in the emissions inventory for the nonattainment area, the state shall
identify the most stringent measures (MSM) for reducing direct
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursors adopted into any
SIP or used in practice to control emissions in any state, as
applicable.
The state shall also reconsider and reassess any measures
previously rejected by the state during the development of any Moderate
area or Serious area attainment plan control strategy for the area.
Similar to the requirements for Serious area plans, the state may make
a demonstration for a 189(d) plan that a measure is not technologically
or economically feasible to implement in whole or in part within 5
years or such longer period as the EPA may determine is appropriate
after the EPA's determination that the area failed to attain by the
Serious area attainment date and may eliminate such whole or partial
measure from further consideration. There are considerations for
technological feasibility of a potential control measure, as described
under 40 CFR 51.1010(c)(3)(i), where a state may consider factors
including but not limited to a source's processes and operating
procedures, raw materials, physical plant layout, and potential
environmental impacts such as increased water pollution, waste
disposal, and energy requirements. There are also considerations for
economic feasibility of a potential control measure, under 40 CFR
51.1010(c)(3)(ii), where a state may consider capital costs, operating
and maintenance costs, and cost effectiveness of the measure. Unless
the state has demonstrated that the measure is not technologically or
economically feasible, the state shall adopt and implement all
potential control measures identified.
Finally, control measures adopted as part of the state's control
strategy must be permanent, enforceable as a practical matter, and
quantifiable.\72\ In order to be enforceable as a practical matter, the
state must adopt into the SIP not only the control measure or emissions
limit itself but also appropriate monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements to ensure compliance with the control
measure.\73\ Without appropriate monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements, violations of the control measure could go
undetected.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ Control measures must be incorporated by reference into the
regulatory portion of the SIP (52.70(c) and (d)) with appropriate
monitoring and reporting requirements. See CAA section 110(a)(2)(A);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)(A); 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at pp. 58046-
47; 57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992, at pp.13567-68.
\73\ 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at pp. 58046-47; 57 FR 13498,
April 16, 1992, at pp. 13567-68; 67 FR 22168, May 2, 2002, at p.
22170; 80 FR 33840, June 12, 2015, at pp. 33843, 33865; Montana
Sulphur & Chemical Co. v. EPA, 666 F.3d 1174, at pp. 1189-1190 (9th
Cir. 2012).
\74\ 67 FR 22168, May 2, 2022, at p. 22170; Montana Sulphur &
Chemical Co. v. EPA, 666 F.3d 1174, at pp. 1189-1190 (9th Cir.
2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the EPA's Prior Rulemaking Regarding the Control Strategy
On December 5, 2023, the EPA finalized an approval in part and
disapproval in part of the BACM requirements for the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area. The EPA's action for each
emissions source category is described in the following paragraphs.
a. Alaska's Identification and Adoption of BACM for Home Heating and
Other Area Sources
i. Solid Fuel-Burning
The EPA approved in part and disapproved in part Alaska's analysis
and adoption of control measures for this source category as meeting
the BACM requirements for PM<INF>2.5</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF>
emissions.\75\ The EPA approved Alaska's analysis that found no
NH<INF>3</INF>-specific emissions controls for this source category.
The EPA also previously approved as SIP strengthening and federally
enforceable many of the control measures submitted as part of the
Fairbanks Serious Plan and prior SIP submissions in 2018 as part of a
separate action (86 FR 52997, September 24, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\75\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at p. 84674.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska identified a number of solid fuel-burning control measures
that have been adopted by other states and local authorities to
identify the full range of potential BACM/BACT measures for this source
category. This analysis took into account technical and economic
feasibility and other considerations included in the PM<INF>2.5</INF>
SIP Requirements Rule.
Alaska's two-stage Solid Fuel-Burning Appliance Curtailment
Program, included in the Fairbanks Emergency Episode Plan, adopts air
quality thresholds that are at least as stringent as comparable
curtailment programs in Idaho, Utah, and California. Alaska accounted
for the differences in natural gas availability, seasonal climate
conditions, and wood stove change-out incentives in establishing the
two-stage thresholds at 20 [micro]g/m\3\ (Stage 1) and 30 [micro]g/m\3\
(Stage 2), respectively. Alaska also had an advisory level set at 15
[micro]g/m\3\ as part of the curtailment program. Alaska placed further
limitations on the ``No Other Adequate Source of Heat'' (NOASH) waiver
(available to households as a temporary waiver from certain curtailment
requirements), limiting applicability to those that have economic needs
based on objective criteria and limiting the number of years NOASH
waivers are available. Therefore, the EPA approved the Solid Fuel-
Burning Appliance Curtailment Program and associated updates to the
NOASH waivers and temporary exemption as BACM for the solid-fuel
burning source category (i.e., Alaska state regulations 18 AAC 50.075
(e)(3), (f)(2)) for PM<INF>2.5</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> emissions.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at pp. 84699, 84673-84675.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska identified and evaluated as BACM the heating device
performance standards adopted previously by Missoula County, Montana.
Alaska adopted a regulation modeled after the rule in Missoula County.
Under 18 AAC 50.077(c), Alaska's regulations require that wood stoves
meet emissions standards that are more stringent than the EPA's New
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) requirement for residential wood
heaters at 40 CFR part 60 and also include one-hour testing
requirements to ensure only the lowest-emitting wood stoves are allowed
to be sold and installed in the nonattainment area. The EPA approved
these measures as BACM for the solid-fuel burning source category
(i.e., 18 AAC 50.077 (a-j)) for PM<INF>2.5</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF>
emissions.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska's regulation 18 AAC 50.075(f), applicable to the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area, prohibits the operation of a solid
fuel-fired heating device emissions when visible emissions exceed 20
percent opacity for more than six minutes in any one hour, except
during the first 15 minutes after initial firing of the device, when
the opacity limit must be less than 50 percent. The rule also prohibits
visible emissions from crossing property lines. These opacity limits
provide a visual indicator for the proper operation of a solid-fuel
heating device. The EPA approved this measure as BACM.\78\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA approved as BACM the additional removal or render
inoperable
[[Page 1610]]
restrictions placed on non-certified EPA wood stoves, non-pellet
outdoor hydronic heaters, coal-fired heating devices, and EPA-certified
wood stoves greater than 25 years-old meet BACM requirements for
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> emissions.\79\ These devices are to
be removed or rendered inoperable by December 31, 2024, or if a
building or residence with such a device is sold prior to that date (or
if a wood-fired heating device is 25 years old prior to that date).
These include Alaska state regulations 18 AAC 50.077 (l-m). The EPA
approved the other solid-fuel burning regulations adopted by Alaska,
including device registration under 18 AAC 50.077(h) and dry wood
requirements for wood sellers 18 AAC 50.076, which are at least as
stringent as similar regulations adopted by other states and local
authorities, and therefore represent BACM for PM<INF>2.5</INF> and
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions for the solid-fuel burning source
category.\80\ These include Alaska state regulations 18 AAC 50.076 (d-
e), (g), (j-l).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ Id.
\80\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the EPA partially disapproved as BACM Alaska's measures
regarding dry wood seller requirements and coal-fired heating
devices.\81\ The EPA recommended Alaska revise 18 AAC 50.076(k)(3) to
require a specific frequency wood sellers are required to measure the
moisture content of the seller's wood stock. Likewise, the EPA also
recommended Alaska revise the regulations at 18 AAC 50.079(d), (e) and
(f) to remove (or revise to BACM and BACT-level stringency) the testing
exemption in (d), remove or properly bound the waiver provision in (e),
and add requirements to verify compliance with the requirement for the
owner and operator to render the device inoperative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at pp. 84670, 84675-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ii. Residential and Commercial Fuel Oil Combustion
Alaska adopted the regulation at 18 AAC 50.078(b) that imposed a
limit of 1,000 parts per million sulfur (diesel no. 1) for residential
and commercial heating. This was a switch from diesel no. 2
(approximately 2,000 parts per million sulfur) to diesel no. 1. Alaska
also evaluated the potential for adopting ULSD for fuel oil combustion,
but the State determined that this measure is economically infeasible.
The EPA approved 18 AAC 50.078(b) as meeting the SO<INF>2</INF> BACM
and BACT requirements for the space heating area source category.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at p. 84674-75.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iii. Small Commercial Area Sources
The EPA approved Alaska's determination that there were no
incinerators in the nonattainment area. Therefore, Alaska need not
identify, adopt, or implement controls for the incinerator source
category. The EPA also approved Alaska's BACM infeasibility
demonstrations for add-on control for charbroilers and restrictions on
used oil burners. By extension, the EPA approved 18 AAC 50.055 as BACM/
BACT for the charbroiler source category.\83\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the EPA disapproved Alaska's BACM requirements for coffee
roasters. The EPA cited a number of deficiencies with Alaska's adopted
control measure for coffee roasters at 18 AAC 50.078(d).\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at p. 84676; See also 81 FR
58010, August 24, 2016, at p. 58047.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iv. Weatherization and Energy Efficiency
The EPA disapproved Alaska's BACM analysis with respect to
potential energy efficiency and weatherization measures. The State
provided a number of reasons for declining to adopt and implement any
such measures, each of which the EPA rejected as bases to not adopt
weatherization and energy efficiency measures.\85\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\85\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at pp. 84641, 84676; See
also 81 FR 58010, August 24, 2016, at p. p. 58085.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
v. Emissions From Mobile Sources
The EPA approved Alaska's rejection of the CARB vehicle standards
as economically infeasible. The EPA likewise finalized approval of
Alaska's rejection of school bus retrofits, road paving, and controls
on road sanding and salting as technologically infeasible. The EPA
approved Alaska's rejection of a motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance (I/M) program. The EPA approved Alaska's determination that
no NH<INF>3</INF>-specific emissions controls exist for this source
category.\86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at p 84675-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA approved Alaska's rejection of other transportation
measures as either technologically infeasible (HOV lanes) or
economically infeasible (traffic flow improvements, diesel retrofit
projects, and ridesharing programs).\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\87\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the EPA approved in part and disapproved in part Alaska's
rejection of vehicle idling restrictions and other transportation
measures.\88\ Specifically, the EPA approved Alaska's rejection of
vehicle idling restrictions for heavy-duty diesel vehicles as
economically infeasible. However, the EPA disapproved Alaska's
rejection of vehicle idling restrictions for light-duty vehicles at
schools and commercial establishments. The EPA determined that Alaska
had not demonstrated that vehicle anti-idling restrictions for light-
duty passenger vehicles are infeasible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Alaska's Identification and Adoption of BACT for Major Stationary
Sources
In its December 5, 2023, action, the EPA partially approved and
partially disapproved the Fairbanks Serious Plan as meeting the BACM
and BACT requirements for major stationary sources.
i. Chena Power Plant
The EPA partially approved and partially disapproved Alaska's BACM/
BACT evaluation for the Chena Power Plant. The EPA partially
disapproved the BACT determination because Alaska did not identify,
adopt, and implement BACT for PM<INF>2.5</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF>. The
EPA approved Alaska's BACT analysis for NH<INF>3</INF> emissions
controls for the Chena Power Plant.\89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at pp. 84670-71, 84675-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ii. Doyon-Fort Wainwright Central Heating and Power Plant
The EPA partially approved and partially disapproved Alaska's BACM/
BACT determinations for PM<INF>2.5</INF> controls for each of the
emission sources at Doyon-Fort Wainwright Central Heating and Power
Plant. The EPA partially approved the BACT determinations because
Alaska's BACT findings for PM<INF>2.5</INF> (embodied in State Air
Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.7, Tables 7.7-11 and
7.7-13 and section III.D.7.7.8.3.4) were consistent with CAA section
189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010(a). The EPA partially disapproved the BACT
determinations because the Fairbanks Serious Plan and initial Fairbanks
189(d) Plan lacked provisions necessary to ensure the BACT
determinations for PM<INF>2.5</INF> are enforceable as a practical
matter as required by CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(7).\90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\90\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 25, 2023, Alaska withdrew its SO<INF>2</INF> BACT
determinations for Doyon-Fort Wainwright Central Heating and Power
Plant. Therefore, the EPA finalized disapproval of Alaska's
SO<INF>2</INF> BACT determinations because the
[[Page 1611]]
Fairbanks Serious Plan and initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan did not
identify, adopt, and implement BACT for SO<INF>2</INF> at the Doyon-
Fort Wainwright Central Heating and Power Plant. The EPA approved
Alaska's analysis that found no NH<INF>3</INF>-specific emissions
controls for the sources at this facility.\91\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iii. University of Alaska Fairbanks Campus Power Plant
The EPA disapproved Alaska's BACM/BACT determination for
PM<INF>2.5</INF> controls for the Small Diesel-Fired Engines (EU IDs
23, 26, and 27). The EPA partially approved and partially disapproved
the Alaska's BACT determinations for PM<INF>2.5</INF> controls for the
remaining emission units. The EPA partially approved the
PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT determinations because Alaska's BACT
determinations embodied in State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II,
section III.D.7.7, Table 7.7-16 and section III.D.7.7.8.6 were
consistent with CAA section 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010(a). The EPA
partially disapproved Alaska's BACT determinations because the
Fairbanks Serious Plan and initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan lacked
provisions necessary to ensure the BACT determinations are enforceable
as a practical matter as required by CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A) and
172(c)(7).\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\92\ Id. at p. 84657
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 25, 2023, Alaska withdrew its SO<INF>2</INF> BACT
determinations for the Fairbanks Campus Power Plant. Therefore, the EPA
disapproved Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF> BACT determinations because the
Fairbanks Serious Plan and initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan did not
identify, adopt, and implement BACT for SO<INF>2</INF> at the Fairbanks
Campus Power Plant. The EPA approved Alaska's analysis that found no
NH<INF>3</INF>-specific emissions controls for the sources at this
facility.\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\93\ Id. at pp. 84670-71, 84675-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iv. Zehnder Power Plant
The EPA partially approved and partially disapproved Alaska's BACM/
BACT provisions for PM<INF>2.5</INF> controls for all emission units at
the Zehnder Power Plant. The EPA partially approved the
PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT determination because Alaska's BACT
determinations embodied in the State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II,
section III.D.7.7, Table 7.7-14 and Appendix III.D.7.7.8.4 are
consistent with CAA section 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010(a). The EPA
partially disapproved Alaska's PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT determinations
because the Fairbanks Serious Plan and initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan
lacked provisions necessary to ensure the PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT
determinations are enforceable as a practical matter as required by CAA
sections 110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(7).\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 25, 2023, Alaska withdrew its SO<INF>2</INF> BACT
determinations for the Zehnder Power Plant. Therefore, the EPA
partially disapproved the SO<INF>2</INF> BACT determinations because
Fairbanks Serious Plan and initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan did not
identify, adopt, and implement BACT for SO<INF>2</INF> at the Zehnder
Power Plant. The EPA approved Alaska's analysis that found no
NH<INF>3</INF>-specific emissions controls for the sources at this
facility.\95\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
v. North Pole Power Plant
The EPA partially approved and partially disapproved Alaska's BACM/
BACT provisions for PM<INF>2.5</INF> controls for all emission units at
the North Pole Power Plant. The EPA partially approved Alaska's
PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT determinations because these findings embodied in
State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.7, Table 7.7-
14 and Appendix III.D.7.7.8.5 are consistent with CAA section 189(b)
and 40 CFR 51.1010(a). The EPA partially disapproved Alaska's
PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT determinations because the Fairbanks Serious Plan
and initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan lacked provisions necessary to ensure
the BACT determinations are enforceable as a practical matter as
required by CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(7).\96\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 25, 2023, Alaska withdrew its SO<INF>2</INF> BACT
determinations for the North Pole Power Plant. Therefore, the EPA
partially disapproved Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF> BACT determinations
because the Fairbanks Serious Plan and initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan
did not identify, adopt, and implement BACT for SO<INF>2</INF> at the
North Pole Power Plant. The EPA approved Alaska's analysis that found
no NH<INF>3</INF>-specific emissions controls for the sources at this
facility.
c. NH<INF>3</INF> Emissions Controls
With respect to NH<INF>3</INF> controls, for residential and
commercial area sources, the EPA approved certain measures as meeting
the BACM/BACT requirement for NH<INF>3</INF> emissions. In other cases,
the EPA approved Alaska's BACM/BACT analysis that concluded there are
no NH<INF>3</INF>-specific controls for the emission source categories
contributing to PM<INF>2.5</INF> formation in the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area, but that there are likely to be
NH<INF>3</INF> emissions co-benefits of measures designed to reduce
emissions of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF>.\97\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\97\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Summary of the State's Submission and the EPA's Evaluation and
Proposed Action Regarding the Control Strategy
a. Updates to the Identification and Adoption of BACM
Below is a summary of the regulations and SIP revisions adopted as
part of the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, organized by source
category, responding to EPA's December 5, 2023, disapproval.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\98\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section
III.D.7.7.13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
i. Solid-Fuel Burning
Alaska revised the dry wood seller measure, adopted as regulation
18 AAC 50.076(k)(3), by setting a frequency at monthly intervals to
measure the moisture content. Alaska also revised regulation 18 AAC
50.076(k)(1) by improving the labeling to indicate ``dry wood.''
Regarding the EPA's disapproval of coal-fired heating device
requirements, Alaska revised 18 AAC 50.079 by lowering the emissions
threshold to test out of the mandatory removal requirements in 18 AAC
50.079(d) from 18 grams per hour to 0.10 pounds per million British
thermal units (Btu) which is equivalent to the pellet hydronic heater
limit in 18 AAC 50.077. Alaska amended 18 AAC 50.079(d) to require a
testing protocol be approved by the department prior to any test
attempting to exempt a coal device from the mandatory removal
requirement. Alaska revised 18 AAC 50.079(e) limit the duration of the
waiver to one calendar year.
The EPA previously approved 18 AAC 50.079(f), which requires the
owner of a coal-fired heating device to render it inoperable not later
than December 31, 2024. As a consequence of Alaska's revisions to 18
AAC 50.079(f), the latest an individual with a coal-fired heating
device could remove that device is December 31, 2025--provided the
individual meets the eligibility requirements in 18 AAC 50.079(e).
Alaska stated that 18 AAC 50.079(f) is revised for clarity by adding
section (3), which requires coal-fired heating devices to be rendered
inoperable after the expiration of a waiver granted under subsection
(e) of 18 AAC 50.079. Alaska stated that newly adopted section 18 AAC
50.079(h) requires documentation on the removal and rendering of the
device inoperable and submitting an affidavit that the coal stove will
not be
[[Page 1612]]
reinstalled in the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area.
Based on these updates, the EPA proposes to approve the submitted
revisions to 18 AAC 50.076 and 18 AAC 50.079 as meeting the
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A), 172(c)(7), and 189(b) and 40
CFR 51.1010(a). Accordingly, the EPA proposes to determine that the
Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan rectifies the disapproved portions of the
Fairbanks Serious Plan and initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan for the solid
fuel-burning source category.
ii. Residential and Commercial Fuel Oil Combustion
In the EPA's December 5, 2023, rule, the EPA approved as BACM
Alaska's regulation under 18 AAC 50.078(b) that imposes a limit of
1,000 parts per million sulfur content in fuel limit (diesel no. 1) for
residential and commercial heating.\99\ This was a switch from diesel
no. 2 (approximately 2,000 parts per million sulfur content in fuel
limit) to diesel no. 1. The EPA agreed with Alaska's demonstration that
further strengthening this requirement to 15 parts per million sulfur
(i.e., Ultra-low sulfur diesel) was economically infeasible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at pp. 84669, 84674.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iii. Small Commercial Area Sources
Alaska revised its regulations for coffee roasters, under 18 AAC
50.078(d). These updated regulations clarify the specific emission
limit required for this source category and ensures the limit is
enforceable as a practical matter. The EPA proposes to approve the
submitted revisions to 18 AAC 50.078(d) as meeting the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2), 172(c)(7), and 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010(a) for
this source category. Accordingly, the EPA proposes to determine that
the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan rectifies the disapproved portions of
the Fairbanks Serious Plan and initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan for coffee
roasters.
iv. Energy Efficiency and Weatherization
To address the EPA's disapproval, Alaska reviewed weatherization
and energy efficiency measures adopted by other jurisdictions. Based on
this review, Alaska adopted a weatherization and energy efficiency
measure at 18 AAC 50.081. The measure mandates that a building owner
have an energy rating completed on the building before listing it for
sale. The rule requires that the seller provide the energy rating
report to the buyer. Alaska also committed to a robust advertising and
education program that includes best practices to improve efficiency in
an arctic environment and available economic and practical mechanisms
that can assist homeowners in improving both efficiency and regulatory
compliance. Alaska asserted that these components will improve the
compliance rate for other control measures, including the solid fuel-
fired heating device curtailment program and the requirement to remove
older, uncertified heating appliances. Alaska noted that any
improvements identified by the energy rater will be voluntary.
Alaska evaluated adopting building energy efficiency codes or
mandatory weatherization requirements and dismissed them as
technologically infeasible. According to Alaska, there is a lack of
technical expertise and resources to implement (lack of energy auditors
and training resources), enforce, and ensure code compliance. Alaska
further contended that the earliest date Alaska can implement building
codes exceeded not only the statutory requirement for the
implementation of BACM by December 31, 2024, but also beyond the 2027
attainment date identified in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan.
The EPA proposes to approve the submitted revisions to 18 AAC
50.081 as meeting the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(2),
172(c)(7), and 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010(a) with respect to
weatherization and energy efficiency. Accordingly, the EPA proposes to
determine that the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan rectifies the
disapproved portions of the Fairbanks Serious Plan and initial
Fairbanks 189(d) Plan for weatherization and energy efficiency.
v. Emissions From Mobile Sources
The EPA previously approved as part of Fairbanks Moderate Plan, a
requirement that businesses with 275 or more parking spaces provide
power to electrical outlets at temperatures of 20 degrees Fahrenheit or
lower for engine block heaters.\100\ In addition, Alaska continues to
install new plug-ins throughout the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area.\101\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\100\ 82 FR 42457, September 8, 2017; State Air Quality Control
Plan, Vol. III, Appendix III.D.5.7, adopted December 24, 2014, at p.
43; State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix III.D.5.12,
adopted December 24, 2014, at p. 43.
\101\ There are nearly 10,000 plug-ins available in the
nonattainment area. See State Air Quality Control Plan, Appendix
III.D.7.7 (adopted November 19, 2019), at p. 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, Alaska re-evaluated
anti-idling for light-duty vehicles as a potential control measure.
Alaska provided additional analysis demonstrating that such a measure
is technologically and economically infeasible in the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area. In particular, Alaska noted that
other jurisdictions that implement this measure include a temperature
threshold, below which restrictions do not apply. These temperature cut
offs range from 40 degrees Fahrenheit to 10 degrees Fahrenheit. These
thresholds are intended to protect human health and safety.
Accordingly, Alaska evaluated implementing idling restrictions
during the winter months of October through March at temperatures above
21 degrees Fahrenheit. Given that episodic emissions contributing to
PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations occur at sub-zero temperatures,
Alaska's evaluation indicates that the measure would not achieve any
emissions reductions.
The EPA notes that in order to achieve emissions reductions in the
extreme Fairbanks environment, Alaska would have to prohibit idling
regardless of ambient temperature, which presents unacceptable risks to
human health. In light of these concerns, rather than regulate the
vehicle users, Alaska requires owners of parking areas to provide
electricity for engine-block heaters. Alaska and the EPA have
previously determined that expanding plug-in availability is
economically infeasible.\102\ Therefore, the EPA proposes to approve
Alaska's current plug-in program as meeting BACM and BACT requirements
for light-duty vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\102\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at pp. 84649, 84652
(determining that anti-idling restrictions on heavy-duty vehicles
had a cost effectiveness of over $400,000 per ton of SO<INF>2</INF>
reduced).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, the EPA proposes to determine that Alaska has
rectified the EPA's December 5, 2023, disapproval of the Fairbanks
Serious Plan and initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan with respect to control
strategy requirements for mobile sources.
b. Alaska's Identification and Adoption of BACT for Major Stationary
Sources
Alaska submitted revisions to its BACM/BACT determinations for the
five major stationary sources in the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area, as described in the following paragraphs.\103\
Alaska also submitted permits for each of the five major
[[Page 1613]]
stationary sources that adopt and implement BACT for direct
PM<INF>2.5</INF>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ State Air Quality Control Plan Vol. II, Appendix III.D.7.7
(adopted November 5, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
i. Chena Power Plant
Chena Power Plant is an existing stationary source owned and
operated by Aurora Energy, LLC, which consists of four existing coal-
fired boilers: three 76 million British Thermal Units (MMBtu) per hour
overfeed traveling grate stoker type boilers and one 269 MMBtu per hour
spreader-stoker type boiler that burn coal to produce steam for heating
and power (497 MMBtu per hour combined). The source also includes a
coal preparation plant, coal stockpile, ash vacuum pump exhaust, and
truck bay ash loadout.
Alaska revised its State Air Quality Control Plan to include its
BACT determinations for PM<INF>2.5</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> for each of
the emission units at the Chena Power Plant.\104\ We note that Alaska
removed its BACT evaluation and determinations for NO<INF>X</INF>
because the EPA approved a comprehensive NO<INF>X</INF> precursor
demonstration. Alaska also submitted conditions from Air Quality
Control Minor Permit AQ0315MSS02 Revision 1 for the Aurora Energy,
LLC--Chena Power Plant (Aurora Permit). The Aurora Permit conditions
include enforceable PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT emissions limitations for the
emission units at the Chena Power Plant comprised of numerical
emissions limits and work practice standards and associated monitoring,
recordkeeping and reporting requirements. The permits are included in
the docket for this action.\105\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-164. Note, Alaska's prior SIP submissions only evaluated
BACT for the coal-fired boilers.
\105\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-187.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA previously reviewed Alaska's BACM/BACT evaluation for the
Chena Power Plant.\106\ Alaska has since clarified that
PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT for the coal-fired boilers is operating and
maintaining fabric filters (full steam baghouse) during operation.\107\
Thus, in this action, the EPA is proposing to approve Alaska's
PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT determinations for the Chena Power Plant, the
submitted revisions to State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III,
Appendix III.D.7.7, related to direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and
the submitted Aurora Permit conditions \108\ as satisfying CAA section
189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\106\ See Hedgpeth and Sorrels. (August 24, 2022). Review of
Best Available Control Technology analyses submitted for the Aurora
Energy, LLC Chena Power Plant as part of the Fairbanks PM2.5
Nonattainment SIP. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10,
Laboratory Services and Applied Science Division, EPA-R10-OAR-2022-
0115.
\107\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-173.
\108\ See section III.A of this preamble for the specific permit
conditions proposed for approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is not proposing to take action on Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF>
BACT determinations in State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III,
Appendix III.D.7.7, at this time. As discussed in the preceding
paragraphs, the EPA is proposing to approve Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF>
precursor demonstration for major stationary sources. If approved,
Alaska will not be required to identify, adopt, or implement
SO<INF>2</INF> BACT for the Chena Power Plant. If the EPA does not
finalize approval of the SO<INF>2</INF> precursor demonstration, then
the EPA will propose action on Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF> BACT
determinations in a separate, future action.
ii. Doyon-Fort Wainwright Central Heating and Power Plant
Fort Wainwright is an existing U.S. Army installation. Emission
units located within the military installation include units such as
boilers and generators that are owned and operated by the U.S. Army
Garrison Alaska (referred to as FWA). The Central Heating and Power
Plant (CHPP), also located within the installation footprint, is owned
and operated by Doyon Utilities, LLC (DU), the regional Alaska Native
corporation for Interior Alaska. The two entities, DU and FWA, comprise
a single stationary source operating under two permits.
The CHPP is comprised of six spreader-stoker type coal-fired
boilers, each rated at 230 MMBtu per hour, that burn coal to produce
steam for stationary source-wide heating and power. In addition to the
CHPP, the source contains emission units comprised of small and large
emergency engines, fire pumps, and generators, diesel-fired boilers,
and material handling equipment. Alaska's BACM/BACT analysis in the
Fairbanks Serious Plan for the stationary source evaluated potential
controls to reduce NO<INF>X</INF>, PM<INF>2.5</INF>, and SO<INF>2</INF>
emissions from each of these emissions units at the stationary
source.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\109\ Alaska evaluated potential NO<INF>X</INF> controls for
each emission unit, but because Alaska determined and the EPA
approved that NO<INF>X</INF> emissions are not significant for
PM<INF>2.5</INF> formation in the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area, Alaska does not plan to require implementation
of BACT for NO<INF>X</INF>. See 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023. Thus,
EPA is not discussing Alaska's BACT analysis for NO<INF>X</INF>
here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, Alaska revised its
Air Quality Control Plan sections related to the Doyon-Fort Wainwright
CHPP to reflect new engines powering lift pumps and generators, correct
typographical errors, improve clarity, and to include updated
SO<INF>2</INF> BACT determinations.\110\ With respect to the new
engines, all are EPA-certified engines ranging in size from 74
horsepower to 324 horsepower. Alaska updated its PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT
determinations for these new engines. Alaska removed its BACT
evaluation and determinations for NO<INF>X</INF> because the EPA
approved a comprehensive NO<INF>X</INF> precursor demonstration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\110\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-202.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska also submitted conditions from two Air Quality Control Minor
Permits: AQ0236MSS03 Revision 2 (U.S. Army Garrison--USAG Alaska Fort
Wainwright) and AQ1121MSS04 Revision 1 (Doyon Utilities, LLC--Fort
Wainwright) (collectively referred to as the Fort Wainwright Permits).
The Fort Wainwright Permits include enforceable PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT
emissions limitations for the emission units at Fort Wainwright
comprised of numerical emissions limits and work practice standards and
associated monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements. The
permits are included in the docket for this action.\111\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-248.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA previously reviewed Alaska's BACM/BACT evaluation for the
Doyon-Fort Wainwright Central Heating and Power Plant.\112\ In addition
to the submitted conditions discussed in this section x.x.ii of this
preamble, Alaska's updated BACT determination clarified the maintenance
and testing requirements for the diesel-fired boilers and added
enclosed conveying system requirements.\113\ The EPA previously
approved Alaska's BACT determinations for older pump engines and
generator engines. Alaska updated its BACT determinations and
associated permit limits to reflect grams per hour emission limits
appropriate to the size and model year of the engine. Alaska also
imposed limits on the hours of operations of these engines. Thus, in
this action, the EPA is proposing to approve Alaska's updated
PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT determinations for the emissions units
[[Page 1614]]
at Doyon-Fort Wainwright CHPP,\114\ the submitted revisions to State
Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix III.D.7.7 related to
direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions from the Doyon-Fort Wainwright
CHPP,\115\ and the submitted conditions from the Fort Wainwright
Permits \116\ as satisfying CAA section 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\112\ See Hedgpeth, Z. (August 24, 2022). Review of Best
Available Control Technology analyses submitted for Fort Wainwright-
US Army Garrison Alaska (FWA) and Doyon Utilities, LLC (DU) as part
of the Fairbanks PM2.5 Nonattainment SIP. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 10, Laboratory Services and Applied
Science Division, EPA-R10-OAR-2022-0115.
\113\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-217; State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-225.
\114\ Industrial coal-fired boilers; diesel-fired boilers;
diesel-fired engines, fire pumps, and generators; and material
handling equipment.
\115\ The EPA is not proposing to approve the NO<INF>X</INF>
related emissions limits as meeting BACT for NO<INF>X</INF>. For
some emission units, Alaska imposed NO<INF>X</INF> emissions limits
as surrogates for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions.
\116\ See section III.A of this preamble for the specific permit
conditions proposed to be approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is not proposing to take action on Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF>
BACT determinations in State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III,
Appendix III.D.7.7 at this time for the same reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraphs regarding the Chena Power Plant. If the EPA does
not finalize approval of the SO<INF>2</INF> precursor demonstration,
then the EPA will propose action on Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF> BACT
determinations in a separate, future action.
iii. University of Alaska Fairbanks Campus Power Plant
The Fairbanks Campus Power Plant is an existing stationary source
owned and operated by the University of Alaska Fairbanks, which
consists of two coal-fired boilers installed in 1962 that were later
replaced by a circulating fluidized bed (CFB) dual fuel-fired boiler
(coal and biomass) rated at 295.6 MMBtu per hour. Other emission units
at the source include a backup diesel generator, diesel-fired boilers,
engines, and a coal handling system for the new dual-fuel fired boiler.
In the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, Alaska updated its Air
Quality Control Plan regarding the Fairbanks Campus Power Plant to
reflect permanently removed emission units, add new diesel boilers and
engines, update the PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT determinations for small
diesel-fired boilers and large and small engines, correct typographical
errors, and improve clarity.\117\ Alaska also added updated
SO<INF>2</INF> BACT determinations for the Fairbanks Campus Power
Plant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\117\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-356.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the small diesel-fired boilers (EUs 17 through 22),
Alaska updated its BACT determination for PM<INF>2.5</INF> to consist
of a partial limit on hours of operation, an emission limit of 0.016
lb/MMBtu,\118\ compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart JJJJJJ, and work
practice standards. Alaska evaluated whether installation of a scrubber
was feasible for these boilers and determined that it was economically
infeasible.\119\ Alaska noted that taking into consideration the
enforceable limit on operation, the combined potential to emit of
PM<INF>2.5</INF> for the six boilers is two tons per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\118\ Alaska noted that it previously selected a 0.012 lb/MMBtu
limit erroneously. This limit is associated with industrial boilers
while the boilers at the Fairbanks Campus Power Plant are commercial
boilers.
\119\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-369.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to large diesel fired engines (EUs 8 and 35) and small
diesel fired engines (EUs 24, 26, 27, 29, and 34), \120\ Alaska
reevaluated the feasibility of add-on PM<INF>2.5</INF> controls, namely
a diesel particulate filter (DPF).\121\ EUs 24, 29, and 34 are limited
to 100 hours per year of non-emergency operation, so additional BACT
controls were not evaluated for these units. Alaska determined that a
DPF is not technologically feasible for EU 8 due to an unacceptable
increase in back pressure. Alaska determined that DPFs were
technologically feasible for the other engines, but Alaska determined
that the high cost per unit of emissions reductions rendered them
economically infeasible. Updating the cost-effectiveness analysis to
reflect comments from the EPA's Technical Support Document,\122\ Alaska
determined that the cost-effectiveness ranged from over $17,000 at EU
26 to over $20,000 per ton of PM<INF>2.5</INF> reduced at EU 27. Alaska
stated that EU 35 has potential PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions of 0.03 tons
per year, which is an order of magnitude lower than the two other
diesel engines, EUs 26 and 27. Therefore, Alaska did not perform a cost
analysis for installing and operating a DPF on EU 35 as it would have
an even higher cost per ton estimate than EUs 26 and 27. Furthermore,
Alaska noted that EU 35 is limited to 100 hours per calendar year of
non-emergency operation and required to combust ULSD under the existing
Federal NSPS Subpart IIII requirements.\123\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\120\ In comments, the University of Alaska Fairbanks clarified
that EU 23 has been permanently removed from service and are no
longer permitted EUs at the facility. See Comments on Proposed
Rule--Air Plan Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval; AK,
Fairbanks North Star Borough; 2006 24-Hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> Serious
Area and 189(d) Plan, at p. 9, Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2022-0115.
\121\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-372.
\122\ See Hedgpeth and Sorrels. (August 24, 2022). Review of
Best Available Control Technology analyses submitted for the
University of Alaska, Fairbanks as part of the Fairbanks PM2.5
Nonattainment SIP, p.15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 10, Laboratory Services and Applied Science Division, EPA-
R10-OAR-2022-0115.
\123\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-374.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska removed its BACT evaluation and determinations for
NO<INF>X</INF> because the EPA approved a comprehensive NO<INF>X</INF>
precursor demonstration.\124\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\124\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska also submitted conditions from Air Quality Control Minor
Permit AQ0316MSS08 Revision 1 (University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF)--
University of Alaska Fairbanks Campus) (UAF Permit). The UAF Permit
conditions include enforceable PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT emissions
limitations comprised of numerical emissions limits and work practice
standards with associated monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. The
permits are included in the docket for this action.\125\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\125\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-414.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA previously reviewed Alaska's BACT evaluation for the
Fairbanks Campus Power Plant.\126\ In this action, the EPA is proposing
to approve Alaska's updated PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT determinations for
the small diesel-fired boilers (EUs 17 through 22), large diesel-fired
engines (EUs 8 and 35), and small diesel-fired engines (EUs 24, 26, 27,
29, and 34) at the Fairbanks Campus Power Plant. The EPA previously
approved Alaska's PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT determinations for EUs 8, 17-
19, 24, and 29. Alaska's updates are consistent with these past
approvals. With respect to EUs 26, 27, and 35, the EPA proposes to
approve Alaska's economic infeasibility demonstrations for DPFs. The
EPA is proposing to approve Alaska's PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT emissions
limits for small diesel-fired boilers (EUs 17 through 22), large
diesel-fired engines (EUs 8 and 35), and small diesel-fired engines
(EUs 24, 26, 27, 29, and 34) at the Fairbanks Campus Power Plant, which
consist of numerical emissions limits, limits on operation, fuel
requirements, and work practice standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\126\ See Hedgpeth and Sorrels. (August 24, 2022). Review of
Best Available Control Technology analyses submitted for the
University of Alaska, Fairbanks as part of the Fairbanks PM2.5
Nonattainment SIP. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10,
Laboratory Services and Applied Science Division, EPA-R10-OAR-2022-
0115.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the EPA proposes to approve the submitted revisions to
State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix III.D.7.7 related to
direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions \127\
from the Fairbanks Campus Power Plant
[[Page 1615]]
and the submitted conditions from the UAF Permit \128\ as satisfying
CAA section 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\127\ The EPA is not proposing to approve the NO<INF>X</INF>
related emissions limits as meeting BACT for NO<INF>X</INF>. For
some emission units, Alaska imposed NO<INF>X</INF> emissions limits
as surrogates for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions.
\128\ See section III.A of this preamble for the specific permit
conditions proposed to be approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is not proposing to take action on Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF>
BACT determinations in State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III,
Appendix III.D.7.7 at this time for the same reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraphs regarding the Chena Power Plant. If the EPA does
not finalize approval of the SO<INF>2</INF> precursor demonstration,
then the EPA will propose action on Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF> BACT
determinations in a separate, future action.
iv. Zehnder Facility
The Zehnder Facility (Zehnder) is an electric generating facility
that combusts distillate fuel in combustion turbines to provide power
to the Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) grid. The power plant
contains two fuel oil-fired simple cycle gas combustion turbines (each
unit rated at 268 MMBtu per hour) and two diesel-fired generators
(electro-motive diesels) used for emergency power and to serve as black
start engines for the GVEA generation system. The primary fuel is
stored in two 50,000 gallon above-ground storage tanks. Turbine startup
fuel and electro-motive diesels primary fuel is stored in a 12,000
gallon above ground storage tank.
In the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, Alaska revised its Air
Quality Control Plan for the Zehnder Facility to correct errors and
improve clarity.\129\ Alaska also submitted conditions from Air Quality
Control Minor Permit AQ0109MSS01 Revision 1 (Golden Valley Electric
Association--Zehnder Facility) (Zehnder Permit). The Zehnder Permit
contains enforceable PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT emissions limitations for
the emission units at the Zehnder Facility comprised of numerical
emissions limits and work practice standards with associated
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. The permits are included in
the docket for this action.\130\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\129\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-316.
\130\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-342.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similar to the small diesel-fired boilers (EUs 17 through 22) at
the Fairbanks Campus Power Plant discussed in the preceding paragraphs
of section II.C of this preamble, Alaska imposed, in the Fairbanks
Serious Plan and Fairbanks 189(d) Plan, an erroneous emissions limit on
the small diesel fired boilers at the Zehnder Facility. The revised Air
Quality Control Plan and associated conditions in the Zehnder Permit
reflect the corrected limit.\131\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\131\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-327.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA previously reviewed Alaska's BACT evaluation for the
Zehnder Facility.\132\ In EPA's prior analysis, the EPA agreed with
Alaska's BACT determinations for PM<INF>2.5</INF>. For the turbines, no
technologically feasible add-on control options exist to reduce
PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions. For the emergency generators, the EPA
agreed that the limits on annual hours of operation of 100 hours per
year or less will result in add-on control equipment such as DPF being
cost prohibitive. Further, the EPA stated that similar to the turbines,
no technologically feasible add-on control options exist to reduce
PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions from the small diesel and propane fired
boilers.\133\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\132\ See Hedgpeth, Z. (August 24, 2022). Review of Best
Available Control Technology analyses submitted for the Golden
Valley Electric Association (GVEA) Zehnder and North Pole Power
Plants as part of the Fairbanks PM2.5 Nonattainment SIP. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Laboratory Services and
Applied Science Division, EPA-R10-OAR-2022-0115.
\133\ Id. at p. 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, in this action, the EPA proposes to approve the submitted
revisions to State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7 related to direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and
NO<INF>X</INF> \134\ emissions from Zehnder and the submitted Zehnder
Permit conditions as satisfying CAA section 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\134\ The EPA is not proposing to approve the NO<INF>X</INF>
related emissions limits as meeting BACT for NO<INF>X</INF>. For
some emission units, Alaska imposed NO<INF>X</INF> emissions limits
as surrogates for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is not proposing to take action on Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF>
BACT determinations in State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III,
Appendix III.D.7.7 at this time for the same reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraphs regarding the Chena Power Plant. If the EPA does
not finalize approval of the SO<INF>2</INF> precursor demonstration,
then the EPA will propose action on Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF> BACT
determinations in a separate, future action.
v. North Pole Power Plant
The North Pole Power Plant is an electric generating facility that
combusts distillate fuel in combustion turbines to provide power to the
Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA) grid. The power plant
contains two fuel oil-fired simple cycle gas combustion turbines (each
unit rated at 672 MMBtu per hour), two fuel oil-fired combined cycle
gas combustion turbines (each unit rated at 455 MMBtu per hour), one
fuel oil-fired emergency generator, and two propane-fired boilers.
In the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, Alaska revised its Air
Quality Control Plan for the North Pole Power Plant to correct errors
and improve clarity.\135\ Alaska also submitted conditions from Air
Quality Control Minor Permit AQ0110MSS01 Revision 1 (Golden Valley
Electric Association--North Pole Power Plant) (NPPP Permit). The NPPP
Permit conditions include enforceable PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT emissions
limitations for the emission units at the North Pole Power Plant
comprised of numerical emissions limits and work practice standards
with associated monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. The permits
are included in the docket for this action.\136\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\135\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-267.
\136\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.7-300.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA previously reviewed Alaska's BACT evaluation for the North
Pole Power Plant.\137\ Similar to the Zehnder facility discussion in
the preceding paragraphs in this section II.C, the EPA agreed with
Alaska that no additional PM<INF>2.5</INF> BACT controls are feasible
for emissions units at the North Pole Power Plant.\138\ Thus, in this
action, the EPA proposes to approve the submitted revisions to State
Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix III.D.7.7 related to
direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and NO<INF>X</INF> \139\ emissions
from the North Pole Power Plant and the submitted NPPP Permit
conditions \140\ as satisfying CAA section 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\137\ See Hedgpeth, Z. (August 24, 2022). Review of Best
Available Control Technology analyses submitted for the Golden
Valley Electric Association (GVEA) Zehnder and North Pole Power
Plants as part of the Fairbanks PM2.5 Nonattainment SIP. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Laboratory Services and
Applied Science Division, EPA-R10-OAR-2022-0115.
\138\ Id. at p. 11.
\139\ The EPA is not proposing to approve the NO<INF>X</INF>
related emissions limits as meeting BACT for NO<INF>X</INF>. For
some emission units, Alaska imposed NO<INF>X</INF> emissions limits
as surrogates for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions.
\140\ See section III.A of this preamble for the specific permit
conditions proposed to be approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is not proposing to take action on Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF>
BACT determinations in State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III,
Appendix III.D.7.7 at this time for the same reasons discussed in the
preceding paragraphs regarding the Chena Power Plant. If the EPA does
not finalize approval of the SO<INF>2</INF> precursor demonstration,
then the EPA will propose action on Alaska's SO<INF>2</INF> BACT
determinations separately.
[[Page 1616]]
c. Alaska's Identification and Adoption of Additional Measures and
Demonstration of Five Percent Reduction in Emissions Pursuant to CAA
Section 189(d)
The Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan retained the identification of
all sources of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and PM<INF>2.5</INF>
plan precursors, identification of all potential controls to reduce
direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions and PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursors,
and reevaluation of previously rejected control measures included in
the initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan, as well as identification of the
MSMs adopted into any SIP or used in practice to control emissions in
any state.
As part of its reevaluation of control measures, Alaska provided
additional information for many of the control measures considered in
the BACM analysis. The Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan includes
additional consideration of banning installation of solid-fuel devices
in new construction, limiting heating oil to ultra-low sulfur diesel,
dry wood requirements, emissions controls for small area sources,
mobile sources, and MSMs.\141\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\141\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section
III.D.7.7.12 (adopted November 5, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska identified a burn-down period as part of other
jurisdictions' solid fuel-fired heating device curtailment program.
Accordingly, Alaska adopted a burn down period of three hours for
solid-fuel heating devices that begins upon the effective date and time
of a curtailment announcement. In addition, Alaska added specific
requirements to document economic hardship as part of a NOASH
curtailment program waiver for solid-fuel devices.
Regarding the requirement to demonstrate five percent annual
reductions, Alaska included in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan a
control strategy analysis that demonstrates annual reductions of
PM<INF>2.5</INF> are greater than five percent through 2027, Alaska's
projected attainment year.\142\ Alaska noted that the State can
demonstrate either five percent annual reductions in emissions of
direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> or a five percent annual reductions in
emissions of a PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursor. Alaska elected to
demonstrate five percent annual reductions in direct PM<INF>2.5</INF>
emissions. Thus, the EPA is proposing to approve the control strategy
included in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 189(d) and 40 CFR 51.1010(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\142\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section
III.D.7.9.2.3, Table 7.9-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Attainment Demonstration and Modeling
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Regarding the Attainment
Demonstration and Modeling
Pursuant to CAA sections 188(c) and 189(b) and 40 CFR 51.1003(b)
and 51.1011(b), for nonattainment areas reclassified as Serious, the
state must submit an attainment demonstration as part of the Serious
Plan that meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.1011. Similarly, pursuant
to 40 CFR 51.1003(c), for Serious areas subject to CAA section 189(d)
for failing to attain by the Serious area attainment date, the state
must submit an attainment demonstration as part of the 189(d) plan that
meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.1011. On September 2, 2020, the EPA
determined that the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area
failed to attain the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the
December 31, 2019, Serious area attainment date. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to evaluate any previously unmet Serious area planning
obligations based on the current, applicable attainment date
appropriate under CAA section 189(d) and not the original Serious area
attainment date.\143\ In accordance with CAA section 172(a)(2)(A) and
40 CFR 51.1004(a)(3), the projected attainment date for Serious
nonattainment areas subject to CAA section 189(d) shall be as
expeditious as practicable, but no later than five years following the
effective date of the EPA's finding that the area failed to attain by
the original Serious area attainment date, except that the
Administrator may extend the attainment date to the extent the
Administrator deems appropriate, for a period no greater than 10 years
from the effective date of the EPA's determination that the area failed
to attain, considering the severity of nonattainment and the
availability and feasibility of pollution control measures. In
accordance with 40 CFR 51.1011, the attainment demonstration must meet
four requirements:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\143\ The term ``applicable attainment date'' is defined at 40
CFR 51.1000 to mean: ``the latest statutory date by which an area is
required to attain a particular PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, unless EPA
has approved an attainment plan for the area to attain such NAAQS,
in which case the applicable attainment date is the date approved
under such attainment plan. If EPA grants an extension of an
approved attainment date, then the applicable attainment date for
the area shall be the extended date.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Identify the projected attainment date for the Serious
nonattainment area that is as expeditious as practicable;
b. Meet the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, appendix W and include
inventory data, modeling results, and emissions reduction analyses on
which the state has based its projected attainment date;
c. The base year for the emissions inventories shall be one of the
3 years used for designations or another technically appropriate
inventory year if justified by the state in the plan submission; and
d. The control strategies modeled as part of a Serious area
attainment demonstration shall be consistent with the control
strategies required pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1003 and 51.1010 (including
the specific requirements in 40 CFR 51.1010(c)) for Serious areas that
fail to attain.
Further, in accordance with 40 CFR 51.1011(b)(5), the attainment
plan must provide for implementation of all control measures needed for
attainment as expeditiously as practicable. Additionally, all control
measures must be implemented no later than the beginning of the year
containing the applicable attainment date, notwithstanding the BACM
implementation deadline requirements in 40 CFR 51.1010.\144\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\144\ 40 CFR 51.1011(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Summary of the EPA's Prior Rulemaking Regarding Attainment
Demonstration and Modeling
The EPA disapproved Alaska's attainment demonstration in the
initial Fairbanks 189(d) Plan because it did not fully meet CAA
requirements.\145\ As part of the attainment demonstration, the state
must identify the projected attainment date that is as expeditious as
practicable. Alaska did not adopt and implement all available control
measures. The correct identification of the most expeditious attainment
date requires an evaluation based upon expeditious implementation of
the required emissions controls. Therefore, the EPA could not assess
whether Alaska identified the expeditious attainment date for modeling
purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\145\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at p. 84676.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Summary of the State's Submission Regarding Attainment Demonstration
and Modeling
The State included an updated attainment demonstration in the
Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan.\146\ In the plan, Alaska asserted that
calendar year 2027 reflects attainment ``as expeditiously as
practicable,'' based on air quality improvements from the base year to
attainment year, as measured by the quantified emissions reductions
[[Page 1617]]
associated with the implementation of control measures.\147\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\146\ State Air Quality Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.9
(adopted November 5, 2024).
\147\ State Air Quality Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska noted that for attainment modeling, five-year design values
are generally recommended. For the earlier Fairbanks Serious Plan, the
base year modeling design value was 131.6 [mu]g/m\3\. However, the
latest five-year (2017-2021) design value is 64.9 [mu]g/m\3\ at the
North Pole air quality monitor (Hurst Road), the area of expected
highest PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations in the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area. As part of updating its attainment
analysis, Alaska identified this five-year design value of 64.9 [mu]g/
m\3\ as the base year modeling design value for the Fairbanks Revised
189(d) Plan.
Building on the 2020 base year emissions inventory, Alaska
developed a series of future year emissions inventories for each
calendar year from 2020 through 2029. Alaska noted that each of these
future year inventories accounted for growth in source activity over
time (e.g., increases in residential heating emissions resulting from
forecasted housing growth). The emissions inventory also accounted for
emissions reductions associated with both on-going state and local
control programs (such as the Wood Stove Change Out and Solid Fuel-
Burning Appliance Curtailment programs), along with other control
measures included in the SIP that were adopted since the area was
classified as a Serious area.
Alaska stated that source activity growth rates used to project the
2020 base year inventory emissions in calendar years 2021 through 2029
were generally based on the 2020-2024 and 2024-2035 annualized growth
rates by source sector included in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d)
Plan.\148\ However, Alaska noted that the source activity growth rate
for space heating was capped after model year 2027, and claimed this is
due to the difficulty in reliably forecasting long-term energy prices
and the likely peak in energy costs in 2024. Alaska also stated that
the effects of the Federal mobile source and fuel control programs in
projecting mobile source emissions from 2021 through 2029 were
accounted for using the EPA's MOVES3 vehicle emissions model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\148\ State Air Quality Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.6, Table
7.6-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska included a list of the state and local control measures for
which emissions benefits were quantified and included in the attainment
date analysis.\149\ Further, Alaska included a phase-in forecast for
each control measure for 2020-2027 inventory years. See Table 4 of this
preamble for a summary of these control measures:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\149\ State Air Quality Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.9, Table
7.9-1.
Table 4--Alaska Control Measures and Phase-In Schedule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent compliance 2027 Projected emissions (tons per
-------------------------- episodic day)
Control measure 2027 -------------------------------------- Details
2020 Base Attainment
year year PM2.5 SO2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fairbanks Wood Stove Change 2,791 5,628 1.09............. 0.11............. Based on funding
Out Program. from the 2016,
2017, 2018,
2019-2020,
2021, and 2022
Targeted
Airshed Grants.
Solid Fuel-Burning Appliance 30% 38% Stage 1: 0.02; Stage 1:--0.000; In winter 2022-
Curtailment Program. Stage 2: 0.12. Stage 2:--0.02. 2023, Alaska
conducted an
observational
field study
from which
compliance was
estimated to be
38.1%.
Shift to diesel no. 1 fuel oil n/a 50% 0.02............. 1.73............. This measure
required a one-
time shift from
the current mix
of diesel no. 2
and diesel no.
1 heating oil
refined and
sold in the
nonattainment
area by
September 2022.
Requires commercially sold n/a 50% 0.06............. Less than 0.01... Requires
wood to be dry before sale. commercially
sold wood after
October 1,
2021, to be
dry, or if sold
as 8-ft length
rounds,
requires proof
of proper/
adequate
storage for
drying by the
buyer.
Removal of all uncertified 0% 30% 0.25............. -0.01............ 2024 is first
devices & cordwood outdoor year of
hydronic heaters. implementation.
Compliance rate
estimates based
on existing and
on-going public
education and
outreach
efforts.
2.0 g/hr and 0.10 lb/MMBtu 22% 35% 0.09............. Less than 0.01... The compliance
certified emission rates for rate estimated
new or re-conveyed wood for this
devices. measure reflect
the volume of
home sales
(projected from
historical
data) coupled
with the
requirement to
register wood-
fired heating
devices upon
sale or
conveyance of a
property.
Removal of coal heaters....... n/a 25% Less than 0.01... Less than 0.01...
[[Page 1618]]
Wood-fired devices may not be 0% 20% 0.09............. Less than 0.01... Beginning in
primary or only heating (existing 2024,
source. homes); 40% compliance
(new homes) rates of 20%
for new home
sales
(discounted for
large lot, 2-
acre cabin
exemption) and
40% for home
resales. The
new home sale
compliance rate
is discounted
from 40% to 20%
to account for
the estimated
portion of
large lot
(greater than 2
acre) cabins
which are
exempted from
this
requirement.
NOASH/Exemption requirements.. 0% 50% Less than 0.01... Less than 0.01... Compliance rates
reflect
projected
penetration
rate increases
associated with
annual renewal
and device
registration
requirements,
proper
installation
and maintenance
determinations
from third-
party
verifiers, and
requirements
for catalyst
replacement
when
manufacturer-
recommended
catalyst useful
life is reached
(estimated at
six years
averaged across
manufacturers).
These elements
are also
coupled with
projected
impacts from
the NOASH
reduction
program funded
under currently
secured TAGs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska noted that, based on these phase-in forecasts, a detailed
spreadsheet was developed to calculate PM<INF>2.5</INF> and
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions reductions within the space heating sector for
each measure in each inventory year. \150\ The source activity data
includes device and fuel splits, emission factors, and methods used to
calculate control measure emissions benefits to support the control
inventories developed for the attainment date analysis. Alaska further
stated that the control measure emissions benefits calculations also
account for the effects of overlap between measures that impact the
same source category, properly eliminating double counting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\150\ See State Air Quality Plan, Vol. III, Appendix III.D.7.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska stated that projected emissions control inventories for each
year from 2020 through 2029 were prepared to support the analysis of
expeditious attainment. Full modeling runs were completed for 2029,
2027, and 2026 in that order. After the 2029 modeling results
demonstrated attainment of the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, 2027 was
selected as the next year to evaluate expeditious attainment.
To begin analyzing the 2027 attainment year, Alaska noted that the
2027 episodic modeling inventory was incorporated into the CMAQ air
quality model. Modeled concentration outputs for this 2027 control
inventory run were post-processed for each grid cell corresponding to
ambient air quality monitors for which design values could be computed
and processed through Alaska's Speciated Modeled Attainment Test (SMAT)
tool (see State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section
III.D.7.8.9). Alaska stated that the modeled design value at the
controlling North Pole (Hurst Road) air quality monitor was found to be
31.9 [mu]g/m\3\, below the 35 [mu]g/m\3\ NAAQS for 24-hour
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and thus demonstrating modeled attainment by 2027.
To evaluate whether attainment could be advanced any sooner than
2027, Alaska compiled another emissions inventory for the 2026 model
year. The 2026 CMAQ gridded outputs were then post-processed for the
key monitor-based grid cells through the SMAT tool to develop modeled
design values that reflected penetration of the State's control
strategy package in 2026. Alaska stated that the 2026 modeled design
value at the North Pole (Hurst Road) monitor was found to be 38.1
[mu]g/m\3\, which exceeds the 35 [mu]g/m\3\ NAAQS.
As shown in Table 5 of this preamble, modeled design values in 2027
at all three regulatory air quality monitor locations in the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area are below the 35 [mu]g/m\3\ 24-hour
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Alaska noted that the modeled design value at
the controlling North Pole (Hurst Road) monitor is 31.9 [mu]g/m\3\,
more than 3 [mu]g/m\3\ below the NAAQS, which provides a ``buffer'' to
account for concentrations in unmonitored grid cells across the
nonattainment area. Modeled 2027 design values at the other two
monitors near downtown Fairbanks are well below the PM<INF>2.5</INF>
NAAQS.
[[Page 1619]]
Table 5--Fairbanks Modeled Attainment Summary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base year 2020 5- Future 5-year Future 5-year
year PM2.5 PM2.5 modeling PM2.5 modeling
Fairbanks PM2.5 air quality monitor modeling design design value design value
value ([micro]g/ ([micro]g/m\3\), ([micro]g/m\3\),
m\3\), 2017-2021 2026 2027
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Pole (Hurst Road)................................ 64.9 38.1 31.9
NCORE.................................................. 27.7 19.8 18.4
A Street............................................... 34.8 24.5 22.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: State Air Quality Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.9, Table 7.9-12.
Alaska noted that even if emission controls were applied for
precursor pollutants within applicable source sectors for which
precursor significance determinations have been made (i.e.,
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions from major stationary sources in the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area), the reduction in secondary
PM<INF>2.5</INF> from such controls would not be sufficient to advance
attainment sooner than 2027.\151\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\151\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section
III.D.7.9.3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, Alaska asserted that this evaluation demonstrates that
2027 is the most expeditious attainment date based on currently
available data and demonstrate attainment ``as expeditiously as
practicable.''
4. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action Regarding the Attainment
Demonstration and Modeling
The EPA proposes to approve Alaska's attainment demonstration as
meeting the requirements under 40 CFR 51.1011(b). Alaska demonstrated
that the 2027 projected attainment date for the Serious nonattainment
area is as expeditious as practicable. The attainment demonstration
meets the requirements of Appendix W and includes inventory data,
modeling results, and emissions reduction analyses on which the state
has based its projected attainment date. As discussed in section II.A
of this preamble, the base year for the emissions inventories for
Alaska was 2020, which the EPA is proposing to determine is the
technically appropriate inventory year. The EPA is proposing to
determine that the control strategies in Alaska's SIP as rectified by
the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR
51.1010. Therefore, the control strategies modeled as part of the
attainment demonstration are consistent with the control strategies
required pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1003 and 51.1010. With respect to the
required timeframe for obtaining emissions reductions, all control
measures needed for attainment will be implemented as expeditiously as
practicable and implemented to attain the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by
2027.
Pursuant to CAA section 172(a)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1004(a)(3), the
EPA is proposing to extend the attainment date for the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area to December 31, 2027. As shown in
Table 5 of this preamble, the 2020 base year design value at the Hurst
Road monitoring station is 64.9 [micro]g/m\3\. This design value is
well above the PM<INF>2.5</INF> 24-hour NAAQS of 35 [micro]g/m\3\,
indicating the air quality problem in the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area remains severe. However, Alaska has demonstrated
that attainment earlier than 2027 is not feasible. Moreover, the EPA
has reviewed Alaska's evaluations (and re-evaluations) of available
control measures and proposes to determine that Alaska's control
strategy meets the requirements of CAA section 189(b) and 189(d) and 40
CFR 51.1010. By extension, the EPA proposes to determine that there are
no other feasible measures that Alaska could implement that would
advance attainment to a date earlier than December 31, 2027.
As discussed in section II.E of this preamble regarding Reasonable
Further Progress, the primary drivers of emissions reductions will be
continued implementation of the wood stove change out program, the
Solid Fuel-Burning Appliance Curtailment Program, and the switch from
diesel no. 2 fuel oil to diesel no. 1 fuel oil. The rate of wood stove
change-outs in a single season is constrained based on the availability
of certified installers and residential demand. Similarly, higher
sulfur fuel cannot feasibly be eliminated from the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area until 2026 \152\ due to the time
necessary to expend all residual diesel no. 2 fuel oil and for diesel
no. 1 to fully flush out any remaining higher sulfur residue. Finally,
Alaska conducted a recent assessment of compliance with the Solid Fuel-
Burning Appliance Curtailment Program that indicated a compliance rate
of 38 percent.\153\ Given the variability of compliance with this
program in past, Alaska does not project a near-term improvement in the
compliance rate. Therefore, the EPA has considered the severity of
nonattainment and the availability and feasibility of control measures
as required under CAA section 172(a)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.1004(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\152\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section
III.D.7.10, Table 7.10-4.
\153\ State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix
III.D.7.9, at p. Appendix III.D.7.14-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Reasonable Further Progress
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Regarding Reasonable Further
Progress
Pursuant to CAA section 172(c) and 40 CFR 51.1012, each attainment
plan for a PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment area shall include Reasonable
Further Progress (RFP) provisions that demonstrate that control
measures in the area will achieve such annual incremental reductions in
emissions of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan
precursors as are necessary to ensure attainment of the applicable
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable. As discussed in
section I of this preamble, on September 2, 2020, the EPA determined
that the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area failed to attain
the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS by the applicable December 31,
2019, Serious area attainment date. Therefore, the EPA is proposing to
evaluate any previously unmet Serious area planning obligations,
including RFP and quantitative milestone requirements, based on the
current, applicable attainment date appropriate under CAA section
189(d) and not the original Serious area attainment date. In accordance
with 40 CFR 51.1012, the RFP plan shall include all of the following:
a. A schedule describing the implementation of control measures
during each year of the applicable attainment plan. Control measures
for Moderate area attainment plans are required in 40 CFR 51.1009, and
control
[[Page 1620]]
measures for Serious area attainment plans are required in 40 CFR
51.1010.
b. RFP projected emissions for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and all
PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan precursors for each applicable milestone year,
based on the anticipated implementation schedule for control measures
required by 40 CFR 51.1009 and 51.1010. For purposes of establishing
motor vehicle emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes
(as required in 40 CFR part 93, subpart A) for a PM<INF>2.5</INF>
nonattainment area, the state shall include in its RFP submission an
inventory of on-road mobile source emissions in the nonattainment area
for each milestone year.\154\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\154\ For an evaluation of motor vehicle emission budgets, see
section II.H of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. An analysis that presents the schedule of control measures and
estimated emissions changes to be achieved by each milestone year, and
that demonstrates that the control strategy will achieve reasonable
progress toward attainment between the applicable base year and the
attainment year. The analysis shall rely on information from the base
year inventory for the nonattainment area required in 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1) and the attainment projected inventory for the
nonattainment area required in 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(2), in addition to the
RFP projected emissions required in 40 CFR 51.1012(a)(2).
d. An analysis that demonstrates that by the end of the calendar
year for each milestone date for the area determined in accordance with
40 CFR 51.1013(a), pollutant emissions will be at levels that reflect
either generally linear progress or stepwise progress in reducing
emissions on an annual basis between the base year and the attainment
year. A demonstration of stepwise progress must be accompanied by
appropriate justification for the selected implementation schedule.
2. Summary of the EPA's Prior Rulemaking Regarding Reasonable Further
Progress
The EPA disapproved the RFP provisions in the Fairbanks Serious
Plan and Fairbanks 189(d) Plan because the control strategies in those
prior plans did not include all required control measures.\155\ This
caused uncertainty as to whether the RFP provisions of those plans
accurately projected progress towards the most expeditious attainment
year, per CAA section 172(c)(2) and 40 CFR 51.1012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\155\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at p. 84676.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Summary of the State's Submission Regarding Reasonable Further
Progress
The Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan includes updated RFP provisions
at State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.10.\156\
Consistent with the attainment demonstration provisions discussed in
the preceding paragraphs, these updated RFP provisions reflect the
attainment year of 2027.\157\ The updated RFP analysis includes a
schedule that includes 2020 as the base year, 2027 as the attainment
year, and the following years as RFP and quantitative milestone
analysis years: 2023, 2026, and 2029.\158\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\156\ Adopted November 5, 2024.
\157\ RFP provisions in prior SIP submissions for the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area reflected varying projected
attainment dates. Initially Alaska submitted an RFP plan in the
Fairbanks Serious Plan based on the projected attainment year of
2029. Alaska withdrew and replaced the RFP plan in the Fairbanks
189(d) plan based on the revised 2024 attainment projection.
\158\ See State Air Quality Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.10.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska included an analysis of implementation of all control
measures that establishes the scheduled phase-in of each measure
adopted and estimation of emissions reductions for each significant
pollutant (also accounting for the overlapping of measures to eliminate
double counting) for each milestone year based on the phase-in
schedule. Alaska calculated the RFP and quantitative milestone (QM)
milestone year emissions reduction targets based on linear progress
towards attainment by 2027. Based on the control measure phase-in
schedule, Alaska calculated projected emissions reductions for each
pollutant in each milestone year and compared these emissions
reductions to their targets to evaluate linear progress toward
attainment.
Alaska has continued to assess the appropriate compliance rate
estimate. As Alaska noted in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, the
State is currently utilizing funding from the 2019-2020 TAG to purchase
three dynamic message highway signs and an infrared camera and to
expand staffing to increase compliance.\159\ Alaska continues to
conduct field studies during the wintertime to observe compliance
rates. Based on the recent 2022-2023 wintertime field study, Alaska
determined that the combined compliance rate in Fairbanks and the North
Pole is 38.1 percent. Based on these observations and the increased use
of TAG funding to improve compliance, Alaska increased its compliance
estimate with the curtailment program to 38 percent for the 2023 model
year, an increase from 30 percent in 2020. Alaska plans to conduct
additional wintertime curtailment program compliance observations to
inform anticipated improvements in compliance beyond 2023. For the
attainment year projected emissions inventory, Alaska stated that it
conservatively assumed no further compliance rate increases pending
further evaluation of additional wintertime compliance
observations.\160\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\159\ State Air Quality Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.9.1.1.
\160\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska stated that direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions reductions
achieved within the first two milestone years (2023 and 2026) achieve
stepwise progress.\161\ However, reductions in direct PM<INF>2.5</INF>
emissions in the attainment year of 2027 reflect linear progress.
According to Alaska's submission, this is attributable to a spike in
participation in the wood stove change out program anticipated by 2027
(based on increased incentives and deadlines for older device turnover)
and gradual improvements in household compliance with control
strategies impacting solid fuel-burning devices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\161\ State Air Quality Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.10.3.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to SO<INF>2</INF>, Alaska stated that SO<INF>2</INF>
emissions reductions are expected to be non-linear but includes early
year (2023 and 2026) progress that significantly exceeds the linear
progress trajectory.\162\ Alaska stated that this non-linearity in
control measure reductions for SO<INF>2</INF> is due to two causes.
First, most of the measures designed to reduce direct PM<INF>2.5</INF>
through removal, curtailment, or replacement of solid-fuel devices
trigger a shift from space heating devices that emit high levels of
direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> to oil-fired devices that emit very low levels
of direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> (but can lead to higher levels of
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions depending on the fuel sulfur content). Second,
initial reductions in SO<INF>2</INF> emissions are the result of Alaska
implementing an SO<INF>2</INF>-specific control measure in 2022
mandating a shift from diesel no. 2 to diesel no. 1 heating oil. Thus,
emissions reductions for SO<INF>2</INF> exhibit stepwise rather than
linear progress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\162\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding NH<INF>3</INF>, Alaska stated that linearly established
targets for NH<INF>3</INF> will not be met until the forecasted 2027
attainment year.\163\ Alaska noted that the increases in NH<INF>3</INF>
emissions are not due to control measure benefits or lack thereof.
Although Alaska adopted and implemented control measures to reduce
NH<INF>3</INF>, Alaska did not calculate any NH<INF>3</INF> emissions
reductions for these measures for the purposes of RFP due to
[[Page 1621]]
the large uncertainty in NH<INF>3</INF> emissions factors for key
sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\163\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action Regarding Reasonable
Further Progress
The EPA is proposing to approve the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan
as meeting the RFP requirements in CAA section 172(c)(2) and 40 CFR
51.1012. The RFP provisions in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan meet
each of the requirements in 40 CFR 51.1012(a)(1)-(4). First, the RFP
provisions include a schedule describing the implementation of control
measures during each year of the applicable attainment plan.\164\
Second, the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan includes RFP projected
emissions for direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and all PM<INF>2.5</INF> plan
precursors for each applicable milestone year based on the phase-in
schedule.\165\ Third, the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan includes an
analysis that presents the schedule of control measures and estimated
emissions changes to be achieved by each milestone year: 2023, 2026,
and 2029.\166\ This analysis relies on information from the base year
inventory and attainment projected inventories in State Air Quality
Control Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.8, as well as the RFP projected
emissions. The analysis demonstrates that the control strategy will
achieve reasonable progress toward attainment between the applicable
base year and the attainment year.\167\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\164\ Id. at section III.D.7.10.3.2; See also State Air Quality
Control Plan, Vol. III, Appendix III.D.7.10.
\165\ Id. at section III.D.7.10.3.3, Table 7.10-5.
\166\ Id. at section III.D.7.10.3.2, Table 7.10-4.
\167\ Id. at section III.D.7.10.3, Tables 7.10-4-7.10-5; Figures
7.10-3-7.10-5. Note that NH<INF>3</INF> emissions are projected to
increase from base year to the projected attainment year. As
discussed in the preceding paragraphs regarding the control
strategy, the EPA either has previously approved Alaska's control
strategy as meet planning requirements for sources of
NH<INF>3.</INF> This is primarily because there are either no
controls for sources of NH<INF>3</INF> emissions in the Fairbanks
PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area or the direct PM<INF>2.5</INF>
emissions controls are sufficient to control NH<INF>3</INF>
emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan includes an analysis
that demonstrates that by the end of the calendar year for each
milestone date, pollutant emissions will be at levels that reflect
either linear progress or stepwise progress in reducing emissions on an
annual basis between the base year and attainment year. As discussed in
section II.E.3 of this preamble, Alaska's projections for reductions in
direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> reductions closely track linear progress. The
EPA proposes to determine that the slight deviations from linear
progress in the initial years of implementation are justified. The EPA
recognizes the episodic nature of wood-stove change outs and the time
lag between state enforcement and deterrence.
With respect to SO<INF>2</INF> emissions reductions, Alaska
projects emissions well below linear progress in 2023 and 2026
milestone years. As discussed in section II.E.3 of this preamble, the
early-year reductions are due to near-term implementation of the
control strategy requirement to switch to lower sulfur fuels. These
early reductions are consistent with the overall goal of achieving
attainment as expeditiously as practicable.\168\ The EPA proposes to
determine that Alaska adequately justified the leveling off of
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions reductions in 2027 as due to the near-term
implementation of the fuel switch as well as the increase in
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions from residents switching from solid fuel-fired
heating devices to liquid fuel-fired heating devices to comply with
other measures in the control strategy targeting sources of direct
PM<INF>2.5</INF>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\168\ See CAA section 189, 42 U.S.C. 7513a, Addendum to the
General Preamble, 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994), at p. 42016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, with respect to NH<INF>3</INF>, the EPA proposes to
determine that Alaska adequately justified the increase in emissions.
The EPA has previously approved Alaska control strategy for
NH<INF>3</INF>, noting that sources in the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area emit a negligible amount of NH<INF>3</INF> and there
are no specific controls for the types of sources in the area.\169\
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to approve the Fairbanks Revised 189(d)
Plan as meeting the RFP requirements in CAA section 172(c)(2) and 40
CFR 51.1012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\169\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at p. 84636
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Quantitative Milestones
1. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements Regarding the Quantitative
Milestones
In accordance with CAA section 189(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1013, the
state must submit in each attainment plan for a PM<INF>2.5</INF>
nonattainment area specific quantitative milestones that provide for
objective evaluation of RFP toward timely attainment of the applicable
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the area.
For an attainment plan submission for a Serious area subject to the
requirements of CAA section 189(d) and 40 CFR 51.1003(c), each plan
shall contain quantitative milestones that provide for objective
evaluation of reasonable further progress toward timely attainment of
the applicable PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the area.\170\ At a minimum,
each plan for an area subject to CAA section 189(d) must include QMs
for tracking progress achieved in implementing the SIP control measures
by each milestone date.\171\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\170\ 40 CFR 51.1013(a)(3).
\171\ 40 CFR 51.1013(a)(3)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the preamble to the PM<INF>2.5</INF> SIP Requirements Rule, the
EPA stated that it interprets the CAA as allowing states to identify
milestones that are suitable for the specific facts and circumstances
of the attainment area.\172\ The EPA suggested possible metrics,
including tracking air quality improvement, tracking emissions
reductions, percentage implementation of control strategies, or percent
compliance with implemented control measures.\173\ Finally, the EPA
stated in the preamble that quantitative milestones will be met by
showing that emissions reductions scheduled to be made between the SIP
due date and the attainment date were actually achieved.\174\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\172\ Id.
\173\ 81 FR 58010, Aug. 24, 2016, at pp. 58064, 58104.
\174\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the specific timeframe for the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Nonattainment Area, per 40 CFR 51.1013(a)(4), each attainment plan
submission for an area designated nonattainment for the 1997 and/or
2006 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS before January 15, 2015, shall contain
quantitative milestones to be achieved no later than 3 years after
December 31, 2014, and every 3 years thereafter until the milestone
date that falls within 3 years after the applicable attainment date.
2. Summary of the EPA's Prior Action Regarding the Quantitative
Milestones
The EPA disapproved the quantitative milestones in the Fairbanks
Serious Plan and Fairbanks 189(d) Plan because the control strategies
in those prior plans did not include all required control
measures.\175\ This caused uncertainty as the whether the quantitative
milestones were based on progress towards the most expeditious
attainment year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\175\ 88 FR 84626, December 5, 2023, at p. 84676.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Summary of the State's Submission Regarding the Quantitative
Milestones
Alaska submitted revised quantitative milestones in the Fairbanks
Revised 189(d) Plan. As noted in section II.E of this preamble,
Alaska's updated RFP analysis is based on a schedule that includes 2020
as the base year, 2027 as the attainment year, and the following years
as quantitative milestone years:
[[Page 1622]]
2023, 2026, and 2029.\176\ Alaska used emissions reductions achieved
compared to projected emissions reductions as the metric to objectively
evaluate progress toward attainment.\177\ Alaska calculated expected
emissions reductions based on the control measure phase-in
schedule.\178\ In its Quantitative Milestone Reports required by CAA
section 189(c) and 40 CFR 51.1013(b), Alaska reported the emissions
reductions achieved by the end of the milestone year compared to the
projected emissions reductions included in the quantitative milestone
provisions in the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, specifically, State
Air Control Quality Plan, Vol. II, section III.D.7.10.3. Alaska made
clear that the state will include in its QM reports completion
statistics and phase-in percentages for each measure included in the
Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan.\179\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\176\ See State Air Quality Control Plan, Vol. II, section
III.D.7.10.2.
\177\ Id.
\178\ Id. at section III.D.7.10.3.3, Table 7.10-5.
\179\ Id. at section III.D.7.10.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan, one of Alaska's
reasons for selecting emissions reductions achieved compared to
projected emissions reductions as the objective metric is because doing
so allows Alaska to take credit for emissions reductions from voluntary
measures that are not part of its control strategy.\180\ Alaska
provided the example of emissions reductions attributable to natural
gas expansion. As discussed further below in section II.F.4 of this
preamble, the EPA disagrees with this specific rationale for allowing
the state to take credit for emissions reductions from voluntary
measures that are not part of its control strategy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\180\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action Regarding the Quantitative
Milestones
The EPA is proposing to approve the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan
as meeting the quantitative milestone requirements of CAA section
189(c)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1013. First, in accordance with 40 CFR
51.1013(a)(3)(ii) and (4), the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan includes
quantitative milestones for the years 2023, 2026, and 2029. Second, the
Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan includes phase-in metrics for each
measure in the control strategy, including measures necessary to meet
the BACM and BACT requirements in CAA section 189(b) and 40 CFR
51.1010(a) and the requirements of CAA section 189(d) and 40 CFR
51.1010(c).
Finally, the measures allow for objective evaluation of RFP. As
stated in the preceding paragraphs, the EPA interprets the CAA as
allowing states to identify milestones that are suitable for the
specific facts and circumstances of the attainment area. The EPA
proposes to determine that Alaska's quantitative milestones provide
objective evaluation of RFP and are suitable for the specific facts and
circumstances for the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area.
Although the EPA agrees that comparing emissions reductions achieved to
projected emissions reductions allows for objective evaluation of RFP
for the Fairbanks PM<INF>2.5</INF> Nonattainment Area, the EPA
disagrees with Alaska's stated rationale for selecting this metric. The
purpose of QMs is to provide an objective evaluation of the state's
implementation of the SIP control measures.\181\ Therefore, crediting
emissions reductions attributable to non-SIP measures toward achieving
a QM is inconsistent with CAA section 189(c) and 40 CFR 51.1013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\181\ See 40 CFR 51.1013(a)(3)(ii) (``At a minimum, each
quantitative milestone plan must include a milestone for tracking
progress achieved in implementing the SIP control measures by each
milestone date.'') (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nevertheless, using emissions reductions as the metric is
appropriate for the Fairbanks Revised 189(d) Plan because of the
overlapping nature of control measures and associated emissions
reductions, particularly those focused on the space heating area source
sector. Specifically, the implementation of specific measures designed
to reduce emissions from solid fuel-fired burning devices impa
[…truncated; see source link]Indexed from Federal Register on January 8, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.