Rule2026-10770
Approval of Source-Specific Air Quality Implementation Plan; New York; Calpine JFK Energy Center
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
May 29, 2026
Effective
June 29, 2026
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is approving a revision to the State of New York's State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) related to a source-specific SIP (SSSIP) revision for Calpine JFK Energy Center, located at Kennedy International Airport (JFK), Building 49, Jamaica, NY 11430 (the Facility). The EPA found that the control options in this SSSIP revision implement Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) with respect to Oxides of Nitrogen (NO<INF>X</INF>) emissions from the relevant Facility sources, which are identified as six mid-size emergency hot water boilers (the Boilers). This SSSIP revision implements NO<INF>X</INF> RACT for the relevant Facility sources in accordance with the requirements for implementation of the 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS. The EPA determined that this action will not interfere with ozone NAAQS requirements and meets all applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 103 (Friday, May 29, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 103 (Friday, May 29, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31925-31928]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-10770]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R02-OAR-2025-0290; FRL-12965-02-R2]
Approval of Source-Specific Air Quality Implementation Plan; New
York; Calpine JFK Energy Center
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) is
approving a revision to the State of New York's State Implementation
Plan (SIP) for the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
related to a source-specific SIP (SSSIP) revision for Calpine JFK
Energy Center, located at Kennedy International Airport (JFK), Building
49, Jamaica, NY 11430 (the Facility). The EPA found that the control
options in this SSSIP revision implement Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) with respect to Oxides of Nitrogen (NO<INF>X</INF>)
emissions from the relevant Facility sources, which are identified as
six mid-size emergency hot water boilers (the Boilers). This SSSIP
revision implements NO<INF>X</INF> RACT for the relevant Facility
sources in accordance with the requirements for implementation of the
2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS. The EPA determined that this action will not
interfere with ozone NAAQS requirements and meets all applicable
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This final rule is effective on June 29, 2026.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID Number EPA-R02-OAR-2025-0290. All documents in the docket are
listed on the <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information (CBI), Proprietary Business
Information (PBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available
electronically through <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Lin, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
New York 10007-1866, telephone number: (212) 637-3711, email address
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e38f8a8dcd909786938b828d8a86a3869382cd848c95"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="68040106461b1c0d18000906010d280d1809460f071e">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What is the background for this action?
II. What comments were received in response to the EPA's proposed
action?
III. What action is the EPA taking?
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background for this action?
On November 17, 2025 (90 FR 51263), the EPA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking for the SSSIP revision submitted by the State of
New York on June 9, 2023 proposing to determine that the emission limit
of 0.15 lb/MMBtu per hour for each of the Facility's Boilers when
firing natural gas, and 0.25 lb/MMBtu per hour when firing distillate
oil (emissions not to exceed 24 tpy on a rolling 12-month basis)
implements RACT. The 6 New York Codes, Rules and Regulations (NYCRR)
subpart 227-2 presumptive NO<INF>X</INF> limit for the Boilers of 0.08
lbs/MMBtu is not economically and technologically feasible for this
source, and no additional control technologies beyond what are
currently used at the Boilers are technically and economically
feasible. The emission limit also has associated monitoring and
reporting requirements. The State's June 9, 2023 SIP submittal consists
of the SSSIP Revision for the Facility, the NO<INF>X</INF> RACT
evaluation from January 2022, and the public notice in the
Environmental Notice Bulletin on March 22, 2023.
The Facility supplies electricity to JFK and the Consolidated
Edison Power Distribution Grid. The Facility also supplies steam to
JFK's central heating and refrigeration plant. The Facility's Boilers
are used intermittently to supplement hot water generation at the
airport when the combustion turbine-based cogeneration units are
unavailable or cannot meet demand.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
(NYSDEC) RACT regulations establish RACT requirements for this category
of sources in 6 NYCRR subpart 227-2, ``Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) For Major Facilities of Oxides of Nitrogen
(NO<INF>X</INF>),'' last approved into New York's SIP by the EPA on
July 12, 2013 (78 FR 41846). However, the NYSDEC RACT regulations allow
source-specific RACT determinations (or variances) if the presumptive
RACT requirements are not technologically or economically feasible;
such source-specific determinations must be submitted to the EPA as a
SSSIP. See 6 NYCRR subpart 227-2.5(c).
This SSSIP was submitted to EPA by NYSDEC on June 9, 2023. The EPA
has reviewed the RACT determination in this SSSIP submittal for
consistency with the CAA and EPA regulations, as interpreted through
EPA actions and guidance. The intended effect of this source-specific
SIP revision is to establish an emission limit for the process specific
control measure for the Boilers.
The EPA is determining through this approval action that the
NO<INF>X</INF> RACT emission limit for the Boilers submitted by the
State in this SSSIP submittal is the lowest emission limit with the
application of control technology that is reasonably available given
technological and economic feasibility considerations. The
NO<INF>X</INF> RACT emission limit is contained in the Facility's air
permit, Title V operating permit, 2-6308-00096/00009 under conditions
56, 57, 58, emission unit B-OILRS issued by the State on June 28, 2022,
and expires on June 27, 2027. EPA is approving the incorporation of
permit conditions 56, 57, and 58 into the SIP. These conditions include
monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements for the Boilers
further described in the EPA RACT analysis below.
The Facility submitted a RACT demonstration, dated January 2022, to
NYSDEC for the emission limit requirements, and NYSDEC reviewed and
approved the emission limit as adequately implementing RACT for the
[[Page 31926]]
source. NYSDEC then submitted the source-specific SIP revision package
at issue in this action for the EPA approval. In this action, the EPA
is determining the emission limit implements RACT for this source. The
RACT variance emission limit for the Facility becomes part of the
federally enforceable SIP upon the EPA's final approval of this SSSIP.
The EPA has determined that the emission limit of 0.15 lb/MMBtu per
hour for each of the Boilers when firing natural gas, and 0.25 lb/MMBtu
per hour when firing distillate oil (emissions not to exceed 24 tpy on
a rolling 12-month basis) implements RACT because: (1) the 6 NYCRR
subpart 227-2 presumptive NO<INF>X</INF> limit for the Boilers of 0.08
lbs/MMBtu is not economically and technologically feasible for this
source; (2) no additional control technologies beyond what are
currently used at the Boilers are technically and economically
feasible; and (3) the SIP revision contains monitoring and reporting
requirements.
The specific details of New York's SIP submittals and the rationale
for the EPA's approval action are explained in the EPA's proposed
rulemaking and are not restated in this final action. For this detailed
information, the reader is referred to the EPA's November 17, 2025
proposed rulemaking (90 FR 51263). Within this final rulemaking, the
EPA is approving conditions 56, 57, and 58 from Permit ID No. 2-6308-
00096/00009 for incorporation by reference into New York's SIP.
II. What comments were received in response to the EPA's proposed
action?
The EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period for the
November 17, 2025 proposed rule (90 FR 51263). The comment period ended
on December 17, 2025. During the 30-day public comment period, the EPA
received four comments in response to the EPA's November 17, 2025
proposed rulemaking on New York's SIP revision submittal (90 FR 51263).
After reviewing the comments, the EPA has determined that one commenter
provided feedback that is outside the scope of our proposed rule or
fails to identify any material issue necessitating a response. More
specifically, this comment did not raise issues relevant to the EPA's
proposed rule, and, therefore, the EPA will not provide a specific
response to this comment. The EPA received comments from three
commenters that are relevant and significant to the EPA's proposed
rule, warranting a response from the EPA. The relevant comments are
summarized below and followed by an EPA response. The specific comments
may be viewed under Docket ID Number EPA-R02-OAR-2025-0290 on the
<a href="https://regulations.gov">https://regulations.gov</a> website.
Comment 1
One commenter identifies procedural and analytical deficiencies
under the incorporation by reference requirements of 1 CFR part 51, the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), and the Regulatory Flexibility Act/Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (RFA/SBREFA). The comment
also requested that the EPA include brief determinations that the rule
will not trigger the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and that the
action is not significant under E.O. 12866. The comment also asked if
EPA relied on the ``good-cause'' exemption of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA).
Response 1
The EPA acknowledges the commenter's petition. The incorporation-
by-reference requirements are already addressed in this action, and the
APA ``good-cause'' exemption was not used for this action. With regard
to the UMRA, the EPA has complied by making its own determination that
this rule will not result in expenditures of $100 million or more, and
therefore the Agency does not need to complete a statement under 2
U.S.C. 1532. The RFA and SBREFA are inapplicable to this rule because
the EPA has certified that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The
regulatory analysis provisions of the RFA are only triggered by a
threshold determination by the Agency that this rule will have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Because the Agency has certified this rule will not have a significant
economic impact, section 603 and 604 of the RFA do not apply to this
rule. See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). The EPA has complied with the PRA by
certifying in the rule that the PRA does not apply because the action
does not involve an information collection burden as defined by the
Act. See 44 U.S.C. 3502(2). Lastly, the Agency has complied with E.O.
12866 by determining that this rule is not a significant regulatory
action as defined in E.O. 12866.
Comment 2
One comment was submitted by James McGuire from Metuchen, New
Jersey. The comment states that ``[NYSDEC] applied a rigid standard to
reject potential alternatives and did not thoroughly analyze all
potential emission reduction alternatives; thus, the EPA should not
approve the NYSDEC's [SSSIP] controls for the [Boilers] and require the
NYSDEC to re-analyze potential alternatives. The EPA has found that New
York (and the [Facility]) is an Ozone Transport Region (OTR) and is in
non-attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
for ozone. 42 U.S. Code 7511c. To reduce ozone emissions in this area,
the CAA requires emitters to install [RACT] on all ozone-emitting
sources. 42 U.S.C. 7511c. To comply with the CAA, the NYSDEC created
presumptive RACT requirements that impose emission limits and specific
control technologies on ozone emitters. See 6 NYCRR subpart 227-2.4.
However, a source can request a source-specific RACT with a higher
emission limit if it demonstrates that the presumptive control measures
are not technically or economically feasible. See 6 NYCRR subpart 227-
2.5(c). NYSDEC's RACT analysis was insufficient and does not justify
permitting this source to emit above the presumptive limits because it
applied a rigid cost-effective test and did not fully consider all
available emission control systems. NYSDEC analyzed three potential
emission control options--fuel switching, low-NO<INF>X</INF> burners,
and flue gas recirculation--and found these methods technically
feasible, but not economically feasible because each method went above
New York's cost reduction threshold. EPA Technical Support Document
(TSD) Docket (EPA-R02-OAR-2025-0290) (pages 17 through 19). This
analysis, however, does not adequately balance this cost against the
environmental harm. Congress designed RACT to require sources to weigh
economic feasibility against environmental benefits, not a rigid cost
reduction threshold. Given that this facility is in a non-attainment
zone for ozone and currently has no emission controls at all, the
NYSDEC should have investigated the potential health effects of this
source more thoroughly and weighed those costs to the public against
the economic costs to the source. Additionally, NYSDEC approved the
facility's RACT plan even though the facility did not fully analyze all
reasonably available alternatives. According to the Reasonably
Available Control Technology, Best Available Control Technology, Lowest
Achievable Emission Rate Clearinghouse (RBLC), which lists existing
control measures for specific sources, there is an additional emissions
control measure, selective catalytic reduction (SCR), which the
facility did not discuss in its plan. The
[[Page 31927]]
NYSDEC excused this, stating that this method was not common and not
cost effective. EPA TSD Docket (EPA-R02-OAR-2025-0290) (page 26). This
excuse does not hold up, given that Congress sought to require sources
to consider all reasonably available emissions controls, not just the
most common. 42 U.S.C. 7511a(b)(2). Given that another source
successfully implemented this SCR emissions control at the Lackawanna
Energy Center in Pennsylvania and recorded their work in the RBLC, it
seems that this strategy is reasonably available, although still
uncommon. Additionally, it is unclear how the NYSDEC determined that
SCR controls are not cost-effective when the facility performed no
comparative analysis of this emission control. Thus, the NYSDEC and the
facility did not properly analyze all possible alternatives. Because
the NYSDEC and the facility did not perform an adequate analysis of the
possible alternatives to justify a source specific implementation plan
the EPA should not approve this plan and require the NYSDEC and
facility to complete a proper comparative analysis. This will ensure
that New York continues to reduce their pollution and achieve
compliance with the NAAQs to achieve the CAA's statutory goals.''
Response 2
The EPA acknowledges the commenter's concerns about alternative
RACT controls such as SCR. However, NYSDEC confirmed that the size of
the boilers (mid-size) was enough to dismiss the evaluation of SCR.
SNCR and SCR are only considered for large size boilers. According to
the Alternative Control Techniques (ACT) Document--NO<INF>X</INF>
Emissions from Industrial/Commercial/Institutional (ICI) Boilers,
``SNCR and SCR controls have been applied primarily to larger boilers
or new packaged boilers because these applications offer better control
of temperature window and steady load demands.'' \1\ The Facility
analyzed technologically feasible emission control options and
determined that none were also economically feasible. The ACT document
also states that low-NO<INF>X</INF> burners (LNB) are the most cost-
effective control for single burner water tube boilers, but the
Facility's analysis found LNB to be over the State's cost threshold.
Therefore, because SCR is less cost-effective than LNB, SCR will also
be, by definition, over the State's cost threshold, according to Table
2-7 of the ACT document. Under the State's regulation (DAR-20), NYSDEC
established the cost threshold to define economic feasibility (based on
1994 dollars, then adjusted for inflation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Alternative Control Techniques, NO<INF>X</INF> Emissions
from Industrial, Commercial & Institutional Boilers (<a href="https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=2000INCA.txt">https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=2000INCA.txt</a>).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 3
One comment was submitted by Shea Centore that states, ``I do not
support making an exception and believe they should revise.''
Response 3
EPA thanks the commenter for their input but without any
substantial evidence supporting otherwise, this action will proceed for
the reasons set forth above.
III. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is approving the Facility's SSSIP revision submittal dated
June 9, 2023 because the limits included in the SSSIP are demonstrated
to implement RACT for emission unit B-OILRS, which represents the
Boilers. Based on information provided by NYSDEC, a thorough RBLC
review of similar sources and EPA's ACT and Control Techniques
Guidelines (CTG), and an analysis of this SSSIP revision, the EPA has
determined the Facility's operation under the NYSDEC approved
NO<INF>X</INF> emission limits for the Facility's Boilers implements
RACT.
Specifically, the EPA has determined the following limits and
associated requirements as implementing RACT. The Facility must: (1)
have a maximum total emissions of 24 tons/yr of NO<INF>X</INF> from the
Boilers, on a rolling 12-month basis, with the total monthly
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions for each boiler calculated on a monthly basis;
(2) maintain records of monthly NO<INF>X</INF> emissions in a
permanently bound log or in electronic format with reporting
requirements annually and reports due 30 days after the reporting
period; (3) have a maximum NO<INF>X</INF> emission rate of 0.15 lb/
MMBtu per hour for each of the Boilers when firing natural gas, and
0.25 lb/MMBtu per hour when firing distillate oil; and (4) conduct
NO<INF>X</INF> emission testing once every five years to verify that
the actual NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from a particular boiler are less
than the maximum limits per hour when firing low sulfur distillate oil
or natural gas.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that
includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of
1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference
revisions to the Facility's Title V operating permit conditions 56, 57,
58 as described in section I and II of this preamble. These documents
are available in the docket of this rule through <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Therefore, these materials have been approved by
the EPA for inclusion in the State Implementation Plan, have been
incorporated by reference by the EPA into that plan, are fully
federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the
effective date of the final rule of the EPA's approval, and will be
incorporated by reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this action:
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
<bullet> Is not an Executive Order 14192 (90 FR 9065, February 6,
2025) regulatory action because this action is not significant under
Executive Order 12866;
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
<bullet> Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
<bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it approves a State program;
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
[[Page 31928]]
<bullet> Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA.
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian Tribe has
demonstrated that a Tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have Tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This rule is exempt from the Congressional Review Act because it is
a rule of particular applicability.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by July 28, 2026. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See CAA section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Michael Martucci,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart HH--New York
0
2. Amend Sec. 52.1670, in the table in paragraph (d), by adding the
entry ``Calpine JFK Energy Center'' at the end of the table to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1670 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
EPA--Approved New York Source-Specific Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Name of source Identifier No. effective EPA approval date Comments
date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Calpine JFK Energy Center........ 2-6308-00096/00009 6/28/2022 5/29/2026, 91 FR RACT emission limit
[INSERT FEDERAL for condition 56,
REGISTER PAGE WHERE 57, and 58,
THE DOCUMENT emission unit B-
BEGINS]. OILRS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2026-10770 Filed 5-28-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on May 29, 2026.
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.