Rule2026-20638
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; New Jersey; RACT Certifications for the 2008 and 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
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
October 8, 2026
Effective
November 9, 2026
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of New Jersey for purposes of certifying and meeting the requirements for Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for the Serious classification of the 2008 and the Moderate classification of the 2015 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The EPA is also approving that the SIP revisions fulfill SIP requirements pertaining to the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. These actions are being taken in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 194 (Thursday, October 8, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 194 (Thursday, October 8, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64289-64295]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-20638]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R02-OAR-2026-0793, FRL-13420-02-R2]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; New
Jersey; RACT Certifications for the 2008 and 2015 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of New Jersey
for purposes of certifying and meeting the requirements for Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT) for the Serious classification of
the 2008 and the Moderate classification of the 2015 8-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The EPA is also
approving that the SIP revisions fulfill SIP requirements pertaining to
the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. These
actions are being taken in accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This final rule is effective on November 9, 2026.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID Number EPA-R02-OAR-2026-0793. 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: Fausto Taveras, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Programs Branch, Region 2, 290 Broadway, New
York, New York 10007-1866, at (212) 637-3378, or by email at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#72261304170013015c34130701061d321702135c151d04"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1743766172657664395176626463785772677639707861">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this final rule, the use of
``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is intended to refer to the EPA. We use
multiple abbreviations and terms in this final rule. While this list
may not be exhaustive, for ease of reading and for reference purposes,
the EPA defines the following terms and acronyms here:
ACT--Alternative Control Techniques
ASNCR--Advanced Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction
BACT--Best Available Control Technology
CAA--Clean Air Act
CBI--Confidential Business Information
CTG--Control Techniques Guidelines
EG--Emission Guideline
EPA--Environmental Protection Agency
FR--Federal Register
LAER--Lowest Achievable Emission Rate
LN--Low NO<INF>X</INF>
MACT--Maximum Achievable Control Technology
MWC--Municipal Waste Combustors
NAA--Nonattainment Area
NAAQS--National Ambient Air Quality Standards
N.J.A.C.--New Jersey Administrative Code
NJDEP--New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
NO<INF>X</INF>--Nitrogen Oxides
NSPS--New Source Performance Standards
NYMA--New York Metropolitan Area
OTC--Ozone Transport Commission
OTR--Ozone Transport Region
PBI--Proprietary Business Information
PPMVD--Parts Per Million by Volume, Dry
[[Page 64290]]
RACT--Reasonably Available Control Technology
SIP--State Implementation Plan
TSD--Technical Support Document
VOC--Volatile Organic Compounds
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. What action is the EPA taking?
B. What is the legal authority and what are the requirements?
II. Background
III. Summary of New Jersey's Submittal
IV. The EPA's Evaluation of New Jersey's Submittal
V. Comments the EPA Received on its Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Executive Summary
A. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is approving New Jersey's SIP revisions dated November 23,
2021, and March 3, 2025, addressing RACT for: (1) the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the New Jersey portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-
Long Island Serious nonattainment area, consistent with CAA section
182(c); (2) the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS (Moderate classification) in
the NYMA, consistent with CAA section 182(b)(2); (3) the statewide 2015
ozone RACT obligation within the OTR, consistent with CAA section
184(b)(1); (4) and the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS (Moderate
classification) for the New Jersey portion of the Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City (PA-NJ-MD-DE) Moderate nonattainment area,
consistent with CAA section 182(b)(2). The EPA has reviewed New
Jersey's RACT certification demonstration and determined that the
State's regulatory requirements for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
and Oxides of Nitrogen (NO<INF>X</INF>) emissions from major sources
accomplish a RACT level of control for both pollutants.
B. What is the legal authority and what are the requirements?
The EPA finds that New Jersey's SIP contains adequate provisions
addresses the requirements of CAA sections 172(c)(1), 182(b)(2),
182(c), 182(f), and 184(b)(1)(B).
II. Background
On July 23, 2026, the EPA proposed to approve a SIP revision
submitted by the State of New Jersey on November 23, 2021, for purposes
of meeting the requirement for RACT \1\ for the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS
in New Jersey's portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island
(NY-NJ-CT) nonattainment area (also referred to as the New York Metro
Area or NYMA) for the Serious classification.\2\ The EPA also proposed
to approve that same submittal for meeting New Jersey's RACT
requirements for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the NYMA and for
meeting the State's requirements for statewide RACT for the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS within the Ozone Transport Region (OTR). In the July 2026
proposed rulemaking, the EPA also proposed to approve New Jersey's
March 3, 2025, RACT certification submitted for the New Jersey portion
of the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City (PA-NJ-MD-DE) 2015 ozone
NAAQS Moderate nonattainment area.\3\ The State's January 2021 and
March 2025 SIP submittals consisted of a RACT certification
demonstration that New Jersey continues to meet the RACT requirements
for the two precursors for ground-level ozone, i.e., NO<INF>X</INF> and
VOCs, set forth by the CAA with respect to the 2008 and 2015 8-hour
ozone standards. Therefore, the EPA proposed to approve New Jersey's
January 2021 and March 2025 RACT SIP submittals as it applies to non-
control technique guideline (non-CTG) major sources of VOCs, Control
Technique Guidelines (CTG) sources of VOCs and to major sources of
NO<INF>X</INF>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The EPA has defined RACT as the lowest emission limitation
that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of
control technology that is reasonably available considering
technological and economic feasibility (44 FR 53762, September 17,
1979).
\2\ See 91 FR 46351 (July 23, 2026).
\3\ On June 4th, 2026, the EPA issued a final rule, under the
authority of CAA section 107(d)(3)(D), to approve a request from the
States of Maryland and Delaware to revise the Philadelphia
nonattainment area. Specifically, the action revises the original
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE nonattainment
area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and 2015 ozone NAAQS into three
separate nonattainment areas that together cover the identical
geographic area of the original nonattainment area. This action
resulted in New Jersey being included within the revised
Philadelphia-Atlantic City, PA-NJ, 2008 and 2015 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area (91 FR 33610, June 4, 2026). For the remainder of
this notice, only the Philadelphia-Atlantic City, PA-NJ, 2008 and
2015 8-hour ozone nonattainment area consistent with 40 CFR part
81.331 is referenced in regard to New Jersey's RACT certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In New Jersey's November 23, 2021, RACT submittal for the Serious
classification of the 2008 ozone standard, Moderate classification for
the 2015 ozone Standard, and OTR requirements related to the 2015 ozone
NAAQS, New Jersey recertified that its previously approved negative
declaration for various CTGs remain valid. New Jersey certified that
there are no sources located in the State for the following CTGs: (1)
Manufacture of Vegetable Oils; \4\ (2) Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber
Tires (EPA-450/2-78-030, Dec. 1978); (3) Aerospace Coatings (EPA-453/R-
97-004, Dec. 1997); (4) Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations; \5\
(5) Metal Furniture Coatings (EPA 453/R-07-005, Sep. 2007); (6) Large
Appliance Coatings (EPA 453/R-07-004, Sept. 2007); and (7) Auto and
Light Duty Truck Original Equipment Manufacturer Assembly Coatings (EPA
453/R-08-006, Sep. 2008). On May 13, 2019, New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP) submitted a SIP revision to EPA
consisting of a negative declaration of the October 2016 Oil and
Natural Gas Control Techniques Guidelines (EPA-453/B-16-001) (2016 Oil
and Gas CTG). On May 18, 2020, EPA issued a final approval of New
Jersey's negative declaration for the 2016 Oil and Gas CTG.\6\ In the
July 23, 2026, notice of proposed rulemaking, the EPA proposed that the
State's negative declaration for the CTGs listed above remain valid and
satisfies the requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS Serious
classification, the 2015 ozone standard Moderate classification and
requirements associated with the OTR for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. In its
March 3, 2025, SIP submission, New Jersey affirms that the negative
declarations for the CTGs identified in this section remain valid and
applicable to the New Jersey portion of the Philadelphia-Atlantic City
(PA-NJ) 2015 ozone NAAQS Moderate nonattainment area. In this action,
the EPA is approving the State's negative declaration for the CTGs
listed above remains valid and satisfies the requirements for the 2008
ozone NAAQS Serious classification, the 2015 ozone standard Moderate
classification and requirements associated with the OTR for the 2015
ozone NAAQS.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The CTG for the manufacturing of vegetable oils was
published in June 1978 (see EPA-450/2-78-035) but in a March 1980
guidance document, entitled ``Guidance for the Control of Volatile
Organic Compounds Emitted by Ten Selected Source Categories,'' EPA
advised that the ``States are not required, at this time, to develop
regulations for the vegetable oil manufacturing industry.'' EPA
guidance has not been revised since the March 1980 guidance. At this
time, EPA considers the vegetable oil CTG as only guidance for
States when they need to develop attainment plans in nonattainment
areas.
\5\ See 61 FR 44050 (August 27, 1996).
\6\ See 85 FR 29627 (May 18, 2020).
\7\ See 83 FR 50506 (October 9, 2018), 85 FR 29627 (May 18,
2020), and 40 CFR 52.1582(q).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Summary of New Jersey's Submittal
The specific details of New Jersey's SIP submittals are not
restated in this final action. For this detailed information, the
reader is referred to the EPA's July 23, 2026, proposed rulemaking.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 91 FR 46351 (July 23, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 64291]]
IV. The EPA's Evaluation of New Jersey's Submittal
The rationale for the EPA's approval action is explained in the
EPA's proposed rulemaking and is not restated in this final action. For
this detailed information, the reader is referred to the EPA's July 23,
2026, proposed rulemaking.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Comments the EPA Received on its Proposed Action
During the 30-day public period, the EPA received two comments in
response to the EPA's July 23, 2026, proposed rulemaking on New
Jersey's SIP revision submittal.\10\ The EPA received comments from a
private citizen that were submitted to strengthen the record in support
of approval, rather than to oppose it, and that requested clarification
of certain aspects of New Jersey's 2008 and 2015 ozone RACT
certifications in the State's November 23, 2021, and March 3, 2025, SIP
revisions. Separately, the EPA received consolidated comments from
Camden for Clean Air, Center for Environmental Transformation,
Ironbound Community Corporation, New Jersey Environmental Justice
Alliance, and Earthjustice, that were submitted to oppose the EPA's
July 23, 2026, proposed action.\11\ Following review of the comments
received, the EPA has determined that these comments warrant a
response. 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-2026-0793 on the <a href="https://regulations.gov">https://regulations.gov</a> website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Id.
\11\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 1
A comment from a private citizen was offered to strengthen the
record for the EPA's approval of New Jersey's 2008 and 2015 ozone RACT
certification. Separately, the commenter notes that New Jersey's RACT
control program is among the more stringent program within the Ozone
Transport Region. Specifically, the commenter requests that the EPA
provided the following clarifications on New Jersey's 2008 & 2015 Ozone
RACT certifications: (1) that the EPA place in the docket a category-
by-category table listing each Control Techniques Guidelines/
Alternative Control Techniques (CTG/ACT) category, the relevant New
Jersey Administrative Code provisions, the date of its last substantive
revisions, and a comparison to current recommended control levels, and
a verification of State's negative declarations for relevant CTG/ACT
document; (2) provide clarity in regards to New Jersey's separate
obligations to address RACT requirements for the Severe-classification
of the 2008 ozone NAAQS that were due May 7, 2024, and to address RACT
requirements for the Serious-classification of the 2015 ozone NAAQS
that were due January 1, 2026; and (3) identify where the SIP's
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting provisions are for New
Jersey's RACT regulations for each covered category, and whether these
provision address Ozone Transport Region requirements.
Response 1
The EPA acknowledges the commenter's support of the EPA July 23,
2026, proposed rule. To address the commenter's first request, the EPA
notes that a Technical Support Document (TSD) was already prepared as
part of the proposed rulemaking and is available in the docket for this
action. The TSD addresses the commenter's request by providing EPA's
technical evaluation of New Jersey's CTG-based VOC RACT regulations.
This TSD is available in the docket for this rulemaking.\12\
Specifically, the TSD outlines the EPA expanded evaluation of New
Jersey's November 23, 2021, and March 3, 2025, RACT certification SIP
submittals for the 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS, and was developed
consistent with the EPA's December 19, 2024, ``Ozone NAAQS Resource
Document: Due Diligence Review Framework for Air Agencies Developing
RACT SIP Revisions.'' \13\ Specifically, the TSD analysis presents
tabular comparisons of New Jersey's CTG-based VOC regulations to the
underlying CTGs and to analogous rules in New York and Pennsylvania,
while also cross-references EPA's RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse and EPA
Menu of Control Measures, and identifies related New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants, where applicable. Within this TSD, the EPA identifies
occasions where the existing New Jersey VOC regulations feature more
stringent emission limits, controls, and/or lower thresholds of
applicability than the recommendations contained in the CTG documents
and from neighboring OTR States.\14\ Separately, Table 2 of the EPA's
July 23, 2026, proposed rulemaking identifies the relevant RACT
controls regulations that have been promulgated by NJDEP and identifies
the corresponding CTG or ACT that the control measure addresses, and
the corresponding most recent EPA SIP approval consistent with the
commenter's request.\15\ In addition to this, in Appendix 11-1 of New
Jersey's November 23, 2021, SIP submission, the State performed a
state-to-state RACT analysis and compared presumptive NO<INF>X</INF>
RACT rule limits for major non-CTG sources located throughout the OTR.
Results of the State's analysis showed that New Jersey's presumptive
NO<INF>X</INF> RACT emission limits for sources including boilers,
stationary combustion/reciprocating engines, asphalt pavement
production plants, glass manufacturing furnaces, municipal solid waste
incinerators, and sewage sludge incinerators were either more stringent
or consistent with other States within the OTR. Also, results of the
State's comparison RACT analysis displayed that New Jersey's RACT
emission standards feature more stringent averaging times compared to
other States within the OTR. Within Appendix 11-1, New Jersey also
presents a technological and economic assessment evaluating whether
additional NO<INF>X</INF> reductions at various major sources,
including Municipal Solid Waste Incinerators and Boilers serving
Electric Generating Units, are feasible beyond current implemented and
enforced control requirements. A copy of New Jersey's Appendix 11-1 is
also provided in the docket of this rulemaking.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See EPA-R02-OAR-2026-0793.
\13\ <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/resource-document-air-agencies-developing-ract-sip-revisions-ozone">https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/resource-document-air-agencies-developing-ract-sip-revisions-ozone</a>.
\14\ While developing this TSD, the EPA conducted a thorough
assessment of the 2020 National Emission Inventory to verify New
Jersey's CTG negative declarations submitted within the State's
November 23, 2021, and March 3, 2025, SIP revisions. Following this
assessment, the EPA has verified that New Jersey's negative
declaration for the CTGs outlined in this action remains valid and
satisfies the requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS Serious
classification, the 2015 ozone standard Moderate classification and
requirements associated with the OTR for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. See
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-R02-OAR-2026-0793-0001">https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-R02-OAR-2026-0793-0001</a>.
\15\ EPA approval dates for various New Jersey VOC and
NO<INF>X</INF> regulations revisions vary from 2010, 2018, 2020, and
2023.
\16\ See <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-R02-OAR-2026-0793-0005">https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-R02-OAR-2026-0793-0005</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the commenter's second clarification request, the EPA's
proposed July 23, 2026, rulemaking proposed to determine that New
Jersey has satisfied the following specific Clean Air Act obligations:
(1) the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS requirements for the New Jersey portion
of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island Serious nonattainment
area, consistent with CAA section 182(c); (2) the 2015 8-
[[Page 64292]]
hour ozone NAAQS requirements for the New York Metropolitan Area
(Moderate classification), consistent with CAA section 182(b)(2); (3)
the statewide 2015 ozone RACT obligation within the Ozone Transport
Region, consistent with CAA section 184(b)(1); and (4) the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS requirements for the New Jersey portion of the
Philadelphia-Atlantic City Moderate nonattainment area, consistent with
CAA section 182(b)(2).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See 91 FR 46351 (July 23, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained in the July 2026 proposal, New Jersey also has
outstanding obligations to submit additional RACT certifications for
the New Jersey portions of the NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area for the 2008
ozone NAAQS, consistent with CAA section 182(d), and for the NY-NJ-CT
and PA-NJ nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, consistent with
CAA section 182(c).\18\ The EPA continues to coordinate with NJDEP
regarding the status of these outstanding RACT certifications, which
will be addressed in future actions once submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding the commenter's third clarification request, the
reporting, monitoring, and recordkeeping provisions associated with New
Jersey's VOC CTG-based regulations are contained under Title 7, Chapter
27, of New Jersey's Administrative Code (N.J.A.C. 7:27) Subchapter
16.22. The EPA most recently approved revisions of N.J.A.C. 7:27
Subchapter 16 on November 28, 2023.\19\ While the reporting,
monitoring, and recordkeeping provisions of New Jersey's NO<INF>X</INF>
non-CTG based regulation are contained under N.J.A.C. 7:27 Subchapters
19.17, 19.18, and 19.19. Similarly, the EPA most recently approved
revisions of N.J.A.C 7:27 Subchapter 19, which include revisions to
N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.19, on November 28, 2023.\20\ During the EPA's
thorough review of New Jersey's RACT certification demonstration, which
include review of the control strategies, reporting, monitoring, and
recordkeeping requirements associated with the State's NO<INF>X</INF>/
VOC RACT regulations, the EPA determined that these requirements
accomplish a RACT level of control for both pollutants and address CAA
obligations associated with CAA sections 172(c)(1), 182(b)(2), 182(c),
182(f), and 184(b)(1)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See 88 FR 83036 (November 28, 2023).
\20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 2
Consolidated comments from Camden for Clean Air, Center for
Environmental Transformation, Ironbound Community Corporation, New
Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance, and Earthjustice (Commenters)
requested that the EPA issue a limited approval of New Jersey's RACT
certification, and limited disapproval of New Jersey's existing
NO<INF>X</INF> emission limit for Municipal Waste Combustors (MWCs).
The Commenters argue that New Jersey's existing 150 parts per million
volume, dry (ppmvd) calendar-day NO<INF>X</INF> limit is no longer RACT
and should be updated to reflect lower limits that they contend are
achievable with currently available control technologies, including
both the proprietary Low NO<INF>X</INF> (LN) technology of the Reworld
company (formally Covanta) and Advanced Selective Non-Catalytic
Reduction (ASNCR).
The Commenters cite the EPA's prior final Good Neighbor Plan for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS, in which EPA recognized that both Reworld's LN
technology and ASNCR could enable applicable municipal waste combustor
units to the Federal Implementation Plan to achieve a 24-hour
NO<INF>X</INF> limit of 110 ppmvd and a 30-day limit of 105 ppmvd.\21\
They note that EPA proposed similar NO<INF>X</INF> limits, supported by
comparable control technologies, in the EPA's recent CAA section 111(d)
Emission Guidelines for existing large MWC codified at 40 CFR part 60,
subpart WWWW.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See 88 FR 36654 (June 5, 2023).
\22\ See 91 FR 11802 (March 10, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commenters also note that the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC)
have issued a June 2021 OTC Municipal Waste Combustor Workgroup Report
(OTC MWC Report) which determined that the emissions limits of 105
ppmvd on a 30-day rolling average and a 110 ppmvd on a 24-hour block
average could be achieved for most large MWCs located within the OTR
using several different technologies, or combination of technologies at
a reasonable cost.\23\ The Commenters note that the OTR, including New
Jersey, also submitted supporting comments on the EPA's prior proposed
amendments to the NSPS and Emission Guidelines (EG) for large MWC,
which at the time included a 24-hour NO<INF>X</INF> limit of 110 ppmvd
and a 30-day NO<INF>X</INF> limit of 105 ppmvd.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Ozone Transport Commission, Municipal Waste Combustors
Workgroup Report, 23 (May 2023), <a href="https://otcair.org/upload/Documents/Reports/OTC%20MWC%20report%20revised%205_2023.pdf">https://otcair.org/upload/Documents/Reports/OTC%20MWC%20report%20revised%205_2023.pdf</a>.
\24\ Letter from Francis C. Steitz, Chair, OTC Stationary & Area
Source Committee to Lee Zeldin, Administrator, EPA, Standards of
Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for
Existing Sources: Large Municipal Waste Combustors Voluntary Remand
Response and 5-Year Review, 2 (May 30, 2025), <a href="https://otcair.org/upload/Documents/Correspondence/20250530-otc-sas-lmwc-comments-to-epa-final.pdf">https://otcair.org/upload/Documents/Correspondence/20250530-otc-sas-lmwc-comments-to-epa-final.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Commenters as well note occasions in which of
States and Districts like Pennsylvania and California South Coast
recently adopting the 110 ppmvd (24-hour) NO<INF>X</INF> emission limit
within the State's respective MWC NO<INF>X</INF> emission control
regulations.\25\ The commenter also notes an occasion in which the EPA
approved a source-specific SIP for a Convanta-owned MWC facilities
located in Virginia which utilized its proprietary low NO<INF>X</INF>
control technology to achieve a NO<INF>X</INF> emission limit of 110
ppmvd on a 24-hour average, and an annual average of 90 ppmvd.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See 25 Pa. Code Sec. 129.112(f) and South Coast Air
Quality Management District Rule 1165, Control of Emissions from
Municipal Solid Waste Incinerators 12 1165-5 (Sept. 6, 2024).
\26\ See 84 FR 67196 (December 9, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commenters rely on these actions to support their position that
lower NO<INF>X</INF> limits are achievable for these sources.
Response 2
On November 6, 2024, the EPA issued a final rule to
administratively stay the effectiveness of the 2015 Good Neighbor Plan
requirements for all sources covered by that rule as promulgated where
an administrative stay was not already in place.\27\ This action was
taken to comply with a stay order issued by the United States Supreme
Court.\28\ Essentially, the EPA's administrative stay of the 2015 Good
Neighbor Plan indefinitely paused implementation of the Plan's
requirements for applicable power plants and other industrial
facilities, including the NO<INF>X</INF> emission standards for MWCs,
in the States covered by the Federal Implementation Plan. Those
requirements remain stayed pending the disposition of the applicants'
petition for review in the D.C. Circuit while the EPA takes further
rulemaking action consistent with the court's merits decisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See 89 FR 87960 (November 6, 2024).
\28\ Ohio v. EPA, 603 U.S. 279 (2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsequently, on March 12, 2025, the EPA announced that the Agency
would reconsider the 2015 Good Neighbor Plan.\29\ Following this, on
January 30, 2026, the EPA proposed phase 1 of its reconsideration of
the 2015 Good Neighbor Plan, which proposed to approve SIP submissions
from eight states regarding interstate transport for the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.\30\ In this
[[Page 64293]]
proposed action, the EPA announced that it would take a separate future
rulemaking to address interstate transport obligations for the 2015 8-
hour ozone NAAQS for the remaining States covered in the final Good
Neighbor Plan, which includes New Jersey.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/trump-epa-announces-plan-work-states-sips-improve-air-quality-and-reconsider-good">https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/trump-epa-announces-plan-work-states-sips-improve-air-quality-and-reconsider-good</a>.
\30\ See 91 FR 4026 (January 30, 2026). States included in the
EPA's Phase 1 Good Neighbor Plan Reconsideration are Alabama,
Arizona, Kentucky, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, and
Tennessee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 10, 2026, the EPA issued its rulemaking to finalize the
NSPS and EG for the Large Municipal Waste Combustion source category,
codified under 40 CFR part 60 Subpart VVVV and WWWW, respectively.\31\
Within this action, the EPA ultimately did not finalize the proposed
110 ppmvd (24-hour average) NO<INF>X</INF> limit for existing large
MWCs based on the more stringent five-year review NO<INF>X</INF> limit.
Instead, for existing MWC sources, the EPA finalized NO<INF>X</INF>
emission standards based on reevaluated Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) floor NO<INF>X</INF> limits.\32\ Additionally, the
EPA explained that at proposal the Agency excluded units expected to be
covered by the former Good Neighbor Plan from the $257 million capital
cost.\33\ Inclusion of the compliance cost for those units
significantly increased the total estimated capital cost to $412
million, which the agency noted could hinder government funded
municipalities' ability to continue to utilize large MWCs for the
public disposal needs.\34\ For these reasons, the EPA did not finalize
the proposed 110 ppmvd (24-hour average) NO<INF>X</INF> limit for
existing MWC sources and instead finalized NO<INF>X</INF> emission
limits based on the MACT floor reevaluation rather than the five-year
review results proposed in the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See 91 FR 11802 (March 10, 2026).
\32\ A MACT floor is the EPA's minimum technology-based emission
standard for a source category. Essentially, it's the emission limit
based on the performance achieved in practice by the best performing
units in the category. For existing units, the floor is based on the
average emission performance achieved by the top 12 percent of the
best-performing sources currently operating in the industry.
\33\ See 89 FR 4243 (January 23, 2024).
\34\ See 91 FR 11802 (March 10, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's review of the recently finalized Large MWC Clean Air Act
section 111(d) emission guidelines, codified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart
WWWW, indicates that New Jersey's currently SIP-approved RACT
requirements for MWCs remain more stringent than the NO<INF>X</INF>
limits finalized in the March 2026 Large MWC emission guidelines.
Appendix B of the Ozone Transport Region's June 2021 MWC report
identifies the combustor type of each MWC in the OTR, including New
Jersey, and shows that all New Jersey MWCs are mass-burn waterwall
units. Under 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWWW, existing mass-burn waterwall
MWCs must comply with a NO<INF>X</INF> limit of 205 ppmvd at 7 percent
O2 on a 24-hour average. By contrast, New Jersey's MWC RACT rule,
N.J.A.C. 7:27, subchapter 19.12, requires mass-burn waterwall MWCs in
the State to meet a more stringent 150 ppmvd at 7 percent O2, 24-hour
average limit. Also, the EPA's recent Large MWC EG requires existing
affected units to comply as expeditiously as practicable after State
Plan approval, which are due March 10, 2027, but no later than three
years after approval of the state plan or five years after promulgation
of the revised standard, whichever is earlier. Because New Jersey
already has federally-approved MWC RACT requirements in place, the
affected units are already subject to more stringent NO<INF>X</INF>
emission limits.
Finally, the commenter notes that States and districts such as
Pennsylvania and the South Coast Air Basin in California have recently
adopted a 110 ppmvd 24-hour NO<INF>X</INF> emission limit in their
respective regulations. However, those regulations have not yet been
approved into the SIP and were adopted by the States on November 11,
2022, and September 6, 2024, respectively, subsequent to New Jersey's
RACT certification for the 2008 Serious and 2015 Moderate
classifications.\35\ As noted earlier in this action, New Jersey
submitted its RACT certification on November 23, 2021, to address Clean
Air Act obligations associated with the New York Metropolitan Area for
the 2008 ozone Serious classification, the 2015 ozone Moderate
classification, and the statewide Ozone Transport Region requirements
applicable to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On March 3, 2025, New Jersey
submitted a SIP revision extending its November 23, 2021, RACT
certification for the 2015 ozone NAAQS to the New Jersey portion of the
PA-NJ nonattainment area, following that area's reclassification to
Moderate for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, effective November 7, 2022.\36\ The
EPA is acting on New Jersey's 2008 and 2015 ozone RACT certifications
as they apply to the lower and less stringent classifications addressed
in this action. As stated earlier, New Jersey also remains obligated to
submit RACT certifications for the Severe and Serious classifications,
for the 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS respectively, which the EPA will
address in a forthcoming action. The EPA will continue to coordinate
with NJDEP to ensure that these remaining RACT obligations are
addressed and to consider any relevant developments since the State's
prior certification submittals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See 40 CFR part 52, subpart NN, section 52.2020 and 40 CFR
part 52, subpart F.
\36\ See 87 FR 60897 (October 7, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the commenter points to EPA's approval of source-
specific SIPs for Covanta-owned MWC facilities in Fairfax and the City
of Alexandria, Virginia, where the facilities relied on Covanta's
proprietary low-NO<INF>X</INF> control technology to achieve a
NO<INF>X</INF> limit of 110 ppmvd on a 24-hour average and 90 ppmvd on
an annual average.\37\ As noted in the rulemaking, Virigina's RACT
regulations for major sources of NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC, under 9VAC5-
40-7400 and 7420, do not outline presumptive NO<INF>X</INF> emission
limits for MWCs and that applicable facilities must conduct a source-
specific (or case-by-case) determination of what constitutes RACT.\38\
With this approach, what constitutes RACT for one facility may not
constitute RACT for another, because the analysis can vary depending on
the source's equipment, operations, costs, and surrounding conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See 84 FR 67196 (December 9, 2019).
\38\ In determining case-by-case RACT determinations, many State
Air Agencies utilize the top-down control technology approach: (1)
identify all available control alternatives; (2) assess technical
feasibility; and (3) evaluate remaining technologies in order of
control effectiveness considering: expected emission reduction
measured in tons per year (tons/yr), economic impacts measured in
dollar per ton of pollutant removed ($/ton), environmental impacts,
and energy impacts. If the top control alternative is not selected
as RACT, the rationale for rejection must be documented. The next
most stringent control alternative is then assessed, and the process
continues until RACT is determined.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding Covanta's implementation of its proprietary Low-
NO<INF>X</INF> control technology, the EPA acknowledges that other MWCs
not operated by Covanta may not be able to use the technology because
of its proprietary nature. Based on the EPA's review of recent stack
testing data for existing MWCs located in New Jersey, the Agency
determined that only the Covanta-operated facilities appear capable of
achieving a NO<INF>X</INF> emission limit of approximately 110
ppmvd.\39\ Furthermore, as the EPA explained in the final large MWC
rule, the 110 ppmvd NO<INF>X</INF> limit (24-hour average) was
associated with the
[[Page 64294]]
application of ASNCR or Covanta Low-NO<INF>X</INF> technology, and the
EPA recognized that those controls had been used to achieve that
performance level.\40\ By contrast, New Jersey's MWC RACT rule,
N.J.A.C. 7:27, subchapter 19.12, establishes presumptive emission
limits that all applicable units must meet statewide. In the EPA's
review of New Jersey's MWC RACT regulation, the agency has determined
the State's 150 ppmvd (24-hour average) emission limit is currently
either more stringent, or comparable to, the limits adopted by most
Ozone Transport Region States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Appendix 11-1 of New Jersey's November 2021 SIP submission
identifies, for various MWC units located statewide, the facility
name, location, applicable NO<INF>X</INF> controls, current permit
limits, and stack test average NO<INF>X</INF> emissions. Based on
EPA's review, it appears that only the Covanta facilities utilizing
proprietary low-NO<INF>X</INF> technology are capable of meeting the
110 ppmvd emission limit. Stack testing data for the remaining
Wheelabrator facility, which does not employ the proprietary
technology, indicate that it is capable of achieving the 150 ppmvd
presumptive RACT limit established by NJDEP.
\40\ See 91 FR 11802 (March 10, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This concludes our response to the comments received. No changes
have been made to the proposed rule as a result of the comments
received.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves State law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this 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, Oct. 4, 1993);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive order 14192 (90 FR 9065, Feb.
6, 2025) because SIP actions are exempt from review 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, Aug. 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, Apr.
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
<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 Clean Air Act.
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, Nov. 9, 2000).
This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and the EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by December 7, 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 section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Michael Martucci,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR part 52 is
amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart FF--New Jersey
0
2. In Sec. 52.1570(e), in the table, add entries for ``2008 8-hour
Ozone Serious RACT Analysis and Certification'' and ``2015 8-hour Ozone
RACT Analysis and Certification'' to the end of the table to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1570 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved New Jersey Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable geographic New Jersey
SIP element or nonattainment area submittal date EPA approval date Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2008 8-hour Ozone Serious RACT New Jersey portion of 11/23/2021 10/8/2026, <bullet> Full
Analysis and Certification. the New York-Northern [insert Federal approval.
New Jersey-Long Register <bullet> Certifies
Island NY-NJ-CT 8- citation]. New Jersey has met
hour ozone the RACT
nonattainment area. requirements as it
applies to non-CTG
major sources of
VOCs, all CTG
sources of VOCs, and
to major sources of
NOX for the New
Jersey portion of
the New York-
Northern New Jersey-
Long Island NY-NJ-CT
2008 8-hour Ozone
Serious
nonattainment area.
[[Page 64295]]
2015 8-hour Ozone RACT Statewide, New Jersey 11/23/2021 10/8/2026, <bullet> Full
Analysis and Certification. portion of the New [insert Federal approval.
York-Northern New Register <bullet> Certifies
Jersey-Long Island NY- citation]. New Jersey has met
NJ-CT 8-hour ozone the RACT
nonattainment area, requirements as it
New Jersey portion of applies to non-CTG
the Philadelphia- major sources of
Atlantic City PA-NJ 8- VOCs, all CTG
hour ozone sources of VOCs, and
nonattainment area. to major sources of
NOX for the New
Jersey portions of
the New York-
Northern New Jersey-
Long Island NY-NJ-CT
and Philadelphia-
Atlantic City PA-NJ
8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas.
<bullet> Certifies
New Jersey's
commitment to meet
RACT statewide
within the Ozone
Transport Region
(OTR) for the 2015
Ozone NAAQS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Amend Sec. 52.1582 by revising paragraph (q)(1) and adding
paragraphs (q)(2) through (8) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1582 Control strategy and regulations: Ozone.
(q) * * *
(1) Oil and Natural Gas Industry (October 2016).
(2) Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires (December 1978).
(3) Aerospace Coatings (December 1997).
(4) Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations (August 1996).
(5) Metal Furniture Coatings (September 2007).
(6) Large Appliance Coatings (September 2007).
(7) Auto and Light Duty Truck Original Equipment Manufacturer Assembly
Coatings (September 2008).
(8) [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2026-20638 Filed 10-7-26; 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 October 8, 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.