61850 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

appendix. If the conventional cooking top is Program, including provisions for you wish to make. The EPA will capable of operating in off mode, as defined penalties on the total annual SO2 generally not consider comments or in section 1.17 of this appendix, measure the emissions from sources covered by the comment contents located outside of the average off mode power of the conventional rule exceeding a proposed assurance primary submission (i.e., on the web, cooking top, POM, in watts as specified in section 3.1.1.1.2 of this appendix. level. cloud, or other file sharing system). For 3.2.2 Combined cooking product standby DATES: Comments must be received on additional submission methods, the full mode and off mode power. Make or before January 13, 2020. EPA public comment policy, measurements as specified in section 3.1.2 of Public Hearing: A public hearing, if information about CBI or multimedia this appendix. If the combined cooking requested, will be held in Room 5220, submissions, and general guidance on product is capable of operating in inactive 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, making effective comments, please visit mode, as defined in section 1.14 of this http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ appendix, measure the average inactive mode Texas 75270 on December 9, 2019 commenting-epa-dockets. power of the combined cooking product, PIA, beginning at 1:00 p.m. If you wish to in watts as specified in section 3.1.2.1 of this request a hearing and present testimony Docket: The index to the docket for appendix. If the combined cooking product is or attend the hearing, you should notify, this action is available electronically at capable of operating in off mode, as defined on or before November 27, 2019, Ms. http://www.regulations.gov and in hard in section 1.17 of this appendix, measure the Jennifer Huser, Air and Radiation copy at the EPA Region 6, 1201 Elm average off mode power of the combined Division (ARSH), Environmental Street, Suite 500, Dallas, Texas 75270. cooking product, POM, in watts as specified Protection Agency Region 6, 1201 Elm in section 3.1.2.2 of this appendix. While all documents in the docket are Street, Suite 500; telephone number: * * * * * listed in the index, some information (214) 665–7347; email address: may be publicly available only at the [FR Doc. 2019–24331 Filed 11–13–19; 8:45 am] [email protected]. Oral testimony BILLING CODE 6450–01–P hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted will be limited to 5 minutes each. The material), and some may not be publicly hearing will be strictly limited to the available at either location (e.g., CBI). subject matter of the proposal, the scope ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION of which is discussed below. Any FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: AGENCY member of the public may file a written Jennifer Huser, Air and Radiation statement by the close of the comment Division, Environmental Protection 40 CFR Parts 52 and 97 period. Written statements (duplicate Agency, Region 6, 1201 Elm Street, [EPA–R06–OAR–2016–0611; FRL–10001– copies preferred) should be submitted to Suite 500, Dallas, Texas 75270, 85–Region 6] Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2016– telephone 214–665–7347; email address 0611, at the address listed above for [email protected]. Promulgation of Air Quality submitted comments. The hearing Implementation Plans; State of Texas; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: location and schedule will be posted on Throughout this document wherever Regional Haze and Interstate Visibility EPA’s web page at https://www.epa.gov/ Transport Federal Implementation ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean publicnotices/notices-search/location/ the EPA. Plan: Proposal of Best Available Texas. Verbatim English—language Retrofit Technology (BART) and transcripts of the hearing and written A public hearing, if requested, will Interstate Visibility Transport statements will be included in the provide interested parties the Provisions rulemaking docket. If no requests for a opportunity to present information and opinions to us concerning our proposal. AGENCY: public hearing are received by close of Environmental Protection Interested parties may also submit Agency (EPA). business on November 27, 2019, a hearing will not be held, and this written comments, as discussed in the ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposal. Written statements and proposed rulemaking. announcement will be made on the web page at the address shown above. supporting information submitted SUMMARY: In this supplemental notice of For additional logistical information during the comment period will be proposed rulemaking (SNPRM), the regarding the public hearing please see considered with the same weight as any Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section oral comments and supporting is supplementing the proposal of this action. information presented at the public published on August 27, 2018 to affirm ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, hearing. We will not respond to the Agency’s October 2017 Federal identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– comments during the public hearing. Implementation Plan (FIP), which OAR–2016–0611, at http:// When we publish our final action, we partially approved the 2009 Texas www.regulations.gov or via email to R6_ will provide written responses to all Regional Haze State Implementation [email protected]. significant oral and written comments Plan (SIP) submission and promulgated Follow the online instructions for received on our proposal. a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for submitting comments. Once submitted, At the public hearing, the hearing Texas to address certain outstanding comments cannot be edited or removed officer may limit the time available for Clean Air Act (CAA) regional haze from Regulations.gov. The EPA may each commenter to address the proposal requirements. The October 2017 FIP publish any comment received to its to three minutes or less if the hearing established the Texas SO2 Trading public docket. Do not submit officer determines it to be appropriate. Program, an intrastate trading program electronically any information you We will not be providing equipment for for certain electric generating units consider to be Confidential Business commenters to show overhead slides or (EGUs) in Texas, as a Best Available Information (CBI) or other information make computerized slide presentations. Retrofit Technology (BART) alternative whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Any person may provide written or oral for sulfur dioxide (SO2). In response to Multimedia submissions (audio, video, comments and data pertaining to our certain comments received on the etc.) must be accompanied by a written proposal at the public hearing. Verbatim August 2018 proposal to affirm the comment. The written comment is English—language transcripts of the October 2017 FIP, we are proposing considered the official comment and hearing and written statements will be revisions to the Texas SO2 Trading should include discussion of all points included in the rulemaking docket.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules 61851

Table of Contents requirements for the following national the proposed revisions has been added I. Background ambient air quality standards (NAAQS): to the docket for this proposed action. (1) 1997 8-hour ozone; (2) 1997 PM II. Public Comment 2.5 1. Addition of Assurance Provisions III. Texas SO2 BART Alternative Trading (annual and 24-hour); (3) 2006 PM2.5 Program (24-hour); (4) 2008 8-hour ozone; (5) In the August 2018 proposal, EPA A. Proposed Changes to Specific Texas SO2 2010 1-hour NO2; and (6) 2010 1-hour proposed to affirm that the Texas SO2 Trading Program Features SO2. The August 2018 proposal contains Trading Program is an appropriate SO2 1. Addition of Assurance Provisions more detailed discussion of previous 2. Revision of Supplemental Allowance BART alternative for EGUs in Texas on Pool Allocation Provisions EPA actions on Texas Regional Haze the basis that the program ‘‘will achieve 3. Termination of Opt-In Provisions and the rationale for our proposed greater reasonable progress than BART 4. Revision of Allowance Recordation action to affirm. towards restoring visibility, consistent The comment period on the August Provisions with the June 2012 ‘CSAPR better than B. Interstate Visibility Transport 2018 proposal closed on October 26, BART’ and September 2017 ‘CSAPR still IV. Supplemental Proposed Action 2018. We received timely comments on better than BART’ determinations.’’ 4 V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews the proposal, and we will address all (Further background on those A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory comments received on the original Planning and Overview, Executive Order determinations is set forth in the August proposal and on this supplemental 13563: Improving Regulation and 2018 proposal.) In support, EPA Regulatory Review proposal in our final action. explained that the Texas SO2 Trading B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing II. Public Comment Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Program, despite some difference in the Costs We are reopening the public comment scope of coverage of EGUs, would be C. Paperwork Reduction Act period with respect to the specific comparable in stringency to, if not more D. Regulatory Flexibility Act proposed changes in this notice. stringent than, the CSAPR SO2 trading E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Comments are due January 13, 2020. program as applied to Texas sources.5 (UMRA) EPA is not reopening the comment EPA further explained that its analysis F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism of the stringency of the CSAPR program G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation period for any other aspects of our and Coordination With Indian Tribal August 2018 proposal. Comments was premised on the CSAPR program’s Governments should be limited to the items discussed structure of state emission budgets plus H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of in this supplemental proposal. ‘‘assurance levels.’’ 6 Children From Environmental Health In each of the CSAPR trading Risks and Safety Risks III. Texas SO2 BART Alternative I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Trading Program programs, EPA set an assurance level for Significantly Affect Energy Supply, each state in order to ensure that, Distribution, or Use A. Proposed Changes to Specific Texas despite the broad, interstate trading J. National Technology Transfer and SO2 Trading Program Features region, emissions reductions would be Advancement Act (NTTAA) In this supplemental proposal, EPA achieved appropriately in a K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions proposes to make four sets of geographically distributed way To Address Environmental Justice in amendments to the Texas SO Trading commensurate with states’ ‘‘good Minority Populations and Low-Income 2 Populations Program: (1) The addition of assurance neighbor’’ obligations as determined by provisions; (2) revisions to the EPA through its analysis under CAA I. Background Supplemental Allowance Pool section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).7 EPA set these On August 27, 2018, we proposed to allocation provisions; (3) termination of assurance levels for states by first affirm our October 2017 FIP and the opt-in provisions; and (4) revision of establishing a ‘‘variability limit’’ as a provided an opportunity to comment on the allowance recordation provisions. percentage of each state’s total emission relevant aspects of the rule, as well as The four subsections of this section budget in order to account for year-to- other specified related issues.1 To discuss each of these proposed sets of year variability in the amount of fossil address the SO2 BART requirements for amendments in turn, along with the fuel combusted to produce electricity EGUs, we proposed to affirm our associated rationales. In general, these required to meet customer demand. EPA October 2017 FIP, which relied on an proposed changes, if finalized, would then set the amount of each state’s 2 intrastate SO2 trading program as a strengthen our finding in October 2017, assurance level as the sum of the state’s BART alternative for certain EGUs in which we proposed to affirm in August budget and its variability limit.8 If a Texas (‘‘Texas SO2 Trading Program’’). 2018, that the Texas SO2 Trading state’s sources’ emissions exceed the We proposed to affirm our approval of Program will result in SO2 emission statewide assurance level, the emissions the portion of the 2009 Texas Regional levels from Texas EGUs that are similar above that level are ‘‘penalized’’ through Haze SIP that addresses the BART to or less than the emission levels from a three-to-one allowance surrender requirement for EGUs for particulate Texas EGUs that would have been ratio.9 The CSAPR assurance levels are matter (PM). We also proposed to affirm realized had Texas continued to thus designed to provide the sources in our determination that the BART participate in the SO2 trading program each state with a strong incentive not to alternatives addressing SO2 and under the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule exceed a state-specific target in any 3 nitrogen oxides (NOX) BART at Texas’ (CSAPR). compliance period, consistent with the EGUs were adequate to satisfy the The proposed changes to the Texas state-specific nature of the good interstate visibility transport SO2 Trading Program would be neighbor obligations, while providing implemented through revisions to the 1 83 FR 43586 (August 27, 2018). Additional existing regulations at 40 CFR part 97, 4 Id. at 43590. information regarding the regulatory background of subpart FFFFF. A redline/strike-out 5 Id. at 43591–92. the CAA and regional haze requirements can be document showing subpart FFFFF with 6 found in the October 2017 FIP, 82 FR 48324 (Oct. Id. at 43594–95. 17, 2017), and our January 2017 notice of proposed 7 76 FR 48208, 48265–66 (Aug. 8, 2011). rulemaking for Texas Regional Haze, 82 FR 912 2 82 FR 48324, 48329. 8 Id. at 48266–68. (Jan. 4, 2017). 3 See 83 FR at 43599. 9 83 FR at 43594–95.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61852 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

flexibility to respond to year-to-year 50,517 tons in the CSAPR SO2 budget anticipated to remain ‘‘well below’’ the variability in electricity demand.10 for Texas—EPA conducted a sensitivity 317,100 ton per year benchmark and The Texas SO2 Trading Program, as analysis for the 2012 final rule to assess would be similar to emissions promulgated in October 2017, does not the effects of the CSAPR budget anticipated under CSAPR. Relying on include an assurance level. In contrast adjustments, making a conservative this information, EPA concluded that to CSAPR, the Texas SO2 Trading assumption that SO2 emissions from the weight of evidence supported the Program does not allow for sources to Texas EGUs under CSAPR could conclusion that the Texas SO2 Trading purchase allowances from sources in potentially increase by the full amount Program met the requirements of a other states. Therefore, the number of of the Texas budget increase, or up to BART alternative.16 allowances available to the Texas 317,100 tons per year (266,600 + Commenters on the August 2018 sources is limited by the total number 50,517).13 Finally, we noted the results proposal identified several specific of allowances allocated under the of that sensitivity analysis, namely that concerns with the Texas SO2 Trading program. While this limits the average CSAPR was expected to provide for Program. EPA has considered these annual emissions under the program, greater reasonable progress than BART comments, and they inform this we recognize, as discussed in further nationwide even with potential SO2 supplemental proposal. Stated broadly, detail below, that the potential use of emissions from Texas EGUs under these commenters are concerned that banked allowances and allowances CSAPR as high as 317,100 tons.14 the Texas SO2 Trading Program is allocated from the Supplemental In our August 2018 proposal, EPA insufficiently stringent to meet the Allowance Pool could result in used this benchmark (317,100 tons of requirements for a BART alternative potentially significant year-to-year SO2 emissions per year) to gauge under 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2). Commenters variability in emissions. Therefore, the whether the Texas SO2 Trading Program specifically questioned EPA’s reliance EPA is proposing to add an assurance was sufficiently stringent for EPA to on the 317,100-ton benchmark and level provision to the Texas SO2 Trading continue to rely on the BART- argued that the Texas SO2 Trading Program in order to maintain alternative analysis we conducted in the Program would, unlike source-specific consistency with the CSAPR program 2012 ‘‘CSAPR better than BART’’ BART control requirements, allow for and to provide additional support for rulemaking. EPA found that the ‘‘annual emissions to increase compared to our determination that SO2 emissions average emissions’’ under the Texas SO2 recent emission levels. Commenters also under the Texas SO2 Trading Program Trading Program would remain below identified the availability of will remain below the requisite level on the 317,100 tons-per-year benchmark supplemental allowances, the issuance an annual basis. In order to explain our relied upon in the 2012 sensitivity of allocations to already-retired units, proposed determination of the analysis, because the yearly allocation the general method of allocating appropriate stringency at which to set to Texas EGUs under the Texas SO2 allowances, and the availability of the assurance level, in this Trading Program was 238,393 tons of unlimited allowance banking as features supplemental proposal we will first allowances, plus 10,000 tons allocated which, according to them, undermine 15 review our prior analysis of the to the Supplemental Allowance Pool. the stringency of the Texas SO2 Trading stringency of the Texas SO2 Trading Although there may be some year-to- Program. Program in the August 27, 2018 notice. year variability in emissions, EPA EPA proposes to reaffirm its finding We will then summarize the relevant reasoned that variability for units within that the current Texas SO2 Trading public comments EPA received on this the Texas program would be Program budget, in general, compares issue in response to that notice, and constrained by the number of banked favorably in stringency to the CSAPR propose an appropriate assurance level allowances and the number of SO2 trading program. Further, certain based on our review of the information. allowances that can be allocated in a features of the Texas SO2 Trading In the August 2018 proposal, we control period from the Supplemental Program that were raised as concerns by summarized relevant Texas-related Allowance Pool. (Annual allocations commenters, such as allocations to aspects of the 2011 proposed and 2012 from the Supplemental Allowance Pool retired units and use of allowance final ‘‘CSAPR better than BART’’ are limited to 54,711 tons.) The total banking, are consistent with elements of rulemaking.11 We described how, for number of allowances that can be the CSAPR trading programs. However, purposes of comparing the impacts of allocated in a single year is therefore EPA recognizes that the current Texas CSAPR and BART nationwide in the 293,104, which is the sum of the SO2 Trading Program, unlike CSAPR, 2011 proposed rule, EPA initially used 238,393-ton budget for existing units does not impose an ‘‘assurance level’’— a model projection of 266,600 tons for plus 54,711. EPA further explained that a total level of annual emissions above which units in the program would be Texas EGUs’ annual SO2 emissions certain sources that had been subject to under the CSAPR program.12 We then the CSAPR program, but which are not penalized with a higher allowance explained that because of intervening covered by the Texas SO2 Trading surrender ratio (i.e., a three-to-one rate) increases in some CSAPR emissions Program, emitted less than 27,500 tons than the one-to-one ratio that applies to budgets—including an increase of of SO2 in 2016 and their emissions were emissions below the assurance level. In not projected to significantly increase EPA’s analysis summarized above, EPA 10 For more information on assurance levels in the from this level. Taking into account relied on the number of allowances CSAPR program, see U.S. EPA, Cross-State Air these figures, as well as recent allocated annually to indicate ‘‘average’’ Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Fact Sheet—Assurance emissions data, EPA concluded that annual emission levels. This analysis Provisions, available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/ ‘‘annual average EGU emissions’’ under did not account for the variability in production/files/2016-05/documents/fact_sheet_ assurance_provisions_0.pdf and in the docket for the Texas SO2 Trading Program were emissions due to the availability of this action. banking or the build-up of allowances 11 See 83 FR at 43594–95 (citing 77 FR 33642 13 See Sensitivity Analysis Accounting for through allocations to retired units. (June 7, 2012)). Increases in Texas and Georgia Transport Rule State Although these features are available to 12 See Technical Support Document for Emissions Budgets, Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– sources participating in the CSAPR Demonstration of the Transport Rule as a BART 2011–0729–0323 (May 29, 2012), available in the Alternative, Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011– docket for this action. programs, their effect on emissions in 0729–0014 (December 2011), available in the docket 14 83 FR at 43595. for this action, at table 2–4. 15 Id. at 43598. 16 Id. at 43602.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules 61853

19 that program is significantly constrained assurance levels in the original CSAPR larger CSAPR SO2 trading program. In by the program’s assurance provisions. rulemaking. This approach maintains reaching that conclusion, EPA includes Although assurance levels in the consistency with the methodology used in its analysis a reasonable estimate of CSAPR program were, as discussed for the CSAPR programs while projected emissions from units that above, originally implemented to meet accounting for the fact that the Texas would have been in the CSAPR requirements relevant to interstate SO2 Trading Program is intrastate-only program, but are not in the Texas SO2 transport under the good neighbor (i.e., does not permit interstate trading). Trading Program. EPA proposes to use provision, this feature of the program On a state-specific basis for Texas, EPA a more conservative (i.e., higher) was also relevant to the BART- determined in the CSAPR rulemaking estimate of these emissions than in its alternative analysis for CSAPR because that the statistical percentage measure August 2018 proposal. We propose to the presence of the three-for-one penalty representing the maximum expected assume that these units will emit 35,000 provision established a practical upper one-year deviation from the state’s tons of SO2 annually based on a bound on each state’s emissions in each average annual fossil fuel consumption maximum annual emission level of year of the program. This informed the for electricity generation was seven 34,129 tons over the past five years level of emissions EPA could project percent.18 Applying that same (2014–2018) and considering that with confidence under the CSAPR percentage to the current Texas SO 2 several of these units have recently shut program when determining whether it Trading Program budget, EPA proposes could serve as a BART alternative. EPA to set the variability limit for Texas at down or have been announced for 20 recognizes that, in the absence of an 16,688 tons, which is seven percent of shutdown in the near future. Adding that amount to the assurance level of assurance level for the Texas SO2 the trading budget of 238,393 tons. The Trading Program, there are no analogous proposed assurance level is the sum of 255,081 tons yields 290,081 tons. means of guaranteeing that emissions the budget and the variability limit, or Assuming this figure represents a firm would remain below a certain amount 255,081 tons. EPA proposes to amend upper bound on annual SO2 emissions on an annual basis. The resulting the Texas SO2 Trading Program’s from the relevant EGUs in Texas, this is growth in the number of allowances regulations to impose a penalty less than the 317,100 ton figure EPA had available for use in future years, without surrender ratio of three allowances for demonstrated was acceptable in the some constraint on annual emissions, each ton of emissions in any year in original 2012 CSAPR analysis, as could in theory impact the stringency of excess of the 255,081-ton assurance discussed above and in the August 2018 the program in terms of annual level, and to impose the penalty proposal.21 We note that, as emissions for purposes of the BART- proportionately to emissions from those demonstrated in Table 1, SO2 emissions alternative analysis. groups of sources represented by a from power plants in Texas are Therefore, EPA is proposing to add an common designated representative that currently well below the Texas SO2 assurance level to the Texas SO2 emit in excess of the groups’ annual Trading Program budget of 238,293 tons Trading Program. EPA is proposing to allocations of allowances. These (as well as the proposed assurance level set the assurance level using the same requirements are in nearly all respects of 255,081 tons) and are anticipated to methodology applied in the original identical to the CSAPR program’s continue to decrease due to the low cost CSAPR rulemaking.17 There, for each assurance provisions. The specific of natural gas and increasing renewable state covered by a given CSAPR amendments to the regulatory text are energy production.22 program, EPA analyzed the historical described in more detail below. year-to-year variability in the total In addition to being consistent with annual quantity of fossil fuel consumed the original CSAPR methodology for 19 Two organizations have filed a petition for to generate electricity in the state. From setting assurance levels, EPA also reconsideration of EPA’s September 29, 2017 determination that CSAPR continues to satisfy the this analysis, EPA developed for each believes that an assurance level set at state a statistical percentage measure BART-alternative analysis under 40 CFR 255,081 is appropriate for the Texas SO2 51.308(e)(4) notwithstanding certain changes to the representing, at a 95% confidence level, Trading Program because, if finalized, it geographic scope of the program, including the the maximum expected one-year will provide further support for our removal of Texas from the CSAPR program for deviation from average annual fossil annual SO2 and NOx emissions. See Sierra Club October 2017 finding that the Texas SO2 fuel consumption for electricity and National Parks Conservation Association, Trading Program will result in SO2 Petition for Partial Reconsideration of Interstate generation. EPA used the highest of emission levels from Texas EGUs that Transport of Fine Particulate Matter: Revision of these state-specific statistical percentage are similar to or less than the emission Federal Implementation Plan Requirements for measures for any state covered by a levels from Texas EGUs that would have Texas, 82 FR 45481 (Sept. 29, 2017); EPA–HQ– given CSAPR program to define OAR–2016–0598; FRL09968–46–OAR (dated Nov. been realized from participation in the 28, 2017). EPA is not proposing to address that ‘‘variability limits’’ for all the states SO2 trading program under CSAPR. At determination through this action, and EPA is not covered by the program, where each an assurance level of 255,081 tons of addressing or revisiting the larger reaffirmation of state’s variability limit was computed as emissions annually, EPA has high the BART-alternative analysis for CSAPR at issue in that specific state’s emissions budget that separate action taken in September 2017. EPA confidence that emissions will be below intends to take action at a later date responding to multiplied by the highest of the state- the amount assumed in the BART- the petition for reconsideration in that matter. specific statistical percentage measures 20 alternative sensitivity analysis utilized See ‘‘Texas EGU SO2 emissions, 2014– for all the states in the program. EPA for the 2012 CSAPR-better-than-BART 2018.xlsx’’, available in the docket for this action. proposes here to set the assurance level Sandow Station units 5A and 5B have been determination (i.e., 317,100 tons), and permanently retired. AEP has announced retirement for the Texas SO2 Trading Program by thus visibility levels at Class I areas of Oklaunion by September 2020. Gibbons Creek is relying on the same analysis and impacted by sources in Texas are currently not operating although it has not been methodology that were used to set anticipated to be at least as good as the officially retired. levels projected in the 2012 analysis 21 See ‘‘Sensitivity Analysis Accounting for 17 See Power Sector Variability Final Rule TSD that assumed Texas would be in the Increases—EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0729–0323’’ (July 2011), available at https://www.epa.gov/csapr/ available in the docket for this action. power-sector-variability-final-rule-tsd and in the 22 http://www.ercot.com/content/wcm/lists/ docket for this action. 18 Id. 144927/2018_LTSA_Report.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61854 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1—RECENT SO2 EMISSIONS TRENDS IN TEXAS [Tons]

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Texas total EGU emissions ...... 343,425 260,138 245,799 275,993 211,025 Participating sources’ emissions ...... 309,296 236,754 218,291 245,870 179,628 Non-participating sources’ emissions ...... 34,129 23,384 27,509 30,124 31,397

EPA also notes that the addition of an EPA requests comment on its reflect the added and renumbered assurance level guaranteeing that SO2 proposal to add assurance provisions to paragraphs. Finally, revisions would be emissions can be expected to remain the Texas SO2 Trading Program. EPA made to existing language at §§ 97.902 below a certain level each year has the also requests comment on its proposal (definitions of ‘‘general account’’ and effect of also addressing a number of to set the assurance level at 255,081 ‘‘Texas SO2 Trading Program allowance other specific concerns about the Texas tons. The specific mechanics for the deduction’’), 97.906(b)(2), 97.913(c), SO2 Trading Program raised by addition of this feature to the program 97.926(b), 97.928(b), and renumbered commenters. In particular, to the extent are discussed in more detail below. 97.906(c)(4)(ii) to integrate the new that commenters claimed the program EPA proposes to make the assurance assurance provisions with various would be inadequately stringent due to level effective beginning with the 2021 existing provisions of the Texas program the allowance allocation methodology, compliance period and for each period regulations. including allocations to retired units, or thereafter. The proposed assurance The language of the proposed due to the Supplemental Allowance provisions would be implemented revisions to the Texas SO2 Trading Pool or allowance banking, these through the addition of new provisions Program regulations would generally concerns are effectively rendered moot at multiple locations in the Texas SO2 parallel the analogous language from the by the addition of the assurance level. Trading Program regulations at 40 CFR CSAPR regulations at 40 CFR part 97, This is because when a mass-based part 97, subpart FFFFF (40 CFR 97.901 subparts AAAAA through EEEEE, trading program includes a ‘‘cap’’ on through 97.935). In § 97.902, new streamlined to reflect the Texas overall annual emissions, as the Texas definitions of several terms used in the program’s narrower applicability (i.e., SO2 Trading Program would with the assurance provisions (‘‘assurance specific units located only in Texas, addition of the proposed assurance account,’’ ‘‘common designated excluding any new units built either in provisions, that overall ‘‘cap’’ on representative,’’ ‘‘common designated Texas or in Indian country within emissions set by the program (here, the representative’s assurance level,’’ and Texas’ borders). The only substantive assurance level) effectively determines ‘‘common designated representative’s differences from the analogous CSAPR the stringency of the program in each share’’) would be added. New assurance provisions concern the year. How allowances to emit are § 97.906(c)(2) and (c)(3)(ii) would set approach used to impute allocation allocated annually within that overall forth the central requirement of the amounts—for use in apportioning cap, and whether allowances may be assurance provisions—namely, that if responsibility for any collective banked across years by certain market SO2 emissions from all covered sources exceedance of the assurance level—to participants, will not impact the annual in 2021 or any subsequent year any units that do not receive actual stringency of the program as a whole. collectively exceed the program’s allowance allocations from the trading Allocations to retired units and the assurance level, then the owners and program budget. Under CSAPR, the only availability of banking are important to operators of the groups of sources units potentially in this situation are ensure market stability, avoid perverse determined to be responsible for the new units that do not receive allowance incentives, and potentially aid in collective exceedance would be allocations from the CSAPR new unit sources’ operational planning.23 With required to surrender allowances set-asides, and the CSAPR regulations the addition of an assurance level, the totaling twice the amount of the include a methodology for computing potential risk of an undue relaxation of exceedance by a specified deadline, in unit-specific imputed allocation the annual stringency in the program is addition to the allowances surrendered amounts based on several data elements minimized, because sources will remain to account for the sources’ total relating to the new units’ design and strongly incentivized to keep annual emissions. New § 97.910(b) and (c) potential operation.25 In contrast, under emissions below the level at which the would establish the variability limit that the Texas SO2 Trading Program, the three-for-one surrender penalty is would be added to the trading program only units potentially in this situation imposed. The effectiveness of assurance budget to determine the amount of the would be existing units that have ceased levels in guaranteeing the stringency of assurance level. New § 97.920(b) would operation for an extended period, trading programs has been borne out in provide for the establishment of thereby losing their allocations from the CSAPR, where no state’s sources’ assurance accounts, when appropriate, trading budget under § 97.911(a), and emissions have exceeded a state’s to hold the additional allowances to be that subsequently resume operation.26 assurance level to-date.24 surrendered. New § 97.925 would set forth additional procedures for EPA’s 25 See, e.g., paragraph (3) of the definition of 23 See CSAPR Update Final Rule, 81 FR 74506, administration of and sources’ ‘‘common designated representative’s share’’ at 40 74559, 74566 (Oct. 26, 2016) (discussing rationales compliance with the assurance CFR 97.702. for these features in the context of the CSAPR 26 Although the owners and operators of a unit in Update ozone season NOX trading program). provisions. this situation might receive an allocation of 24 See 2017 and 2018 CSAPR Budgets Emissions Besides the addition of the new allowances from the Supplemental Allowance Pool and Assurance Levels Spreadsheets, available at provisions just described, in §§ 97.906 under § 97.912 based in part on the unit’s emissions U.S. EPA, CSAPR Assurance Provision, https:// following resumption of operations, under the www.epa.gov/csapr/csapr-assurance-provision. and 97.920, several existing paragraphs Texas program assurance provisions as proposed, Copies of the spreadsheets, fact sheet, and web page would be renumbered and internal any allocations of allowances from the are also provided in the docket for this action. cross-references would be updated to Supplemental Allowance Pool would not be

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules 61855

Because the Texas SO2 Trading Program have flexibility to transfer allowances 2020 control periods, and a new regulations already identify the unit- among multiple participating units paragraph (b) would be added setting specific allowance allocations that these under the same owner/operator when forth the revised allocation methodology units would formerly have received planning operations, Coleto Creek proposed for the control periods in 2021 from the trading budget, the proposed consists of only one coal-fired unit, and and subsequent years. Two existing Texas SO2 Trading Program assurance at the time of our October 2017 FIP, was paragraphs of the section would be provisions would use these previously the only coal-fired unit in Texas owned renumbered to accommodate the new established amounts for purposes of and operated by Dynegy. To provide paragraph (b), and internal cross- assurance provision calculations instead this source additional flexibility, under references would be updated to reflect of requiring new imputed allocation the current program, Coleto Creek is the renumbering and to integrate the amounts to be computed according to allocated its maximum supplemental provisions of the revised allocation the more complex methodology in the allocation from the Supplemental methodology with other existing CSAPR assurance provisions. The Allowance Pool as long as there are provisions. simpler approach proposed for the sufficient allowances in the Proposed new § 97.912(b)(1) of the Texas SO2 Trading Program assurance Supplemental Allowance Pool available revised allocation methodology sets provisions appears at paragraph (2) of for allocation, and its actual allocation forth a procedure for assigning units the proposed new definition of will not be reduced in proportion with into groups under common ownership ‘‘common designated representative’s any reductions made to the called ‘‘affiliated ownership groups.’’ assurance level’’ in § 97.902. supplemental allocations to other Under the proposed procedure, the The simpler approach we are sources. In our August 2018 proposal, group assignments would remain proposing for determining any imputed we noted that Dynegy has merged with constant unless and until revised by allocation amounts allows for some Vistra, which owns other units that are EPA to reflect an ownership transfer. additional simplifications elsewhere in subject to the trading program. In the The proposed initial group assignments the proposed Texas SO2 Trading August 2018 proposal, we solicited for all covered units are specified in a Program assurance provisions. The comment on eliminating this additional proposed new column that would be CSAPR assurance provisions include flexibility for Coleto Creek in light of the added to the existing allowance regulatory text addressing the recent change in ownership, and we allocation table in § 97.911(a)(1). submission of data required to compute received no adverse comments on such Finally, consistent with the existing the imputed allocation amounts and the a change. In this SNPRM, we propose to language in renumbered § 97.912(d) consequences of appeals relating to make this change to the regulations. capping the number of allowances that EPA’s use of the data; the CSAPR Some commenters on the August 2018 can be allocated from the Supplemental provisions also call for issuance of an proposal supported an analogous further Allowance Pool for any given control initial notice in advance of the required change to the methodology for period, non-substantive revisions to data submissions. Because under the allocating allowances from the §§ 97.911(a)(2) and (c)(5) would clarify proposed Texas SO Trading Program Supplemental Allowance Pool. These 2 that allowances from the trading budget assurance provisions the specific commenters observed that any owner that are transferred to the Supplemental imputed allocation amounts would with multiple sources has the ability to Allowance Pool are not necessarily already be stated in the regulations, use surplus allowances allocated to one ‘‘allocated under’’ § 97.912, but instead analogous provisions addressing data source to cover emissions from its other are made available for ‘‘potential submissions and appeals are sources that exceed those other sources’ allocation in accordance with’’ § 97.912. unnecessary and the contents of the base allowance allocations. Based on initial notice can be consolidated into a this observation, the commenters EPA requests comment on the later notice. Consequently, the expressed the view that it would be proposed revisions to the Supplemental corresponding paragraphs of the more equitable to make allocations from Allowance Pool allocation provisions. proposed Texas SO2 Trading Program the Supplemental Allowance Pool in 3. Termination of Opt-In Provisions assurance provisions at proposed new proportion to each owner’s total Under § 97.904(b) of the existing § 97.925(b)(1)(ii), (b)(2)(i), and (b)(6)(ii) emissions in excess of the owner’s total Texas SO would contain no regulatory language base allowance allocations instead of in 2 Trading Program regulations, and instead appear as ‘‘reserved.’’ proportion to each individual source’s the EPA provided an opportunity for emissions in excess of the individual any other unit in the State of Texas that 2. Revision of Supplemental Allowance source’s base allowance allocation. EPA was previously subject to the CSAPR Pool Allocation Provisions agrees that this change would be SO2 Group 2 Trading Program and Section 97.912 of the existing Texas equitable and notes that it would also be would have received an allowance SO2 Trading Program regulations consistent with the rationale for allocation under that program to opt establishes how allowances are eliminating the special flexibility in the into the Texas SO2 Trading Program. allocated from the Supplemental existing regulations for Coleto Creek. Under § 97.911(b), a unit that opts into Allowance Pool to sources (collections Accordingly, EPA proposes to amend the Texas SO2 Trading Program would of participating units at a facility) that the Supplemental Allowance Pool receive the same allowance allocation have reported total emissions for that allocation provisions to reflect this that it would have received under the control period exceeding the total further change in the allocation CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading Program. amounts of allowances allocated to the methodology. These allowance allocations would be participating units at the source for that The proposed modifications to the in addition to the allocations to other control period (before any allocation methodology for allocating allowances units from the Texas SO2 Trading from the Supplemental Allowance from the Supplemental Allowance Pool Program budget and would therefore Pool). While all other sources required would be implemented through several increase the total number of allowances to participate in the trading program revisions to §§ 97.911 and 97.912. In available under the program. As of the § 97.912, paragraph (a) would be edited date of this supplemental proposal, no considered when apportioning responsibility for a to limit applicability of the current source has notified EPA of intent to opt collective exceedance of the assurance level. allocation methodology to the 2019 and into the Texas SO2 Trading Program.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61856 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

A commenter on the August 2018 4. Revision of Allowance Recordation for the following six NAAQS: (1) 1997 proposal asserted that the opt-in Provisions 8-hour ozone; (2) 1997 PM2.5 (annual provision weakened the functional Under § 97.921(a) of the existing and 24-hour); (3) 2006 PM2.5 (24-hour); equivalence of the Texas SO2 Trading (4) 2008 8-hour ozone; (5) 2010 1-hour Texas SO2 Trading Program regulations, 28 Program to CSAPR. The commenter ‘‘[t]he Administrator may delay NO2; and (6) 2010 1-hour SO2. The basis of this proposed affirmation was cited EPA’s determination not to recordation of Texas SO2 Trading include opt-in provisions in the CSAPR Program allowances for the specified our determination in the October 2017 trading programs on the basis that opt- control periods if the State of Texas FIP that the regional haze measures in in provisions would undermine submits a SIP revision before the place for Texas are adequate to ensure that emissions from the State do not achievement of the CSAPR program’s recordation deadline.’’ Similarly, under interfere with measures to protect emission reduction objectives. The § 97.921(b), ‘‘[t]he Administrator may visibility in nearby states because the commenter also cited EPA’s discussion delay recordation of the Texas SO 2 emission reductions are consistent with of the reasons for this determination, Trading Program allowances for the the level of emissions reductions relied including the difficulty of applicable control periods if the State of upon by other states during consultation Texas submits a SIP revision by May 1 distinguishing new emission reductions and when setting their reasonable of the year of the applicable recordation from reductions that opt-in sources progress goals. As discussed in our deadline under this paragraph.’’ In this would have made anyway, and the August 2018 proposal, the 2009 Texas SNPRM, we are proposing to amend the consequent likelihood that the amounts Regional Haze SIP relied on CAIR to language in the recordation provisions of allowances allocated to the sources meet SO2 and NOX BART requirements would exceed their starting emissions such that the Administrator can delay for EGUs. Under CAIR, Texas EGU levels. The allocations to the sources recordation in the event that Texas sources were projected to emit submits a SIP revision and EPA takes opting in would thus introduce ‘‘extra’’ approximately 350,000 tons of SO2 allowances into the CSAPR trading final action to approve it. These annually. In today’s SNPRM, EPA programs, increasing the quantity of revisions are necessary to ensure that proposes to make four revisions to the program remains fully operational allowances available to be traded to strengthen the Texas SO2 Trading other sources and thereby decreasing unless it is replaced by a SIP revision Program and increase its consistency the programs’ stringency.27 EPA that is approved by EPA as meeting the with CSAPR, including the addition of believes that these considerations about SO2 BART requirements for the covered an assurance level consistent with the potentially introducing ‘‘extra’’ units. 2012 CSAPR demonstration. As The proposed amendment to allowances also apply to the current discussed elsewhere in this SNPRM, condition any exceptions to scheduled opt-in provisions in the Texas SO Texas EGU annual SO2 emissions for 2 allowance recordation activities on Trading Program. Therefore, consistent sources covered by the trading program EPA’s approval, rather than Texas’ with this supplemental proposal’s would be constrained by the assurance submission, of a SIP revision would be level of 255,081 tons. Including an overall objective of strengthening our implemented through revisions to three finding that the Texas SO2 Trading estimated 35,000 tons per year of paragraphs of § 97.921. In § 97.921(a), emissions from units not covered by the Program will result in SO2 emission the existing language providing for a levels from Texas EGUs that are similar Texas SO2 Trading Program yields possible delay of recordation activities 290,081 tons of SO2, well below the to or less than the emission levels from scheduled for November 1, 2018, would Texas EGUs that would have been 350,000-ton emissions projection for be deleted without replacement; the Texas sources under CAIR or the realized from participation in the SO2 language is moot because the trading program under CSAPR, EPA 317,100-ton emissions benchmark for recordation date has already passed. In Texas sources under CSAPR discussed proposes to terminate the opt-in § 97.921(b), which governs future in section III.A.1. Additionally, the provisions in the Texas SO Trading 2 recordation of allowances allocated October 2017 FIP relies on CSAPR as an Program. from the trading budget under alternative to EGU BART for NOX, EPA requests comment on the § 97.911(a), the existing language would which exceeds the NOX emission proposed termination of the opt-in be revised to provide that future reductions from Texas relied upon by provisions. EPA also solicits comment recordation activities will take place as other states during consultation. as to what other relevant provisions in scheduled unless provided otherwise in Because the proposed revisions to the the Texas SO2 Trading Program may EPA’s approval of a SIP revision Texas SO2 Trading Program in this offset the expressed concerns with the replacing the provisions of subpart SNPRM would make the program opt-in provisions. FFFFF. The same revised condition consistent with or below those emission would also be added to § 97.921(c), The proposed termination of the opt- levels relied upon by other states during which governs future recordation of in provisions would be implemented consultation, we believe these revisions allowances allocated from the through revisions in three locations. In provide further support for our earlier Supplemental Allowance Pool under finding that the BART alternatives in § 97.904(b)(2), revised language would § 97.912. the October 2017 FIP result in emission provide that the opportunity to EPA requests comment on the reductions adequate to satisfy the participate in the Texas SO Trading 2 proposed revisions to the allowance requirements of CAA section Program by opting in is available only recordation provisions. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) with respect to for the 2019 and 2020 control periods. B. Interstate Visibility Transport visibility for the six identified NAAQS. Revisions to §§ 97.911(b) and 97.921(d) We invite comment on how the would similarly provide that allowance In our August 2018 proposal, we proposed revisions in this SNPRM allocations to opt-in units could be proposed to affirm that Texas’ impact our August 2018 proposal to made and recorded only for the 2019 participation in CSAPR to satisfy NOx affirm our October 2017 determination and 2020 control periods. BART and the Texas SO2 Trading regarding Texas’ visibility transport Program fully addresses Texas’ 27 See generally 76 FR at 48276. interstate visibility transport obligations 28 83 FR at 43593, 43604, and 43605.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules 61857

obligations with respect to the NAAQS because this action is not significant distribution of power and identified above. under Executive Order 12866. responsibilities among the various IV. Supplemental Proposed Action C. Paperwork Reduction Act levels of government. G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation In this SNPRM, EPA proposes to make This proposed action does not impose and Coordination With Indian Tribal four sets of amendments to the Texas any new information collection burden under the PRA. OMB has previously Governments SO2 Trading Program: (1) The addition approved the information collection of assurance-level provisions; (2) This proposed rule does not have activities for the Texas SO2 Trading revisions to the Supplemental tribal implications, as specified in Allowance Pool allocation provisions; Program as part of the most recent information collection request renewal Executive Order 13175. It will not have (3) termination of the opt-in provisions; substantial direct effects on tribal and (4) revision of the allowance for the CSAPR trading programs and has governments. Thus, Executive Order recordation provisions. The proposed assigned OMB control number 2060– 0667. This proposed action would not 13175 does not apply to this rule. changes to the Texas SO2 Trading Program would be implemented through change any information collection H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of requirements for any entity affected revisions to the existing regulations at Children From Environmental Health underthe Texas SO Trading Program. 40 CFR part 97, subpart FFFFF. A 2 Risks and Safety Risks redline/strike-out document showing D. Regulatory Flexibility Act subpart FFFFF with the proposed Executive Order 13045: Protection of I certify that this proposed action will revisions has been added to the docket Children From Environmental Health not have a significant impact on a for this proposed action. Risks and Safety Risks 29 applies to any substantial number of small entities. In In this proposed action we are only making this determination, the impact rule that: (1) Is determined to be soliciting comment on the four of concern is any significant adverse economically significant as defined proposed revisions to the Texas SO2 economic impact on small entities. An under Executive Order 12866; and (2) Trading Program, and how those agency may certify that a rule will not concerns an environmental health or proposed changes impact our August have a significant economic impact on safety risk that we have reason to 2018 proposal to affirm that (1) the a substantial number of small entities if believe may have a disproportionate Texas SO2 Trading Program will result the rule relieves regulatory burden, has effect on children. EPA interprets E.O. in SO2 emission levels from Texas EGUs no net burden or otherwise has a 13045 as applying only to those that are similar to or less than the positive economic effect on the small regulatory actions that concern health or emission levels from Texas EGUs that entities subject to the rule. This safety risks, such that the analysis would have been realized from proposed rule does not impose any required under Section 5–501 of the participation in the SO2 trading program requirements or create impacts on small E.O. has the potential to influence the under CSAPR, and (2) Texas’ interstate entities. This proposed action to modify regulation. This proposed action is not visibility transport obligations with a FIP action previously issued under subject to Executive Order 13045 respect to six NAAQS (listed in the Section 110 of the CAA will not create because it is not economically preceding section) are satisfied. The any new requirement with which small significant as defined in Executive EPA is not reopening the comment entities must comply. Accordingly, it Order 12866, and because the EPA does period on any other aspect of the August affords no opportunity for the EPA to not believe the environmental health or 2018 proposal. The EPA will not fashion for small entities less safety risks addressed by this proposed respond to comments received during burdensome compliance or reporting action present a disproportionate risk to the reopened comment period outside requirements or timetables or the above-defined scope. We will children. This proposed action is not exemptions from all or part of the rule. subject to E.O. 13045 because it respond to all comments received on The fact that the CAA prescribes that implements specific standards this SNPRM and our August 2018 various consequences (e.g., emission established by Congress in statutes. proposal to affirm our October 2017 FIP limitations) may or will flow from this However, to the extent this proposed in a single final rulemaking. action does not mean that the EPA either can or must conduct a regulatory rule will limit emissions of SO2, the V. Statutory and Executive Order proposed rule will have a beneficial Reviews flexibility analysis for this action. We have therefore concluded that this effect on children’s health by reducing A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory proposed action will have no net air pollution. Planning and Overview, Executive Order regulatory burden for all directly I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 13563: Improving Regulation and regulated small entities. Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Regulatory Review E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Distribution, or Use This proposed action is not a (UMRA) This proposed action is not subject to ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under This proposed action does not contain the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 an unfunded mandate of $100 million or (May 22, 2001)), because it is not a FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is more as described in UMRA, 2 U. S. C. therefore not subject to review under significant regulatory action under 1531–1538, and does not significantly or Executive Order 12866. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 uniquely affect small governments. FR 3821, January 21, 2011). J. National Technology Transfer and F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Advancement Act (NTTAA) Regulations and Controlling Regulatory This proposed action does not have This proposed action does not involve Costs federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, technical standards. This proposed action is not an on the relationship between the national Executive Order 13771 regulatory action government and the states, or on the 29 62 FR 19885 (Apr. 23, 1997).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61858 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal ■ a. In the definitions of ‘‘Acid Rain § 97.910(a)(1) and the variability limit Actions To Address Environmental Program’’, ‘‘Allowance Management under § 97.910(b) and divided by the Justice in Minority Populations and System’’, and ‘‘Allowance Management sum of the total amount of Texas SO2 Low-Income Populations System account’’, capitalizing the first Trading Program allowances allocated three words; for such control period under § 97.911, The EPA believes that this proposed ■ action does not have disproportionately b. Adding in alphabetical order a or deemed to have been allocated under high and adverse human health or definition of ‘‘Assurance account’’; paragraph (2) of this definition, to all ■ c. In the definition of ‘‘authorized environmental effects on minority Texas SO2 Trading Program units; account representative’’, capitalizing the (2) Provided that, in the case of a populations, low-income populations word ‘‘trading’’ the first time it appears; Texas SO Trading Program unit that and/or indigenous peoples, as specified 2 ■ d. Adding in alphabetical order operates during, but has no amount of in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, definitions of ‘‘Common designated Texas SO Trading Program allowances February 16, 1994). We have determined 2 representative’’, ‘‘Common designated allocated under § 97.911 for, such that this proposed rule will not have representative’s assurance level’’, and control period, the unit shall be treated, disproportionately high and adverse ‘‘Common designated representative’s solely for purposes of this definition, as human health or environmental effects share’’; and being allocated the amount of Texas SO2 on minority or low-income populations ■ e. Revising the definitions of ‘‘General Trading Program allowances shown for because it increases the level of account’’ and ‘‘Texas SO2 Trading the unit in § 97.911(a)(1). environmental protection for all affected Program allowance deduction’’. Common designated representative’s populations without having any The additions and revisions read as share means, with regard to a specific disproportionately high and adverse follows: common designated representative for a human health or environmental effects control period in a given year and the on any population, including any § 97.902 Definitions. total amount of SO2 emissions from all * * * * * minority or low-income population. The Texas SO2 Trading Program units during proposed rule limits emissions of SO2 Assurance account means an such control period, the total tonnage of Allowance Management System from certain facilities in Texas. SO2 emissions during such control account, established by the period from the group of one or more List of Subjects Administrator under § 97.925(b)(3) for Texas SO2 Trading Program units 40 CFR Part 52 certain owners and operators of a group having the common designated Environmental protection, Air of one or more Texas SO2 Trading representative for such control period. Program sources and units, in which are pollution control, Incorporation by * * * * * reference, Intergovernmental relations, held Texas SO2 Trading Program General account means an Allowance Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate allowances available for use for a Management System account, matter, Reporting and recordkeeping control period in a given year in established under this subpart, that is requirements, Sulfur dioxides, complying with the Texas SO2 Trading not a compliance account or an Visibility, Interstate transport of Program assurance provisions in assurance account. accordance with §§ 97.906 and 97.925. pollution, Regional haze, Best available * * * * * retrofit technology. * * * * * Texas SO2 Trading Program Common designated representative allowance deduction or deduct Texas 40 CFR Part 97 means, with regard to a control period SO2 Trading Program allowances means in a given year, a designated Environmental protection, the permanent withdrawal of Texas SO2 Administrative practice and procedure, representative where, as of April 1 Trading Program allowances by the Air pollution control, Intergovernmental immediately after the allowance transfer Administrator from a compliance relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting deadline for such control period, the account (e.g., in order to account for same natural person is authorized under and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur compliance with the Texas SO2 Trading dioxides. §§ 97.913(a) and 97.915(a) as the Program emissions limitation) or from designated representative for a group of Dated: November 1, 2019. an assurance account (e.g., in order to one or more Texas SO2 Trading Program account for compliance with the David Gray, sources and units. Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6. assurance provisions under §§ 97.906 Common designated representative’s and 97.925). For the reasons stated in the assurance level means, with regard to a * * * * * preamble, Part 97 of chapter I of title 40 specific common designated of the Code of Federal Regulations is representative and control period in a § 97.904 [Amended] proposed to be amended as follows: given year for which the State assurance ■ 3. Section 97.904 is amended in level is exceeded as described in paragraph (b)(2) by removing the text PART 97—FEDERAL NOX BUDGET § 97.906(c)(2)(iii): ‘‘Program, provided’’ and adding in its TRADING PROGRAM, CAIR NOX AND (1) The amount (rounded to the place the text ‘‘Program for the control SO2 TRADING PROGRAMS, CSAPR nearest allowance) equal to the sum of periods in years before 2021, provided’’. NOX AND SO2 TRADING PROGRAMS, the total amount of Texas SO2 Trading ■ AND TEXAS SO TRADING PROGRAM 4. Section 97.906 is amended by: 2 Program allowances allocated for such ■ a. In paragraph (b)(2), adding after the control period under § 97.911, or ■ 1. The authority citation for Part 97 is text ‘‘emissions limitation’’ the text deemed to have been allocated under revised to read as follows: ‘‘and assurance provisions’’; paragraph (2) of this definition, to the ■ b. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(2) Authority: 42 U. S. C. 7401, 7403, 7410, group of one or more Texas SO2 Trading through (6) as paragraphs (c)(3) through 7426, 7491, 7601, and 7651, et seq. Program units having the common (7) and adding a new paragraph (c)(2); designated representative for such ■ c. Redesignating the text of newly Subpart FFFFF—TEXAS SO2 TRADING PROGRAM control period multiplied by the sum for redesignated paragraph (c)(3) after the such control period of the Texas SO2 paragraph heading as paragraph (c)(3)(i) ■ 2. Section 97.902 is amended by: Trading Program budget under and adding a new paragraph (c)(3)(ii);

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules 61859

■ d. In newly redesignated paragraph (ii) The owners and operators shall 2021 and for each control period (c)(4)(ii), removing the text ‘‘paragraph hold the Texas SO2 Trading Program thereafter. (c)(1)(ii)(A)’’ and adding in its place the allowances required under paragraph * * * * * text ‘‘paragraphs (c)(1)(ii)(A) and (c)(2)(i) of this section, as of midnight of ■ 5. Section 97.910 is amended by: (c)(2)(i) through (iii)’’. November 1 (if it is a business day), or ■ a. Revising the section heading; and The additions read as follows: midnight of the first business day ■ b. Adding paragraphs (b) and (c). thereafter (if November 1 is not a § 97.906 General provisions. The revision and additions read as business day), immediately after the follows: * * * * * year of such control period. (c) * * * (iii) Total SO2 emissions from all § 97.910 Texas SO2 Trading Program (2) Texas SO2 Trading Program Texas SO2 Trading Program units at budget, Supplemental Allowance Pool budget, and variability limit. assurance provisions. (i) If total SO2 Texas SO2 Trading Program sources emissions during a control period in a during a control period in a given year * * * * * given year from all Texas SO2 Trading exceed the State assurance level if such (b) The variability limit for the Texas Program units at Texas SO2 Trading total SO2 emissions exceed the sum, for SO2 Trading Program budget for the Program sources exceed the State such control period, of the Texas SO2 control periods in 2021 and thereafter is assurance level, then the owners and Trading Program budget under 16,688 tons. operators of such sources and units in § 97.910(a)(1) and the variability limit (c) The Texas SO2 Trading Program each group of one or more sources and under § 97.910(b). budget in paragraph (a)(1) of this section units having a common designated (iv) It shall not be a violation of this does not include any tons in the representative for such control period, subpart or of the Clean Air Act if total Supplemental Allowance Pool budget in where the common designated SO2 emissions from all Texas SO2 paragraph (a)(2) of this section or the representative’s share of such SO2 Trading Program units at Texas SO2 variability limit in paragraph (b) of this emissions during such control period Trading Program sources during a section. exceeds the common designated control period exceed the State ■ 6. Section 97.911 is amended by: representative’s assurance level for such assurance level or if a common ■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(1); control period, shall hold (in the designated representative’s share of total ■ b. In paragraph (a)(2), removing the assurance account established for the SO2 emissions from the Texas SO2 text ‘‘allocated under the Texas owners and operators of such group) Trading Program units at Texas SO2 Supplemental Allowance Pool under 40 Texas SO2 Trading Program allowances Trading Program sources during a CFR 97.912.’’ and adding in its place the available for deduction for such control control period exceeds the common text ‘‘transferred to the Texas period under § 97.925(a) in an amount designated representative’s assurance Supplemental Allowance Pool for equal to two times the product (rounded level. potential allocation in accordance with to the nearest whole number), as (v) To the extent the owners and § 97.912.’’; determined by the Administrator in operators fail to hold Texas SO2 Trading ■ c. In paragraph (b)(1), removing the accordance with § 97.925(b), of Program allowances for a control period text ‘‘SO2 allocation’’ and adding in its multiplying— in a given year in accordance with place the text ‘‘allocation’’, and adding (A) The quotient of the amount by paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (iii) of this after the text ‘‘each year’’ the text which the common designated section, ‘‘before 2021’’; and representative’s share of such SO2 (A) The owners and operators shall ■ d. In paragraph (c)(5), removing the emissions exceeds the common pay any fine, penalty, or assessment or text ‘‘under 40 CFR 97.912.’’ and adding designated representative’s assurance comply with any other remedy imposed in its place the text ‘‘for potential level divided by the sum of the under the Clean Air Act; and allocation in accordance with amounts, determined for all common (B) Each Texas SO2 Trading Program § 97.912.’’. designated representatives for such allowance that the owners and operators The revision reads as follows: sources and units for such control fail to hold for such control period in period, by which each common accordance with paragraphs (c)(2)(i) § 97.911 Texas SO2 Trading Program designated representative’s share of through (iii) of this section and each day allowance allocations. such SO2 emissions exceeds the of such control period shall constitute a (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph respective common designated separate violation of this subpart and (a)(2) of this section, Texas SO2 Trading representative’s assurance level; and the Clean Air Act. Program allowances from the Texas SO2 (B) The amount by which total SO2 (3) * * * Trading Program budget will be emissions from all Texas SO2 Trading (ii) A Texas SO2 Trading Program unit allocated, for the control periods in Program units at Texas SO2 Trading shall be subject to the requirements 2019 and each year thereafter, as Program sources for such control period under paragraph (c)(2) of this section for provided in Table 1 to this paragraph exceed the State assurance level. the control period starting on January 1, (a)(1):

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1)—TEXAS SO2 TRADING PROGRAM ALLOCATIONS

Texas SO2 trading Texas SO2 trading program units ORIS code program allo- Affiliated ownership group cation (tons)

Big Brown Unit 1 ...... 3497 8,473 Vistra Energy. Big Brown Unit 2 ...... 3497 8,559 Vistra Energy. Coleto Creek Unit 1 ...... 6178 9,057 Vistra Energy. Fayette/Sam Seymour Unit 1 ...... 6179 7,979 Lower Colorado River Authority/City of Austin. Fayette/Sam Seymour Unit 2 ...... 6179 8,019 Lower Colorado River Authority/City of Austin.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61860 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1)—TEXAS SO2 TRADING PROGRAM ALLOCATIONS—Continued

Texas SO2 trading Texas SO2 trading program units ORIS code program allo- Affiliated ownership group cation (tons)

Graham Unit 2 ...... 3490 226 Vistra Energy. H W Pirkey Power Plant Unit 1 ...... 7902 8,882 American Electric Power. Harrington Unit 061B ...... 6193 5,361 Xcel Energy. Harrington Unit 062B ...... 6193 5,255 Xcel Energy. Harrington Unit 063B ...... 6193 5,055 Xcel Energy. JT Deely Unit 1 ...... 6181 6,170 City of San Antonio. JT Deely Unit 2 ...... 6181 6,082 City of San Antonio. Limestone Unit 1 ...... 298 12,081 NRG Energy. Limestone Unit 2 ...... 298 12,293 NRG Energy. Martin Lake Unit 1 ...... 6146 12,024 Vistra Energy. Martin Lake Unit 2 ...... 6146 11,580 Vistra Energy. Martin Lake Unit 3 ...... 6146 12,236 Vistra Energy. Monticello Unit 1 ...... 6147 8,598 Vistra Energy. Monticello Unit 2 ...... 6147 8,795 Vistra Energy. Monticello Unit 3 ...... 6147 12,216 Vistra Energy. Newman Unit 2 ...... 3456 1 El Paso Electric. Newman Unit 3 ...... 3456 1 El Paso Electric. Newman Unit 4 ...... 3456 2 El Paso Electric. Sandow Unit 4 ...... 6648 8,370 Vistra Energy. Sommers Unit 1 ...... 3611 55 City of San Antonio. Sommers Unit 2 ...... 3611 7 City of San Antonio. Stryker Unit ST2 ...... 3504 145 Vistra Energy. Tolk Station Unit 171B ...... 6194 6,900 Xcel Energy. Tolk Station Unit 172B ...... 6194 7,062 Xcel Energy. WA Parish Unit WAP4 ...... 3470 3 NRG Energy. WA Parish Unit WAP5 ...... 3470 9,580 NRG Energy. WA Parish Unit WAP6 ...... 3470 8,900 NRG Energy. WA Parish Unit WAP7 ...... 3470 7,653 NRG Energy. Welsh Power Plant Unit 1 ...... 6139 6,496 American Electric Power. Welsh Power Plant Unit 2 ...... 6139 7,050 American Electric Power. Welsh Power Plant Unit 3 ...... 6139 7,208 American Electric Power. Wilkes Unit 1 ...... 3478 14 American Electric Power. Wilkes Unit 2 ...... 3478 2 American Electric Power. Wilkes Unit 3 ...... 3478 3 American Electric Power.

* * * * * § 97.912 Texas SO2 Trading Program affiliated with the previous holder of a ■ 7. Section 97.912 is amended by: Supplemental Allowance Pool. 50% or greater ownership share of the ■ a. In paragraph (a) introductory text, * * * * * unit. removing the text ‘‘each control period (b) For each control period in 2021 (2) No later than February 15, 2022 in 2019 and thereafter,’’ and adding in and thereafter, the Administrator will and each subsequent February 15, the its place the text ‘‘the control periods in allocate Texas SO2 Trading Program Administrator will review all the 2019 and 2020,’’; allowances from the Texas SO2 Trading quarterly SO emissions reports ■ 2 b. In paragraph (a)(1), removing the Program Supplemental Allowance Pool provided under § 97.934(d) for each text ‘‘each subsequent February 15,’’ as follows: Texas SO Trading Program unit for the and adding in its place the text 2 (1) For each control period, the previous control period. The ‘‘February 15, 2021,’’; Administrator will assign each Texas Administrator will identify each ■ c. In paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A), removing SO2 Trading Program unit to an affiliated ownership group of Texas SO the text ‘‘paragraph (b)’’ and adding in 2 affiliated ownership group reflecting the Trading Program units as of December its place the text ‘‘paragraph (d)’’; unit’s ownership as of December 31 of 31 of such control period for which the ■ d. In paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(B), removing the control period. The affiliated total amount of emissions reported for the text ‘‘paragraph (b)’’ wherever it ownership group assignments for each the units in the group for that control appears and adding in its place the text control period will be as shown in period exceeds the total amount of ‘‘paragraph (d)’’; § 97.911(a)(1) except that the allowances allocated to the units in the ■ e. In paragraph (a)(3)(iii), removing Administrator will revise the group for that control period under the text ‘‘paragraph (b)’’ and adding in assignments, based on the information its place the text ‘‘paragraph (d)’’; required to be submitted in accordance § 97.911. ■ f. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(4) and with § 97.915(c) and any other (3) For each affiliated ownership (b) as paragraphs (c) and (d) and adding information available to the group of Texas SO2 Trading Program a new paragraph (b); and Administrator, as necessary to reflect units identified under paragraph (b)(2) ■ g. In newly redesignated paragraph any ownership transfer resulting in a of this section, the Administrator will (d), adding after the text ‘‘paragraph 50% or greater ownership share of a calculate the amount by which the total (a)(3)(iii)’’ the text ‘‘or (b)(4)(ii)’’. unit being held by a new owner that the amount of reported emissions for that The addition reads as follows: Administrator determines is not control period exceeds the total amount

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules 61861

of allowances allocated for that control determined under paragraph (b)(4)(i) of ■ l. In newly redesignated paragraph period under § 97.911. this section will be maintained in the (c)(5)(v), removing the text ‘‘paragraph (4)(i) The Administrator will allocate Supplemental Allowance Pool. These (b)(5)(iii)(D)’’ and adding in its place the and record allowances from the allowances will be available for text ‘‘paragraph (c)(5)(iii)(D)’’, and Supplemental Allowance Pool as allocation by the Administrator in removing the text ‘‘paragraph (b)(5)(iv)’’ follows: subsequent control periods to the extent and adding in its place the text (A) If the total for all such affiliated consistent with paragraph (d) of this ‘‘paragraph (c)(5)(iv)’’; ownership groups of the amounts section. ■ m. In newly redesignated paragraph calculated under paragraph (b)(3) of this * * * * * (d), removing the text ‘‘paragraphs (a) section is less than or equal to the total ■ 8. Section 97.913 is amended by and (b)’’ and adding in its place the text number of allowances in the revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: ‘‘paragraphs (a), (b), and (c)’’; and Supplemental Allowance Pool available ■ n. In newly redesignated paragraph for allocation under paragraph (d) of § 97.913 Authorization of designated representative and alternate designated (e), removing the text ‘‘paragraphs this section, then the Administrator will (b)(2)(ii) and (b)(5)’’ and adding in its allocate and record in the compliance representative. * * * * * place the text ‘‘paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) and accounts for the sources at which the (c)(5)’’. units in each such group are located a (c) Except in this section, § 97.902, The revision and addition read as total amount of allowances from the and §§ 97.914 through 97.918, whenever follows: Supplemental Allowance Pool equal to the term ‘‘designated representative’’ (as the amount calculated for the group distinguished from the term ‘‘common § 97.920 Establishment of compliance under paragraph (b)(3) of this section. designated representative’’) is used in accounts, assurance accounts, and general (B) If the total for all such affiliated this subpart, the term shall be construed accounts. ownership groups of the amounts to include the designated representative * * * * * or any alternate designated calculated under paragraph (b)(3) of this (b) Assurance accounts. The section is greater than the total number representative. ■ 9. Section 97.920 is amended by: Administrator will establish assurance of allowances in the Supplemental accounts for certain owners and Allowance Pool available for allocation ■ a. Revising the section heading; ■ b. Redesignating paragraphs (b) operators and States in accordance with under paragraph (d) of this section, then § 97.925(b)(3). the Administrator will calculate each through (d) as paragraphs (c) through (e) such group’s allocation of allowances and adding a new paragraph (b); * * * * * ■ ■ from the Supplemental Allowance Pool c. In newly redesignated paragraph 10. Section 97.921 is amended by: by dividing the amount calculated (c)(2)(i) introductory text, removing the ■ a. In paragraph (a), removing the under paragraph (b)(3) of this section for text ‘‘paragraph (b)(1)’’ and adding in its second sentence; the group by the sum of the amounts place the text ‘‘paragraph (c)(1)’’; ■ b. Revising paragraphs (b) and (c); and ■ d. In newly redesignated paragraph calculated under paragraph (b)(3) of this ■ c. In paragraph (d), removing the text (c)(2)(ii), removing the text ‘‘paragraph section for all such groups, then ‘‘July 1 of each year thereafter,’’ and (b)(5)’’ and adding in its place the text multiplying by the number of adding in its place the text ‘‘July 1, ‘‘paragraph (c)(5)’’; 2020,’’. allowances in the Supplemental ■ e. In newly redesignated paragraphs The revision reads as follows: Allowance Pool available for allocation (c)(3)(i) and (ii), removing the text under paragraph (d) of this section and ‘‘paragraph (b)(1)’’ and adding in its rounding to the nearest allowance. The § 97.921 Recordation of Texas SO2 place the text ‘‘paragraph (c)(1)’’; Trading Program allowance allocations. Administrator will then record the ■ f. In newly redesignated paragraph calculated allocations of allowances in * * * * * (c)(4)(i), removing the text ‘‘paragraph (b) By July 1, 2019, the Administrator the applicable compliance accounts. (b)(1)’’ wherever it appears and adding (C) When an affiliated ownership will record in each Texas SO2 Trading in its place the text ‘‘paragraph (c)(1)’’; Program source’s compliance account group receives an allocation of ■ g. In newly redesignated paragraph the Texas SO Trading Program allowances under paragraph (b)(4)(i)(A) (c)(4)(ii), removing the text ‘‘paragraph 2 allowances allocated to the Texas SO or (B) of this section, each unit in the (b)(4)(i)’’ and adding in its place text 2 Trading Program units at the source in group whose emissions during the ‘‘paragraph (c)(4)(i)’’; control period for which allowances are ■ h. In newly redesignated paragraph accordance with § 97.911(a) for the being allocated exceed the amount of (c)(5)(iii) introductory text and control period in the fourth year after allowances allocated to the unit under paragraph (c)(5)(iii)(C), removing the the year of the applicable recordation § 97.911 will receive a share of the text ‘‘paragraph (b)(5)(i)’’ and adding in deadline under this paragraph, unless group’s allocation. The Administrator its place the text ‘‘paragraph (c)(5)(i)’’; provided otherwise in the will compute each such unit’s share by ■ i. In newly redesignated paragraph Administrator’s approval of a SIP dividing the amount of the unit’s (c)(5)(iii)(D), removing the text revision replacing the provisions of this emissions during the control period ‘‘97.920(b)(5)(iv)’’ and adding in its subpart. exceeding the unit’s allocation under place the text ‘‘97.920(c)(5)(iv)’’; (c) By February 15, 2020, and § 97.911 by the sum for all such units ■ j. In newly redesignated paragraph February 15 of each year thereafter, the of the amounts of the units’ emissions (c)(5)(iii)(E), removing the text Administrator will record in each Texas during the control period exceeding the ‘‘97.920(b)(5)(iv),’’ and adding in its SO2 Trading Program source’s units’ allocations under § 97.911, then place the text ‘‘97.920(c)(5)(iv),’’, and compliance account the allowances multiplying by the group’s allocation removing the text ‘‘97.920(b)(5)’’ and allocated from the Texas SO2 Trading under paragraph (b)(4)(i)(A) or (B) of adding in its place the text Program Supplemental Allowance Pool this section and rounding to the nearest ‘‘97.920(c)(5)’’; in accordance with § 97.912 for the allowance. ■ k. In newly redesignated paragraph control period in the year of the (ii) Any unallocated allowances (c)(5)(iv), removing the text ‘‘paragraph applicable recordation deadline under remaining in the Supplemental (b)(5)(iii)’’ and adding in its place the this paragraph, unless provided Allowance Pool after the allocations text ‘‘paragraph (c)(5)(iii)’’; otherwise in the Administrator’s

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 61862 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules

approval of a SIP revision replacing the designated representative’s share of the paragraph (b)(3) of this section shall provisions of this subpart. total SO2 emissions from all Texas SO2 hold in the assurance account * * * * * Trading Program units at Texas SO2 established for them and for the ■ 11. Section 97.925 is added to read as Trading Program sources, the common appropriate Texas SO2 Trading Program follows: designated representative’s assurance sources and Texas SO2 Trading Program level, and the amount (if any) of Texas units under paragraph (b)(3) of this § 97.925 Compliance with Texas SO2 SO2 Trading Program allowances that section a total amount of Texas SO2 Trading Program assurance provisions. the owners and operators of such group Trading Program allowances, available (a) Availability for deduction. Texas of sources and units must hold in for deduction under paragraph (a) of SO2 Trading Program allowances are accordance with the calculation formula this section, equal to the amount such available to be deducted for compliance in § 97.906(c)(2)(i). By each such August owners and operators are required to with the Texas SO2 Trading Program 1, the Administrator will promulgate a hold with regard to such sources and assurance provisions for a control notice of data availability of the results units as calculated by the Administrator period in a given year by the owners of the calculations under this paragraph and referenced in such notice. and operators of a group of one or more and paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, (ii) Notwithstanding the allowance- Texas SO2 Trading Program sources and including separate calculations of the holding deadline specified in paragraph units only if the Texas SO2 Trading SO2 emissions from each Texas SO2 (b)(4)(i) of this section, if November 1 is Program allowances: Trading Program source. not a business day, then such (1) Were allocated for a control period (iii) The Administrator will provide allowance-holding deadline shall be in a prior year or the control period in an opportunity for submission of midnight of the first business day the given year or in the immediately objections to the calculations referenced thereafter. following year; and by the notice of data availability (5) After November 1 (or the date (2) Are held in the assurance account, required in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this described in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this established by the Administrator for section. section) immediately after the such owners and operators of such (A) Objections shall be submitted by promulgation of each notice of data group of Texas SO2 Trading Program the deadline specified in such notice availability required in paragraph sources and units under paragraph (b)(3) and shall be limited to addressing (b)(2)(iii)(B) of this section and after the of this section, as of the deadline whether the calculations referenced in recordation, in accordance with established in paragraph (b)(4) of this the notice required under paragraph § 97.923, of Texas SO2 Trading Program section. (b)(2)(ii) of this section are in allowance transfers submitted by (b) Deductions for compliance. The accordance with § 97.906(c)(2)(iii), midnight of such date, the Administrator will deduct Texas SO2 §§ 97.906(b) and 97.930 through 97.935, Administrator will determine whether Trading Program allowances available the definitions of ‘‘common designated the owners and operators described in under paragraph (a) of this section for representative’’, ‘‘common designated paragraph (b)(3) of this section hold, in compliance with the Texas SO2 Trading representative’s assurance level’’, and the assurance account for the Program assurance provisions for a ‘‘common designated representative’s appropriate Texas SO2 Trading Program control period in a given year in share’’ in § 97.902, and the calculation sources and Texas SO2 Trading Program accordance with the following formula in § 97.906(c)(2)(i). units established under paragraph (b)(3) procedures: (B) The Administrator will adjust the of this section, the amount of Texas SO2 (1) By June 1, 2022 and June 1 of each calculations to the extent necessary to Trading Program allowances available year thereafter, the Administrator will: ensure that they are in accordance with under paragraph (a) of this section that (i) Calculate the total SO2 emissions the provisions referenced in paragraph the owners and operators are required to from all Texas SO2 Trading Program (b)(2)(iii)(A) of this section. By October hold with regard to such sources and units at Texas SO2 Trading Program 1 immediately after the promulgation of units as calculated by the Administrator sources during the control period in the such notice, the Administrator will and referenced in the notice required in year before the year of this calculation promulgate a notice of data availability paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(B) of this section. deadline and the amount, if any, by of the calculations incorporating any (6) Notwithstanding any other which such total SO2 emissions exceed adjustments that the Administrator provision of this subpart and any the State assurance level as described in determines to be necessary and the revision, made by or submitted to the § 97.906(c)(2)(iii). reasons for accepting or rejecting any Administrator after the promulgation of (ii) [Reserved] objections submitted in accordance with the notice of data availability required (2) If the calculations under paragraph paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(A) of this section. in paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(B) of this section (b)(1)(i) of this section indicate that the (3) The Administrator will establish for a control period in a given year, of total SO2 emissions from all Texas SO2 one assurance account for each set of any data used in making the Trading Program units at Texas SO2 owners and operators referenced, in the calculations referenced in such notice, Trading Program sources during such notice of data availability required the amounts of Texas SO2 Trading control period exceed the State under paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(B) of this Program allowances that the owners and assurance level as described in section, as all of the owners and operators are required to hold in § 97.906(c)(2)(iii): operators of a group of Texas SO2 accordance with § 97.906(c)(2)(i) for (i) [Reserved] Trading Program sources and units such control period shall continue to be (ii) By August 1 immediately after the having a common designated such amounts as calculated by the deadline for the calculations under representative for such control period Administrator and referenced in such paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, the and as being required to hold Texas SO2 notice required in paragraph Administrator will calculate, for such Trading Program allowances. (b)(2)(iii)(B) of this section, except as control period and each common (4)(i) As of midnight of November 1 follows: designated representative for such immediately after the promulgation of (i) If any such data are revised by the control period for a group of one or each notice of data availability required Administrator as a result of a decision more Texas SO2 Trading Program in paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(B) of this section, in or settlement of litigation concerning sources and units, the common the owners and operators described in such data on appeal under part 78 of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 220 / Thursday, November 14, 2019 / Proposed Rules 61863

this chapter of such notice, or on appeal assurance account established by the reconfiguration program, or rebanding. under section 307 of the Clean Air Act Administrator for the appropriate Texas The document seeks comment on the of a decision rendered under part 78 of SO2 Trading Program sources and Texas proposed rule deletions. this chapter on appeal of such notice, SO2 Trading Program units under DATES: Comments are due on or before then the Administrator will use the data paragraph (b)(3) of this section, a total December 16, 2019 and reply comments as so revised to recalculate the amounts amount of the Texas SO2 Trading are due on or before December 30, 2019. of Texas SO2 Trading Program Program allowances held in such ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, allowances that owners and operators assurance account equal to the amount identified by WT Docket No. 02–55, by are required to hold in accordance with of the decrease. If Texas SO2 Trading the calculation formula in any of the following methods: Program allowances were transferred to • § 97.906(c)(2)(i) for such control period such assurance account from more than Federal Communications Commission’s website: http:// with regard to the Texas SO2 Trading one account, the amount of Texas SO 2 fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the Program sources and Texas SO2 Trading Trading Program allowances recorded in Program units involved, provided that instructions for submitting comments. each such transferor account will be in • such litigation under part 78 of this proportion to the percentage of the total People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable chapter, or the proceeding under part 78 amount of Texas SO2 Trading Program of this chapter that resulted in the allowances transferred to such accommodations (accessible format decision appealed in such litigation assurance account for such control documents, sign language interpreters, under section 307 of the Clean Air Act, period from such transferor account. CART, etc.) by email: [email protected] or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202– was initiated no later than 30 days after (C) Each Texas SO2 Trading Program promulgation of such notice required in allowance held under paragraph 418–0432. paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(B) of this section. (b)(6)(iii)(A) of this section as a result of For detailed instructions for (ii) [Reserved] recalculation of requirements under the submitting comments and additional (iii) If the revised data are used to Texas SO2 Trading Program assurance information on the rulemaking process, recalculate, in accordance with provisions for such control period must see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION paragraph (b)(6)(i) of this section, the be a Texas SO2 Trading Program section of this document. amount of Texas SO2 Trading Program allowance allocated for a control period FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: allowances that the owners and in a year before or the year immediately Roberto Mussenden, Policy and operators are required to hold for such following, or in the same year as, the Licensing Division, Public Safety and control period with regard to the Texas year of such control period. Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418– SO2 Trading Program sources and Texas 1428. SO2 Trading Program units involved— § 97.926 [Amended] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a (A) Where the amount of Texas SO2 ■ 12. Amend § 97.926 paragraph (b) by summary of the Commission’s Notice of Trading Program allowances that the adding after the text ‘‘§ 97.924,’’ the text Proposed Rulemaking in WT Docket No. owners and operators are required to ‘‘§ 97.925,’’. hold increases as a result of the use of 02–55, FCC 19–108, released on October all such revised data, the Administrator § 97.928 [Amended] 28, 2019. The complete text of this will establish a new, reasonable ■ 13. Amend § 97.928 paragraph (b) by document is available for download at _ deadline on which the owners and removing the text ‘‘a compliance http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs public/. operators shall hold the additional account,’’ and adding in its place the The complete text of this document is amount of Texas SO2 Trading Program text ‘‘a compliance account or an also available for inspection and allowances in the assurance account assurance account,’’. copying during normal business hours established by the Administrator for the in the FCC Reference Information § 97.931 [Amended] appropriate Texas SO2 Trading Program Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, sources and Texas SO2 Trading Program ■ 14. Amend § 97.931 paragraph (d)(3) Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. units under paragraph (b)(3) of this introductory text by removing after the To request materials in accessible section. The owners’ and operators’ text ‘‘is replaced by’’ the text ‘‘with’’. formats for people with disabilities failure to hold such additional amount, [FR Doc. 2019–24286 Filed 11–13–19; 8:45 am] (Braille, large print, electronic files, as required, before the new deadline BILLING CODE 6560–50–P audio format), send an email to shall not be a violation of the Clean Air [email protected] or call the Consumer & Act. The owners’ and operators’ failure Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202– to hold such additional amount, as FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 418–0530 (voice), 202–418–0432 (TTY). required, as of the new deadline shall be COMMISSION Synopsis a violation of the Clean Air Act. Each Texas SO2 Trading Program allowance 47 CFR Part 90 1. In the Notice of Proposed that the owners and operators fail to Rulemaking (NPRM), the Commission, hold as required as of the new deadline, [WT Docket No. 02–55; FCC 19–108] recognizing that it has determined that Sprint did not reap an economic and each day in such control period, Improving Public Safety windfall from the spectrum award that shall be a separate violation of the Clean Communications in the 800 MHz Band Air Act. Sprint received in exchange for (B) For the owners and operators for AGENCY: Federal Communications undertaking the financial obligation to which the amount of Texas SO2 Trading Commission. support 800 MHz rebanding, proposes Program allowances required to be held ACTION: Proposed rule. eliminating the rule that requires an decreases as a result of the use of all annual auditing of Sprint’s rebanding such revised data, the Administrator SUMMARY: In this document the expenditures by the 800 MHz Transition will record, in all accounts from which Commission takes steps to streamline Administrator. The NPRM seeks Texas SO2 Trading Program allowances our rules and procedures to accelerate comment on proposed procedures for were transferred by such owners and the successful conclusion of the eliminating the requirement that each operators for such control period to the Commission’s 800 MHz band rebanding agreement be reviewed and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:59 Nov 13, 2019 Jkt 250001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14NOP1.SGM 14NOP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS