Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Amendments to Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Air Quality Permit Program, 45485-45487 [E6-12970]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 9, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 24, 2006.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E6–12969 Filed 8–8–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2006–0527; FRL–8206–9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; West
Virginia; Amendments to Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) Air
Quality Permit Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a revision to the West Virginia State
Implementation Plan (SIP). The revision
consists of amendments to West
Virginia’s existing prevention of
significant deterioration (PSD)
preconstruction air quality permit
program. This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the
Act). In a separate action, EPA will
address changes made by West Virginia
to its nonattainment new source review
(NSR) permit program, also submitted
on December 1, 2005.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before September 8,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2006–0527 by one of the
following methods:
A. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. E-mail: campbell.dave@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2006–0527,
David Campbell, Chief, Permits and
Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode
3AP11, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2006–
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 Aug 08, 2006
Jkt 208001
0527. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business
hours at the Air Protection Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Copies of the State submittal are
available at the West Virginia
Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601
57th Street SE., Charleston, West
Virginia 25304.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rosemarie Nino, (215) 814–3377, or by
e-mail at nino.rose@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
supplementary information is arranged
as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45485
I. Background
II. Program Review
A. What is being addressed in this
document?
B. What are the program changes that EPA
is approving?
III. Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On December 31, 2002, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
published revisions to the Federal
prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD) and nonattainment new source
review (NSR) regulations (67 FR 80186).
These revisions are commonly referred
to as EPA’s ‘‘NSR Reform’’ regulations
and became effective on March 3, 2003.
These regulatory revisions included
provisions for baseline emissions
determinations, actual-to-future actual
methodology, Plantwide Applicability
Limits (PALs), Clean Units, and
Pollution Control Projects (PCPs). The
December 2002 rulemaking action
required State and local permitting
authorities to include the NSR Reform
measures as minimum program
elements in their State implementation
plans (SIP) and to submit these
revisions to EPA by January 2, 2006.
The United States Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit
ruled in New York v. EPA, 413 F.3d 3
(D.C. Cir. June 24, 2005) that EPA lacked
the authority to promulgate the Clean
Unit provisions, and the Court
requested that EPA vacate that portion
of the 2002 Federal regulation, codified
at 40 CFR 52.21(x), as contrary to the
statute. Also, the Court determined EPA
lacked the authority to create PCP
exceptions from NSR and vacated those
parts of the 1991 and 2002 rules,
codified at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(32) and
52.21(z), as contrary to the statute.
On December 1, 2005, EPA Region III
received a revision to the West Virginia
State Implementation Plan (SIP) from
the West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection (WVDEP).
This SIP revision consists of Legislative
Rule 45 CSR 14—Permits for
Construction and Major Modification of
Major Stationary Sources of Air
Pollution for the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration adopted by the
State of West Virginia on April 8, 2005
and effective June 1, 2005. The State
adopted the regulation in order to meet
the relevant plan requirements of 40
CFR 51.166. On December 22, 2005,
WVDEP provided supplemental
materials consisting of a letter and an
attached one-page table requesting that
EPA exclude from its December 1, 2005
request for SIP approval the provisions
of 45 CSR 14, as set forth in the attached
table, that pertain to ‘‘Clean Units’’ and
E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM
09AUP1
45486
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 9, 2006 / Proposed Rules
‘‘Pollution Control Project’’ in order to
ensure that their federally-approved
regulations are consistent with the
United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit’s June 24,
2005 ruling.
The WVDEP is seeking approval of
amendments to 45 CSR 14 in order to
meet the minimum requirements of 40
CFR 51.166 and the Clean Air Act. It
should be noted that West Virginia also
submitted amendments to its
nonattainment new source review (NSR)
regulations on December 1, 2005. The
EPA will address those amendments in
a separate rulemaking action.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
II Program Review
A. What Is Being Addressed in This
Document?
1. As stated in the December 31, 2002
‘‘NSR Reform’’ rulemaking, State and
local permitting agencies were required
to adopt and submit revisions to their
part 51 permitting programs,
implementing the minimum program
elements of that rulemaking no later
then January 2, 2006 (67 FR 80240).
With this submittal, West Virginia
requests approval of program revisions
to satisfy this requirement.
2. On December 1, 2005, WVDEP
submitted regulatory revisions to EPA
for approval. The submitted West
Virginia Rule was entitled, ‘‘45 CSR
14—Permits for Construction and Major
Modification of Major Stationary
Sources of Air Pollution for the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD)’’ and was adopted April 8, 2005
and effective June 1, 2005.
3. By letter dated December 22, 2005,
WVDEP requested that EPA exclude
from its December 1, 2005 request for
approval into the SIP those provisions
of 45 CSR 14 that pertain to the Clean
Unit and Pollution Control Project (PCP)
provisions of 40 CFR 51.166. The
specific provisions to be excluded were
set forth in a table attached to the letter.
The WVDEP made this request in order
for its SIP to be consistent with the
United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit June 24,
2005 ruling which vacated those
provisions of the Federal rules. West
Virginia also asked that EPA not act
upon the provisions of 45 CSR 14.19.8
pertaining to the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements for sources that
elect to use the actual-to-projected
actual emission test and where there is
a ‘‘reasonable possibility’’ that a project
may result in a significant net emissions
increase. The ‘‘reasonable possibility’’
clause of the corresponding provisions
of the Federal rules (51.166(r)(6)) were
remanded to EPA in the June 24, 2005
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 Aug 08, 2006
Jkt 208001
ruling mentioned above. West Virginia
has instructed EPA to not consider this
clause as part of this SIP revision
request. In its December 22, 2005 letter,
WVDEP stated its intent to make any
revisions to 45 CSR 14 necessary to
incorporate and implement Federal
program revisions once EPA takes
further action on the remand of 40 CFR
51.166(r)(6).
B. What Are the Program Changes That
EPA Is Approving?
In its December 2002 regulatory
action, EPA dramatically changed many
aspects of the regulations governing the
PSD and nonattainment NSR programs
(together, as ‘‘NSR’’). These changes
affected the NSR applicability
requirements to allow sources more
flexibility to pursue modifications of
their facilities in order to respond to
changes in the marketplace and to plan
for plant improvements. The goals of the
changes were to provide greater
regulatory certainty, administrative
flexibility, and permit streamlining,
while ensuring the current level of
environmental protection, or more, from
the existing program.
West Virginia has fully embraced
EPA’s NSR reform regulatory revisions
and sought to develop a regulatory
program that closely reflects the Federal
NSR regulations and conforms to the
minimum requirements of 40 CFR
51.166. As such, West Virginia has
translated the Federal NSR requirements
into the regulatory text of 45 CSR 14 in
a manner that is consistent with State
regulatory development procedures.
Since West Virginia has sought to
incorporate the majority of the Federal
regulatory language into its regulations,
the following is an examination of only
those few areas in which the State
altered the Federal regulatory text or
approach. A more detailed comparison
of 45 CSR 14 to the Federal
requirements of 40 CFR 51.166 can be
found in the technical support
document (TSD) prepared for this
rulemaking.
Notable Differences in 45 CSR 14—
Permits for Construction and Major
Modification of Major Stationary
Sources of Air Pollution for the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD)
1. West Virginia’s definition for
‘‘Actual Emissions’’ at 45 CSR 14–2.1
does not identify all of the defined NSR
pollutants. However, West Virginia did
incorporate a definition for ‘‘Regulated
NSR Pollutants,’’ which, when read
together with the definition for ‘‘Actual
Emissions’’, makes the regulation
consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(b)(21).
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Therefore, EPA finds the definition
acceptable.
2. The provisions for the general
requirements for establishing PALs at 45
CSR 14–25.4(a)(2) indicates that all PAL
permits shall meet the general public
review procedures established at 45 CSR
14–17. Section 25 also identifies public
participation procedures expressly for
PALs at 45 CSR 25.5. While the
identification of two public
participation procedures for PALs may
be confusing, the two procedures are not
in conflict and satisfaction of either of
the procedures meets the minimum
requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(w)(5).
3. In a change unrelated to the Federal
NSR Reform efforts and to be consistent
with 40 CFR 51.166(s)(2)(v), West
Virginia added language to 45 CSR 14–
14.d.3 that requires all modifications
seeking to rely upon innovative
technology as best available control
technology to meet minimum public
participation requirements. This change
was necessary because public
participation is a condition for using
innovative technology, therefore, EPA
finds the provision acceptable.
III. Proposed Action
Based on the above analysis, EPA has
determined that the amendments to
West Virginia’s prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) permit program at
45 CSR 14, as submitted on
December 1, 2005 and supplemented on
December 22, 2005, meet the minimum
requirements of 40 CFR 51.166 and the
Clean Air Act. This amendment is
approvable as a revision to the West
Virginia SIP.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ and therefore is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is
also not subject to Executive Order
13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)). This action merely
proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies
that this proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule
proposes to approve pre-existing
requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable
E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM
09AUP1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 153 / Wednesday, August 9, 2006 / Proposed Rules
duty beyond that required by state law,
it does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). This proposed
rule also does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will
it have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999), because it merely
proposes to approve a state rule
implementing a Federal requirement,
and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the
absence of a prior existing requirement
for the State to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. As required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61
FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this proposed rule, EPA has taken the
necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize
potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct. EPA
has complied with Executive Order
12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by
examining the takings implications of
the rule in accordance with the
‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk
and Avoidance of Unanticipated
Takings’’ issued under the executive
order. This proposed rule, approving
amendment to West Virginia’s
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 Aug 08, 2006
Jkt 208001
(PSD) Construction Permit Program,
does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 24, 2006.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E6–12970 Filed 8–8–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0085; FRL–8207–1]
Revisions to Standards of
Performance for New Stationary
Sources, National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source
Categories
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to
revise the General Provisions for
Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources, for National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants, and for National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Source Categories to allow
extensions to the deadline imposed for
source owners and operators to conduct
initial or other required performance
tests in certain specified circumstances.
The General Provisions do not currently
provide for extensions of the deadlines
for conducting performance tests.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before November 7, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2006–0085, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–1741.
• Mail: Revisions to Standards of
Performance for New Stationary
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45487
Sources, National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source
Categories, Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2006–0085, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode 6102T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Please include a
total of two copies. In addition, please
mail a copy of your comments on the
information collection provisions to the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for
EPA, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC
20503.
• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center,
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room
B102, Washington, DC 20460. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–
0085. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov your email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM
09AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 153 (Wednesday, August 9, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45485-45487]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-12970]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0527; FRL-8206-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Amendments to Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) Air Quality Permit Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the West Virginia
State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revision consists of amendments to
West Virginia's existing prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
preconstruction air quality permit program. This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). In a separate action, EPA
will address changes made by West Virginia to its nonattainment new
source review (NSR) permit program, also submitted on December 1, 2005.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 8,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2006-0527 by one of the following methods:
A. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: campbell.dave@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0527, David Campbell, Chief, Permits and
Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP11, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2006-0527. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE., Charleston,
West Virginia 25304.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosemarie Nino, (215) 814-3377, or by
e-mail at nino.rose@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The supplementary information is arranged as
follows:
I. Background
II. Program Review
A. What is being addressed in this document?
B. What are the program changes that EPA is approving?
III. Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On December 31, 2002, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) published revisions to the Federal prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) and nonattainment new source review (NSR)
regulations (67 FR 80186). These revisions are commonly referred to as
EPA's ``NSR Reform'' regulations and became effective on March 3, 2003.
These regulatory revisions included provisions for baseline emissions
determinations, actual-to-future actual methodology, Plantwide
Applicability Limits (PALs), Clean Units, and Pollution Control
Projects (PCPs). The December 2002 rulemaking action required State and
local permitting authorities to include the NSR Reform measures as
minimum program elements in their State implementation plans (SIP) and
to submit these revisions to EPA by January 2, 2006.
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit ruled in New York v. EPA, 413 F.3d 3 (D.C. Cir. June 24, 2005)
that EPA lacked the authority to promulgate the Clean Unit provisions,
and the Court requested that EPA vacate that portion of the 2002
Federal regulation, codified at 40 CFR 52.21(x), as contrary to the
statute. Also, the Court determined EPA lacked the authority to create
PCP exceptions from NSR and vacated those parts of the 1991 and 2002
rules, codified at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(32) and 52.21(z), as contrary to the
statute.
On December 1, 2005, EPA Region III received a revision to the West
Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the West Virginia
Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP). This SIP revision
consists of Legislative Rule 45 CSR 14--Permits for Construction and
Major Modification of Major Stationary Sources of Air Pollution for the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration adopted by the State of West
Virginia on April 8, 2005 and effective June 1, 2005. The State adopted
the regulation in order to meet the relevant plan requirements of 40
CFR 51.166. On December 22, 2005, WVDEP provided supplemental materials
consisting of a letter and an attached one-page table requesting that
EPA exclude from its December 1, 2005 request for SIP approval the
provisions of 45 CSR 14, as set forth in the attached table, that
pertain to ``Clean Units'' and
[[Page 45486]]
``Pollution Control Project'' in order to ensure that their federally-
approved regulations are consistent with the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit's June 24, 2005 ruling.
The WVDEP is seeking approval of amendments to 45 CSR 14 in order
to meet the minimum requirements of 40 CFR 51.166 and the Clean Air
Act. It should be noted that West Virginia also submitted amendments to
its nonattainment new source review (NSR) regulations on December 1,
2005. The EPA will address those amendments in a separate rulemaking
action.
II Program Review
A. What Is Being Addressed in This Document?
1. As stated in the December 31, 2002 ``NSR Reform'' rulemaking,
State and local permitting agencies were required to adopt and submit
revisions to their part 51 permitting programs, implementing the
minimum program elements of that rulemaking no later then January 2,
2006 (67 FR 80240). With this submittal, West Virginia requests
approval of program revisions to satisfy this requirement.
2. On December 1, 2005, WVDEP submitted regulatory revisions to EPA
for approval. The submitted West Virginia Rule was entitled, ``45 CSR
14--Permits for Construction and Major Modification of Major Stationary
Sources of Air Pollution for the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD)'' and was adopted April 8, 2005 and effective June
1, 2005.
3. By letter dated December 22, 2005, WVDEP requested that EPA
exclude from its December 1, 2005 request for approval into the SIP
those provisions of 45 CSR 14 that pertain to the Clean Unit and
Pollution Control Project (PCP) provisions of 40 CFR 51.166. The
specific provisions to be excluded were set forth in a table attached
to the letter. The WVDEP made this request in order for its SIP to be
consistent with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit June 24, 2005 ruling which vacated those provisions of
the Federal rules. West Virginia also asked that EPA not act upon the
provisions of 45 CSR 14.19.8 pertaining to the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements for sources that elect to use the actual-to-
projected actual emission test and where there is a ``reasonable
possibility'' that a project may result in a significant net emissions
increase. The ``reasonable possibility'' clause of the corresponding
provisions of the Federal rules (51.166(r)(6)) were remanded to EPA in
the June 24, 2005 ruling mentioned above. West Virginia has instructed
EPA to not consider this clause as part of this SIP revision request.
In its December 22, 2005 letter, WVDEP stated its intent to make any
revisions to 45 CSR 14 necessary to incorporate and implement Federal
program revisions once EPA takes further action on the remand of 40 CFR
51.166(r)(6).
B. What Are the Program Changes That EPA Is Approving?
In its December 2002 regulatory action, EPA dramatically changed
many aspects of the regulations governing the PSD and nonattainment NSR
programs (together, as ``NSR''). These changes affected the NSR
applicability requirements to allow sources more flexibility to pursue
modifications of their facilities in order to respond to changes in the
marketplace and to plan for plant improvements. The goals of the
changes were to provide greater regulatory certainty, administrative
flexibility, and permit streamlining, while ensuring the current level
of environmental protection, or more, from the existing program.
West Virginia has fully embraced EPA's NSR reform regulatory
revisions and sought to develop a regulatory program that closely
reflects the Federal NSR regulations and conforms to the minimum
requirements of 40 CFR 51.166. As such, West Virginia has translated
the Federal NSR requirements into the regulatory text of 45 CSR 14 in a
manner that is consistent with State regulatory development procedures.
Since West Virginia has sought to incorporate the majority of the
Federal regulatory language into its regulations, the following is an
examination of only those few areas in which the State altered the
Federal regulatory text or approach. A more detailed comparison of 45
CSR 14 to the Federal requirements of 40 CFR 51.166 can be found in the
technical support document (TSD) prepared for this rulemaking.
Notable Differences in 45 CSR 14--Permits for Construction and Major
Modification of Major Stationary Sources of Air Pollution for the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
1. West Virginia's definition for ``Actual Emissions'' at 45 CSR
14-2.1 does not identify all of the defined NSR pollutants. However,
West Virginia did incorporate a definition for ``Regulated NSR
Pollutants,'' which, when read together with the definition for
``Actual Emissions'', makes the regulation consistent with 40 CFR
51.166(b)(21). Therefore, EPA finds the definition acceptable.
2. The provisions for the general requirements for establishing
PALs at 45 CSR 14-25.4(a)(2) indicates that all PAL permits shall meet
the general public review procedures established at 45 CSR 14-17.
Section 25 also identifies public participation procedures expressly
for PALs at 45 CSR 25.5. While the identification of two public
participation procedures for PALs may be confusing, the two procedures
are not in conflict and satisfaction of either of the procedures meets
the minimum requirements of 40 CFR 51.166(w)(5).
3. In a change unrelated to the Federal NSR Reform efforts and to
be consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(s)(2)(v), West Virginia added language
to 45 CSR 14-14.d.3 that requires all modifications seeking to rely
upon innovative technology as best available control technology to meet
minimum public participation requirements. This change was necessary
because public participation is a condition for using innovative
technology, therefore, EPA finds the provision acceptable.
III. Proposed Action
Based on the above analysis, EPA has determined that the amendments
to West Virginia's prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permit
program at 45 CSR 14, as submitted on December 1, 2005 and supplemented
on December 22, 2005, meet the minimum requirements of 40 CFR 51.166
and the Clean Air Act. This amendment is approvable as a revision to
the West Virginia SIP.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)).
This action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any
additional enforceable
[[Page 45487]]
duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any
unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments,
as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4). This proposed rule also does not have a substantial direct effect
on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor
will it have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), because it merely proposes to approve a state rule
implementing a Federal requirement, and does not alter the relationship
or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this proposed rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied
with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining
the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
This proposed rule, approving amendment to West Virginia's Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Construction Permit Program, does
not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 24, 2006.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E6-12970 Filed 8-8-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P