Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Federal Implementation Plan, 53883-53892 [2010-21706]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 170 / Thursday, September 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
(13) Proceed generally north,
northwest, and west along the California
Aqueduct, crossing over the Palmdale,
Ritter Ridge, Lancaster West, Del Sur,
Lake Hughes, and Fairmont Butte maps,
onto the Neenach School map, to the
aqueduct’s intersection with the Pacific
Crest National Scenic Trail and the Los
Angeles Aqueduct in section 16, T8N,
R16W; then
(14) Proceed north and northeast
along the Pacific Crest National Scenic
Trail and the Los Angeles Aqueduct as
the aqueduct crosses over the Fairmont
Butte map onto the Tylerhorse map to
the 3,120-foot, marked elevation point at
the West Antelope Station, section 3,
T9N, R15W; then
(15) Proceed east-northeast along the
Los Angeles Aqueduct (the Pacific Crest
National Scenic Trail forks to the west
at the 3,120-foot marked elevation
point), crossing onto the Willow Springs
map, to the aqueduct’s intersection with
Tehachapi Willow Springs Road,
section 7, T10N, R13W; then
(16) Proceed southeast and south on
Tehachapi Willow Springs Road,
crossing onto the Little Buttes map, to
the road’s intersection with the 2,500foot elevation line, section 17 west
boundary line, T9N, R13W; then
(17) Proceed east and northeast along
the 2,500-foot elevation line, crossing
over the Willow Springs map and
continuing onto the Soledad Mtn. map,
where that line crosses over and back
three times from the Rosamond map, to
the line’s intersection with the Edwards
AFB boundary line, section 10, T9N,
R12W; and then
(18) Proceed straight south along the
Edwards AFB boundary line, crossing
over to the Rosamond map, to the
beginning point.
Signed: August 23, 2010.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010–21989 Filed 9–1–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0107; FRL–9190–8]
RIN–2060–AQ45
Action To Ensure Authority To Issue
Permits Under the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration Program to
Sources of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Federal Implementation
Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Sep 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
In this rulemaking, EPA is
proposing a Federal implementation
plan (FIP) to apply in any State that is
unable to submit, by its deadline, a
corrective State implementation plan
(SIP) revision to ensure that the State
has authority to issue permits under the
Clean Air Act’s (CAA or Act) New
Source Review Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program for sources
of greenhouse gases (GHGs). This
proposal is a companion rulemaking to
‘‘Action to Ensure Authority to Issue
Permits Under the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration Program to
Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions:
Finding of Substantial Inadequacy and
SIP Call,’’ which is being signed and
published on the same schedule. In that
action, EPA is proposing to make a
finding of substantial inadequacy and
proposing to issue a SIP call for 13
States on grounds that their SIPs do not
appear to apply the PSD program to
GHG-emitting sources.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be
received on or before October 4, 2010.
Public Hearing: One public hearing
concerning the proposed regulation will
be held. The date, time and location will
be announced separately. Please refer to
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for
additional information on the comment
period and the public hearing.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2010–0107 by one of the following
methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–9744
• Mail: Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2010–0107, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
West (Air Docket), 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Mail code: 6102T,
Washington, DC 20460. Please include a
total of 2 copies.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA West (Air
Docket), 1301 Constitution Avenue,
Northwest, Room 3334, Washington, DC
20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2010–0107. 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–2010–
0107. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53883
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 https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://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 https://
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, avoid 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.
For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to section I.C
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket. All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the Air Docket is (202) 566–
1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Lisa Sutton, Air Quality Policy Division,
Office of Air Quality Planning and
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
53884
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 170 / Thursday, September 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Standards (C504–03), Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711; telephone number:
(919) 541–3450; fax number: (919) 541–
local, or tribal permitting authority, or
to submit information requested in this
action, please contact the appropriate
EPA regional office:
5509; e-mail address:
sutton.lisa@epa.gov.
For
questions related to a specific State,
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
EPA regional
office
Contact for regional office (person, mailing address, telephone number)
Permitting authority
I ........................
Dave Conroy, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office
Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109–3912, (617) 918–1661.
Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region 2, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, NY 10007–1866, (212) 637–3706.
Kathleen Anderson, Chief, Permits and Technical Assessment Branch,
EPA Region 3, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029, (215)
814–2173.
Dick Schutt, Chief, Air Planning Branch, EPA Region 4, Atlanta Federal
Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, GA 30303–3104, (404) 562–
9033.
J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), EPA Region 5,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604–3507, (312) 886–1430.
Jeff Robinson, Chief, Air Permits Section, EPA Region 6, Fountain Place
12th Floor, Suite 1200, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202–2733,
(214) 665–6435.
Mark Smith, Chief, Air Permitting and Compliance Branch, EPA Region 7,
901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101, (913) 551–7876.
Carl Daly, Unit Leader, Air Permitting, Monitoring & Modeling Unit, EPA
Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202–1129, (303) 312–
6416.
Gerardo Rios, Chief, Permits Office, EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 972–3974.
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and Virgin
Islands.
District of Columbia, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia.
II .......................
III ......................
IV .....................
V ......................
VI .....................
VII ....................
VIII ...................
IX .....................
X ......................
Nancy Helm, Manager, Federal and Delegated Air Programs Unit, EPA
Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101, (206)
553–6908.
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
Entities potentially affected by this
rule include States, local permitting
authorities, and tribal authorities.1 Any
SIP-approved PSD air permitting
regulation that is not structured such
that it includes GHGs among pollutants
subject to regulation under the Act will
potentially be found substantially
inadequate to meet CAA requirements,
under CAA section 110(k)(5), and the
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi,
North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee.
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and
Wisconsin.
Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma,
and Texas.
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska.
Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Utah, and Wyoming.
Arizona; California; Hawaii and the Pacific Islands; Indian Country within Region 9 and Navajo Nation; and Nevada.
Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.
State will potentially be affected by this
rule. For example, if a State’s PSD
regulation identifies its regulated NSR
pollutants by specifically listing each
individual pollutant and the list omits
GHGs, then the regulation is inadequate.
Entities potentially affected by this
rule also include sources in all industry
groups, which have a direct obligation
under the CAA to obtain a PSD permit
for GHGs for projects that meet the
applicability thresholds set forth in the
Tailoring Rule.2 This independent
obligation on sources is specific to PSD
and derives from CAA section 165(a).
Any source that is subject to a State PSD
air permitting regulation not structured
to apply to GHG-emitting sources will
potentially rely on this rule to obtain a
permit that contains emission
limitations that conform to requirements
under CAA section 165(a). The majority
of entities potentially affected by this
action are expected to be in the
following groups:
NAICS a
Utilities (electric, natural gas, other systems) ..........................................
Manufacturing (food, beverages, tobacco, textiles, leather) ....................
Wood product, paper manufacturing ........................................................
Petroleum and coal products manufacturing ...........................................
Chemical manufacturing ...........................................................................
Rubber product manufacturing .................................................................
Miscellaneous chemical products .............................................................
Nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing .............................................
Primary and fabricated metal manufacturing ...........................................
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Industry group
2211, 2212, 2213.
311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316.
321, 322.
32411, 32412, 32419.
3251, 3252, 3253, 3254, 3255, 3256, 3259.
3261, 3262.
32552, 32592, 32591, 325182, 32551.
3271, 3272, 3273, 3274, 3279.
3311, 3312, 3313, 3314, 3315, 3321, 3322, 3323, 3324, 3325, 3326,
3327, 3328, 3329.
3331, 3332, 3333, 3334, 3335, 3336, 3339.
3341, 3342, 3343, 3344, 3345, 4446.
3351, 3352, 3353, 3359.
3361, 3362, 3363, 3364, 3365, 3366, 3366, 3369.
3371, 3372, 3379.
3391, 3399.
Machinery manufacturing .........................................................................
Computer and electronic products manufacturing ...................................
Electrical equipment, appliance, and component manufacturing ............
Transportation equipment manufacturing .................................................
Furniture and related product manufacturing ...........................................
Miscellaneous manufacturing ...................................................................
1 EPA respects the unique relationship between
the U.S. government and tribal authorities and
acknowledges that tribal concerns are not
interchangeable with State concerns. However, for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Sep 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
convenience, we refer to ‘‘State’’ in this rulemaking
to collectively mean State, local permitting
authorities, and tribal authorities.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title
V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule. 75 FR
31514 (June 3, 2010). The Tailoring Rule is
described in more detail later in this preamble.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 170 / Thursday, September 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
53885
Industry group
NAICS a
Waste management and remediation ......................................................
Hospitals/nursing and residential care facilities .......................................
Personal and laundry services .................................................................
Residential/private households .................................................................
Non-residential (commercial) ....................................................................
5622, 5629.
6221, 6231, 6232, 6233, 6239.
8122, 8123.
8141.
Not available. Codes only exist for private households, construction
and leasing/sales industries.
a North
American Industry Classification System.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
B. Where can I get a copy of this
document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the
docket, an electronic copy of this
proposal will also be available on the
World Wide Web. Following signature
by the EPA Administrator, a copy of this
notice will be posted on the EPA’s NSR
Web site, under Regulations &
Standards, at https://www.epa.gov/nsr.
C. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information
that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD–ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD–ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver
information identified as CBI only to the
following address: Roberto Morales,
OAQPS Document Control Officer
(C404–02), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0107.
2. Tips for preparing your comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
• Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
• Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
• Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
• Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Sep 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
• If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
• Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
• Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
• Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
D. How can I find information about the
public hearing?
The EPA will hold one public hearing
on this proposal. The date, time, and
location of the public hearing will be
announced separately. The EPA
encourages commenters to provide
written versions of their oral testimonies
either electronically or in paper copy. If
you would like to present oral testimony
at the public hearing, please notify Ms.
Pamela S. Long, New Source Review
Group, Air Quality Policy Division
(C504–03), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711, telephone number (919)
541–0641, or e-mail: long.pam@epa.gov.
Persons interested in presenting oral
testimony should notify Ms. Long at
least 2 days in advance of the public
hearing. Persons interested in attending
the public hearing should also contact
Ms. Long to verify the time, date, and
location of the hearing. The public
hearing will provide interested parties
the opportunity to present data, views,
or arguments concerning the proposed
rule.
E. How is the preamble organized?
The information presented in this
preamble is organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. Where can I get a copy of this document
and other related information?
C. What should I consider as I prepare my
comments for EPA?
D. How can I find information about the
public hearing?
E. How is the preamble organized?
II. Background and Context of Proposed Rule
A. Introduction
B. CAA and Regulatory Context
C. SIP Inadequacy and Corrective Action;
Federal Implementation Plans
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
D. States That Do Not Appear To Apply the
PSD Program to GHG Sources; PSD GHG
SIP Call
III. Proposed Federal Implementation Plan
A. Timing for FIP
B. Substance of FIP
C. Primacy of the SIP Process
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866—Regulatory
Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform
E. Executive Order 13132—Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175—Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
G. Executive Order 13045—Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211—Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898—Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Determination Under Section 307(d)
V. Statutory Authority
II. Background and Context of Proposed
Rule
A. Introduction
In this rulemaking under the CAA,
EPA is proposing a FIP for 13 States for
which, in a companion action, EPA is
proposing a finding of SIP substantial
inadequacy and is proposing to issue a
SIP Call because the States’ PSD SIP
programs do not appear to apply to
sources of GHGs. ‘‘Action to Ensure
Authority to Issue Permits Under the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Finding of Substantial
Inadequacy and SIP Call’’ (the ‘‘PSD
GHG SIP Call’’ or ‘‘SIP Call’’). These two
rulemakings address States whose
permitting regulations and SIPs appear
to fail to apply the PSD program to
sources of GHGs in those States. As
discussed further in this preamble,
certain larger GHG-emitting sources will
be subject to PSD permitting
requirements on and after January 2,
2011. Thus, in States whose PSD
programs do not apply to sources of
GHGs, sources will be unable to obtain
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
53886
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 170 / Thursday, September 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
a PSD permit that covers GHG emissions
and therefore potentially unable to
undertake construction or modification
projects on and after January 2, 2011.
The States for which we are proposing
a FIP are listed in table II–1, ‘‘States with
SIPs That Do Not Appear To Apply PSD
to GHG Sources (Presumptive SIP Call
List).’’ If any of these States are not in
a position to submit to EPA a corrective
SIP revision by its deadline, EPA will
promulgate a FIP that will provide
authority to issue PSD permits for
construction or modification of
appropriate GHG sources in the State.
TABLE II–1—STATES WITH SIPS THAT DO NOT APPEAR TO APPLY PSD TO GHG SOURCES (PRESUMPTIVE SIP CALL
LIST)
EPA
region
State (or area)
Alaska ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Arizona: Pinal County; Rest of State (Excludes Maricopa County, Pima County, and Indian Country) .........................................................
Arkansas ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................
California: Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD ....................................................................................................................................................
Connecticut .......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Florida ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Idaho .................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Kansas ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Kentucky: Jefferson County; Rest of State ......................................................................................................................................................
Nebraska ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Nevada: Clark County ......................................................................................................................................................................................
Oregon ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Texas ................................................................................................................................................................................................................
The rest of the States with approved
SIP PSD programs (meaning each of
those not listed in table II–1) are listed
in table II–2, ‘‘States with SIPs that
Appear to Apply PSD to GHG Sources
(Presumptive Adequacy List).’’ For each
of the States listed in table II–2 (as well
as for any States with approved SIP PSD
programs that we may have
inadvertently omitted from table II–2),
EPA is soliciting comment in the SIP
Call companion notice on whether their
SIPs do or do not apply the PSD
program to GHG-emitting sources. We
are not at this time proposing a FIP for
the States listed in table II–2. However,
if EPA concludes, on the basis of
information EPA receives, that such a
State’s SIP does not apply the PSD
program to GHG-emitting sources, then
EPA will proceed to issue for that State
a finding of substantial inadequacy and
a SIP Call on the same schedule as for
the States listed in table II–1 (the
presumptive SIP Call list). If a SIPcalled State is not able to submit to EPA
a SIP revision that applies the PSD
program to GHG sources by the deadline
required in the SIP Call, then EPA
proposes to promulgate a FIP without
further notice and comment. The
promulgated FIP will apply the PSD
X
IX
VI
IX
I
IV
X
VII
IV
VII
IX
X
VI
program to GHG sources in the State
and provide PSD permitting authority
for construction and modification of
affected sources. Accordingly, interested
parties in a State for which we, in the
companion SIP Call rulemaking, solicit
comment on the adequacy of its SIP to
apply PSD to GHG-emitting sources
should consider the comment period for
the present notice to be their
opportunity to comment on the FIP that
EPA would implement in their State
(should EPA ultimately determine to
issue a SIP Call for their State in EPA’s
final action on the companion SIP Call
rulemaking).
TABLE II–2—STATES WITH SIPS THAT APPEAR TO APPLY PSD TO GHG SOURCES (PRESUMPTIVE ADEQUACY LIST)
EPA
region
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
State (or area)
Alabama: Jefferson County; Huntsville; Rest of State .....................................................................................................................................
California: Mendocino County AQMD; Monterey Bay Unified APCD; North Coast Unified AQMD; Northern Sonoma County APCD .........
Colorado ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Delaware ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Georgia .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Indiana ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Iowa ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Louisiana ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Maine ................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Maryland ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Michigan ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Mississippi ........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Missouri ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Montana ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
New Hampshire ................................................................................................................................................................................................
New Mexico: Albuquerque; Rest of State ........................................................................................................................................................
North Carolina: Forsythe County; Mecklenburg; Western NC; Rest of State .................................................................................................
North Dakota ....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Ohio ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Oklahoma .........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Pennsylvania: All except Allegheny County .....................................................................................................................................................
Rhode Island ....................................................................................................................................................................................................
South Carolina ..................................................................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Sep 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
IV
IX
VIII
III
IV
V
VII
VI
I
III
V
IV
VII
VIII
I
VI
IV
VIII
V
VI
III
I
IV
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 170 / Thursday, September 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
53887
TABLE II–2—STATES WITH SIPS THAT APPEAR TO APPLY PSD TO GHG SOURCES (PRESUMPTIVE ADEQUACY LIST)—
Continued
EPA
region
State (or area)
South Dakota ....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Tennessee: Chattanooga; Nashville; Knoxville; Memphis; Rest of State ........................................................................................................
Vermont ............................................................................................................................................................................................................
Virginia ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................
West Virginia ....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Wisconsin .........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Wyoming ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................
Utah ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................
The background and context for this
proposed rule is the same as for the
proposed PSD GHG SIP Call and other
actions cross-referenced in that action.
Familiarity with the proposed PSD GHG
SIP Call is presumed. As a result, the
background and context for this rule
will be only briefly summarized here.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
B. CAA and Regulatory Context
1. SIP PSD Requirements
Under the CAA PSD requirements, a
new or existing source that emits or has
the potential to emit ‘‘any air pollutant’’
in specified quantities cannot construct
or modify unless it first obtains a PSD
permit that, among other things,
imposes emission limitations that
qualify as best available control
technology (BACT). CAA sections
165(a)(1), 165(a)(4), 169(1).
Longstanding EPA regulations have
interpreted the term ‘‘any air pollutant’’
narrowly so that only emissions of any
‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ trigger PSD.
40 CFR 52.21(j)(2), (b)(50)(iv). The term
‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ is defined to
include the following four classes of air
pollutants:
(i) any pollutant for which a NAAQS
has been promulgated;
(ii) any pollutant subject to an NSPS
promulgated under CAA 111;
(iii) any pollutant subject to a
standard promulgated under CAA title
VI; and
(iv) ‘‘any pollutant that otherwise is
subject to regulation under the Act’’
(excluding HAPs listed under CAA
section 112).
The CAA contemplates that the PSD
program be implemented in the first
instance by the States. States are
required to include PSD requirements in
their SIPs. CAA section 110(a)(2)(C).
Most States have PSD programs that
have been approved into their SIPs, and
these States implement their PSD
program and act as the permitting
authority. For the most part, these
approved SIPs mirror EPA regulatory
requirements, as found in 40 CFR
51.166 (except for the recently added
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:20 Sep 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
revisions from the Tailoring Rule). As a
result, most SIPs include the
applicability requirement that PSD
apply to sources that construct or
modify and thereby increase their
emissions of any ‘‘regulated NSR
pollutant.’’ A number of States do not
have PSD programs approved into their
SIPs; in those States, EPA’s regulations
at 40 CFR 52.21 govern, and either EPA
or the State as EPA’s delegatee acts as
the permitting authority.
2. Recent EPA Regulatory Actions
Concerning PSD Requirements for GHGemitting Sources
Beginning on January 2, 2011, certain
stationary sources that construct or
undertake modifications will become
subject to the CAA requirement to
obtain a PSD permit for their GHG
emissions. This is because of the
following EPA regulatory actions.
By notice dated December 15, 2009,
pursuant to CAA section 202(a), EPA
issued, in a single final action, two
findings 3 regarding GHGs that are
commonly referred to as the
‘‘Endangerment Finding’’ and the ‘‘Cause
or Contribute Finding.’’ In the
Endangerment Finding, EPA found that
six long-lived and directly emitted
GHGs—carbon dioxide (CO2), methane
(CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O),
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs),
perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur
hexafluoride (SF6)—may reasonably be
anticipated to endanger public health
and welfare. In the Cause or Contribute
Finding, the Administrator ‘‘define[d]
the air pollutant as the aggregate group
of the same six * * * greenhouse
gases,’’ 74 FR 66536, and found that the
combined emissions of this air pollutant
from new motor vehicles and new motor
vehicle engines contribute to the GHG
air pollution that endangers public
health and welfare.
By notice dated May 7, 2010, EPA
published what is commonly known as
3 ‘‘Endangerment and Cause or Contribute
Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section
202(a) of the Clean Air Act.’’ 74 FR 66496.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
VIII
IV
I
III
III
V
VIII
VIII
the ‘‘Light-Duty Vehicle Rule’’ (LDVR),4
which for the first time established
Federal controls on GHGs, those emitted
from light-duty vehicles. This rule
specifies, in its applicability provisions,
the air pollutant subject to control as the
aggregate group of the six GHGs,
including CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs,
and SF6. 75 FR 25686 (40 CFR 86.1818–
12(a)).
By notice dated April 2, 2010, EPA
promulgated what is commonly known
as the Johnson Memo Reconsideration.5
The Johnson Memo Reconsideration
interpreted one of the regulatory triggers
for PSD applicability—the term ‘‘subject
to regulation’’—and concluded that
promulgation of the LDVR would render
GHGs ‘‘subject to regulation’’ and
thereby trigger PSD applicability for
GHG-emitting sources on January 2,
2011, which according to EPA is the
date upon which the LDVR takes effect.
By notice dated June 3, 2010, EPA
published what is commonly known as
the ‘‘Tailoring Rule,’’6 which limits the
applicability of PSD to certain GHGemitting sources through a multi-step
phase-in approach. In the Tailoring
Rule, EPA established the first two steps
of the phase-in approach as follows:
For the first step of this Tailoring Rule,
which will begin on January 2, 2011, PSD
* * * requirements will apply to sources’
GHG emission only if the sources are subject
to PSD * * * anyway due to their non-GHG
pollutants. [We call these sources ‘‘anyway
sources.’’] Therefore, EPA will not require
sources or modifications to evaluate whether
they are subject to PSD * * * requirements
solely on account of their GHG emissions.
4 ‘‘Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission
Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy
Standards; Final Rule,’’ 75 FR 25324 (May 7, 2010).
5 ‘‘Interpretation of Regulations that Determine
Pollutants Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting
Programs’’ (75 FR 17004; April 2, 2010) (finalizing
EPA response to petition for reconsideration of
‘‘EPA’s Interpretation of Regulations that Determine
Pollutants Covered by Federal Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permit Program’’
(commonly known as the ‘‘Johnson Memo’’),
December 18, 2008).
6 ‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration and
Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule,’’
75 FR 31514.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
53888
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 170 / Thursday, September 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Specifically, for PSD, Step 1 requires that as
of January 2, 2011, the applicable
requirements of PSD, most notably, the best
available control technology (BACT)
requirement, will apply to projects that
increase net GHG emissions by at least
75,000 tpy carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e)
but only if the project also significantly
increase emissions of at least one non-GHG
pollutant.
The second step * * * beginning on July
1, 2011, will phase in additional large
sources of GHG emissions. New sources
* * * that emit, or have the potential to emit,
at least 100,000 tpy CO2e will become subject
to the PSD * * * requirements. In addition,
sources that emit or have the potential to
emit at least 100,000 tpy CO2e and that
undertake a modification that increases net
emissions of GHGs by at least 75,000 tpy
CO2e will also be subject to PSD
requirements. [We call this the 100,000/
75,000 threshold.] For both steps, we note
that if sources or modifications exceed these
CO2e-adjusted GHG triggers, they are not
covered by permitting requirements unless
their GHG emissions also exceed the
corresponding mass-based triggers (i.e.,
unadjusted for CO2e.)
75 FR 31516. In the Tailoring Rule,
EPA codified the Johnson Memo
Reconsideration interpretation of the
term ‘‘subject to regulation’’ and added
a further interpretation of that term
designed to expedite the adoption of the
phase-in approach by the States into
their SIPs. In addition, in the Tailoring
Rule, EPA identified the air pollutant as
the aggregate of the six GHGs, again,
CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6.
The Tailoring Rule further provided that
for purposes of determining whether the
amount of GHG emissions exceeds
specified thresholds and therefore
triggers the application of PSD, the
amount of emissions must be calculated
on both a mass basis and, as alluded to
above, a carbon dioxide equivalent
(CO2e) basis. With respect to the latter,
according to the rule, ‘‘PSD * * *
applicability is based on the quantity
that results when the mass emissions of
each of these gases is multiplied by the
Global Warming Potential (GWP) of that
gas, and then summed for all six gases.’’
75 FR 31518.
Further information on the applicable
CAA provisions, the Endangerment and
Cause or Contribute Findings, the
LDRV, the Johnson Memo
Reconsideration, and the Tailoring Rule
is contained in the Tailoring Rule and
the proposed PSD GHG SIP Call.
We note that in this rulemaking we
are not addressing the issue of
accounting for emissions of GHGs from
bioenergy and other biogenic sources
(which are generated during the
combustion or decomposition of
biologically based material such as
forest or agriculture products). When we
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Sep 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
finalized the Tailoring Rule, we noted
that EPA planned to seek comment on
how to address emissions of biogenic
CO2 under the PSD and title V programs
through future action, such as a separate
Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPR) (75 FR at 31591).
As a first step, we recently issued a Call
for Information (CFI) to solicit public
comment and data on technical issues
that might be used to consider biomass
fuels and the emissions resulting from
their combustion differently with regard
to applicability under PSD and with
regard to the BACT review process
under PSD. See ‘‘Call for Information:
Information on Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Associated with Bioenergy
and Other Biogenic Sources,’’ 75 FR
41173 (July 15, 2010).
Additional information on this CFI is
available at https://www.epa.gov/
climatechange/emissions/
biogenic_emissions.html. In the CFI we
stated: ‘‘In response to this Call for
Information, interested parties are
invited to assist EPA in the following:
(1) Surveying and assessing the science
by submitting research studies or other
relevant information, and (2) evaluating
different accounting approaches and
options by providing policy analyses,
proposed or published methodologies,
or other relevant information. Interested
parties are also invited to submit data or
other relevant information about the
current and projected scope of GHG
emissions from bioenergy and other
biogenic sources.’’ 75 FR at 41174.
Without prejudging the outcome of
the CFI process, EPA anticipates that the
comments we receive in response to the
CFI, with regard to applicability under
PSD and with regard to the BACT
review process under PSD, will inform
any subsequent actions to address
applicability of emissions of GHGs from
bioenergy and other biogenic sources
under the PSD program.
C. SIP Inadequacy and Corrective
Action; Federal Implementation Plans
The CAA provides a mechanism for
the correction of SIPs that are
inadequate, under CAA section
110(k)(5), which provides:
(5) Calls for plan revisions
Whenever the Administrator finds that the
applicable implementation plan for any area
is substantially inadequate to * * * comply
with any requirement of this Act, the
Administrator shall require the State to revise
the plan as necessary to correct such
inadequacies. The Administrator shall notify
the State of the inadequacies and may
establish reasonable deadlines (not to exceed
18 months after the date of such notice) for
the submission of such plan revisions.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
This provision by its terms authorizes
the Administrator to ‘‘find[] that [a SIP]
* * * is substantially inadequate to
* * * comply with any requirement of
this Act,’’ and, based on that finding,
‘‘require the State to revise the [SIP]
* * * to correct such inadequacies.’’
This latter action is commonly known
as a ‘‘SIP call.’’ In addition, this
provision provides that EPA must notify
the State of the inadequacies and
authorizes EPA to establish a
‘‘reasonable deadline[] (not to exceed 18
months after the date of such notice)’’
for the submission of the corrective SIP
revision.
If the State fails to submit the
corrective SIP revision by the deadline,
CAA section 110(c) authorizes EPA to
‘‘find[] that [the] State has failed to make
a required submission.’’ CAA section
110(c)(1)(A). Once EPA makes that
finding, CAA section 110(c)(1) requires
EPA to ‘‘promulgate a Federal
implementation plan at any time with 2
years after the [finding] * * * unless
the State corrects the deficiency, and
[EPA] approves the plan or plan
revision, before [EPA] promulgates such
[FIP].’’
D. States That Do Not Appear To Apply
the PSD Program to GHG Sources; PSD
GHG SIP Call
A number of States do not have an
approved PSD SIP; as a result, in these
States 7 the applicable regulatory
authority is EPA’s regulations, found in
40 CFR 52.21, which constitute a FIP.
For sources in these States, either the
EPA Regional Office or the State acting
as EPA’s delegatee is the permitting
authority. In these States, EPA’s
regulations apply directly. As a result,
the regulations apply the PSD program
to any constructing or modifying source
that emits the requisite quantity of any
‘‘regulated NSR pollutant,’’ 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50), which includes any
‘‘pollutant subject to regulation,’’ which,
in turn, as discussed earlier in this
preamble, will cover GHG emissions on
January 2, 2011.
All of the other States administer their
PSD programs through an approved SIP
and, as a result, they or their local
7 In the following listed State or local
jurisdictions, as well as in all Indian country, EPA
is the PSD permitting authority, implementing the
Federal PSD regulation at 40 CFR 52.21: American
Samoa; Arizona (some areas); California (most
areas); District of Columbia; Guam; Massachusetts;
New Jersey; New York; Northern Mariana Islands;
Puerto Rico; Trust Territories; and the Virgin
Islands. In a smaller number of areas, listed as
follows, the State or local permitting authority is
delegated at least partial authority by EPA to
implement the Federal PSD regulation: Arizona
(some areas); California (some areas); Hawaii;
Illinois; Minnesota; Nevada (most areas);
Pennsylvania (some areas); and Washington.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 170 / Thursday, September 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
entities are the PSD permitting
authority. Of these States, most appear
to have SIP PSD applicability provisions
that parallel EPA’s regulatory PSD
applicability provisions and therefore
apply PSD to any stationary source that
emits the requisite amount of any air
pollutant ‘‘subject to regulation.’’ As a
result, and absent any other provision
under State law that limits the
applicability of these provisions, these
PSD SIPs will cover GHG sources, just
as the current FIPs do, in these States,
on and after January 2, 2011. Therefore,
these States or local authorities will be
able to act as the permitting authority
for GHG sources in their States.
As discussed in the PSD GHG SIP
Call, it appears, on the basis of
preliminary research and information
received that for 13 of the States with
approved PSD SIPs, the PSD programs
do not apply to GHG-emitting sources.
In many of these SIPs, the PSD
applicability provisions do not mirror
EPA’s regulatory provisions by applying
PSD requirements to sources of any air
pollutant ‘‘subject to regulation.’’
Instead, the applicability provisions
specifically list the air pollutants to
which the PSD program applies and do
not include GHGs on that list. Although,
as discussed in the proposed PSD GHG
SIP Call, these SIPs may have other
provisions that provide the State with
general authority to issue permits that
meet CAA requirements, until EPA
receives more information, we will
proceed on the basis that these SIPs do
not apply their PSD programs to GHG
sources. Also as discussed in the
proposed SIP Call, the State of
Connecticut explicitly excludes GHGs
from the State PSD program. In
addition, as discussed in the proposed
SIP Call, some States with SIP PSD
applicability provisions that do mirror
EPA’s regulatory provisions by applying
PSD requirements to sources of any air
pollutant ‘‘subject to regulation’’
nevertheless do not appear to apply PSD
to GHG-emitting sources because these
States have other State law constraints
against applying State law or SIP
requirements without specific State
action authorizing such application of
law.
In the SIP Call, EPA proposed to find
the SIPs for these 13 States to be
substantially inadequate, and EPA
proposed a SIP Call under CAA section
110(k)(5). EPA stated that it intends to
finalize the finding of substantial
inadequacy and the SIP Call by
December 1, 2010. EPA further stated
that it would allow States 12 months
from the date of signing the finding and
the SIP Call for States to submit their
corrective SIP revisions, but that States
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Sep 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
could indicate to EPA that they do not
object to a shorter deadline, and in that
event EPA would impose that shorter
deadline.
In the proposed SIP Call, EPA also
solicited comment on whether the
approved SIPs for those other States
(listed in table II–2 of this preamble, for
which EPA was not proposing a SIP
Call) do or do not apply their PSD
programs to GHG-emitting sources. EPA
asked the other States to review their
SIPs and, if their SIPs fail to apply PSD
to GHG-emitting sources, advise EPA by
the end of the comment period of the
State’s inadequacy and also inform EPA
if they do not object to a shorter
deadline for submittal of the required
corrective SIP revision.
In the proposed SIP Call, we stated
that the required corrective SIP revision
could constitute a simple addition of
GHGs to the list of pollutants subject to
PSD applicability, with GHGs defined as
the aggregate of six pollutants—CO2,
CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6.
53889
the State intends to hold a hearing, we
will propose the draft SIP submittal for
approval and open a comment period
during the same time as the State
hearing. If the SIP submittal that the
State ultimately submits to us is
substantially similar to the draft SIP
submittal, we will proceed to take final
action without a further proposal or
comment period. If we approve such a
SIP revision, we will at the same time
rescind the FIP.
B. Substance of FIP
The proposed FIP constitutes the EPA
regulations found in 40 CFR 52.21,
including the PSD applicability
provisions, with a limitation to assure
that, strictly for purposes of this
rulemaking, the FIP applies only to
GHGs. Under the PSD applicability
provisions in 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50), the
PSD program applies to sources that
emit the requisite amounts of any
‘‘regulated NSR pollutant[s],’’ including
any air pollutant ‘‘subject to regulation.’’
However, in States for which EPA
III. Proposed Federal Implementation
would promulgate a FIP to apply PSD to
Plan
GHG-emitting pollutants, the approved
In this rulemaking, we propose a FIP,
SIP already applies PSD to other air
under CAA section 110(c)(1)(A), for any pollutants. To appropriately limit the
State—if ultimately there is any—for
scope of the FIP, EPA proposes in this
which we issue a finding of failure to
action to amend 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50) to
submit a SIP submission required under limit the applicability provision to
the PSD GHG SIP Call.
GHGs.
We propose this FIP because it would,
A. Timing for FIP
to the greatest extent possible, mirror
If any of the States for which we issue EPA regulations (as well as those of
the SIP Call does not meet its SIP
most of the States). In addition, this FIP
submittal deadline, we will immediately would readily incorporate the phase-in
issue a finding of failure to submit a
approach for PSD applicability to GHG
required SIP submission, under CAA
sources that EPA has developed in the
section 110(c)(1)(A), and immediately
Tailoring Rule and expects to develop
thereafter promulgate a FIP for the State. further through additional rulemaking.
This timing for FIP promulgation is
As explained in the Tailoring Rule,
authorized under CAA section 110(c)(1), incorporating this phase-in approach—
which authorizes us to promulgate a FIP including Steps 1 and 2 of the phase-in
‘‘at any time within 2 years after’’ finding as promulgated in the Tailoring Rule—
can be most readily accomplished
a failure to submit a required SIP
through interpretation of the terms in
submission. We intend to take these
the definition ‘‘regulated NSR
actions immediately in order to
pollutant,’’ including the term ‘‘subject
minimize any period of time during
to regulation.’’
which larger-emitting sources may be
In accordance with the Tailoring Rule,
under an obligation to obtain PSD
as described earlier in this preamble, the
permits for their GHGs when they
FIP would apply in Step 1 of the phaseconstruct or modify, but no permitting
in approach only to ‘‘anyway sources’’
authority is authorized to issue those
(that is, sources undertaking
permits.
construction or modification projects
After we have promulgated a FIP, it
that are required to apply for PSD
must remain in place until the State
permits anyway due to their non-GHG
submits a SIP revision and we approve
that SIP revision. CAA section 110(c)(1). emissions and that emit GHGs in the
amount of at least 75,000 tpy on a CO2e
Under the present circumstances, we
will act on a SIP revision to apply the
basis) and would apply in Step 2 of the
PSD program to GHG sources as quickly phase-in approach to both ‘‘anyway
as possible. Upon request of the State,
sources’’ and sources that meet the
we will parallel-process the SIP
100,000/75,000-tpy threshold (that is,
submittal. That is, if the State submits
(i) sources that newly construct and
to us the draft SIP submittal for which
would not be subject to PSD on account
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
53890
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 170 / Thursday, September 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
of their non-GHG emissions, but that
emit GHGs in the amount of at least
100,000 tpy CO2e, and (ii) existing
sources that emit GHGs in the amount
of at least 100,000 tpy CO2e, that
undertake modifications that would not
trigger PSD on the basis of their nonGHG emissions, but that increase GHGs
by at least 75,000 tpy CO2e).
Under the FIP, with respect to permits
for ‘‘anyway sources,’’ EPA will be
responsible for acting on permit
applications for only the GHG portion of
the permit, and the State will retain
responsibility for the rest of the permit.
Likewise, with respect to permits for
sources that meet the 100,000/75,000tpy threshold, our preferred approach—
for reasons of consistency—is that EPA
will be responsible for acting on permit
applications for only the GHG portion of
the permit, that the State permitting
authorities will be responsible for the
non-GHG portion of the permit, and
EPA will coordinate with the State
permitting authority as needed in order
to fully cover any non-GHG emissions
that, for example, are subject to BACT
because they exceed the significance
levels. We recognize that questions may
arise as to whether the State permitting
authorities have authority to permit
non-GHG emissions; as a result, we
solicit comment on whether EPA should
also be the permitting authority for the
non-GHG portion of the permit for these
latter sources.
We propose that the FIP consist of the
regulatory provisions included in 40
CFR 52.21, except that the applicability
provision would include a limitation so
that it applies for purposes of this
rulemaking only to GHGs.
C. Primacy of the SIP Process
This proposal is secondary to our
overarching goal, which is to assure that
in every instance, it will be the State
that will be that permitting authority.
EPA continues to recognize that the
States are best suited to the task of
permitting because they and their
sources have experience working
together in the State PSD program to
process permit applications. EPA seeks
to remain solely in its primary role of
providing guidance and acting as a
resource for the States as they make the
various required permitting decisions
for GHG emissions.
Accordingly, beginning immediately
we intend to work closely with the
States—as we have already begun to do
since earlier in the year—to help them
promptly develop and submit to us their
corrective SIP revisions that extend
their PSD program to GHG-emitting
sources. Moreover, we intend to
promptly act on their SIP submittals.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Sep 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
Again, EPA’s goal is to have each and
every affected State have in place the
necessary permitting authorities by the
time businesses seeking construction
permits need to have their applications
processed and the permits issued—and
to achieve that outcome by means of
engaging with the States directly
through a concerted process of
consultation and support.
EPA is taking up the additional task
of proposing this FIP and the
companion SIP Call action only because
the Agency believes it is compelled to
do so by the need to assure businesses,
to the maximum extent possible and as
promptly as possible, that a permitting
authority is available to process PSD
permit applications for GHG-emitting
sources once they become subject to
PSD requirements on January 2, 2011.
In order to provide that assurance, we
are obligated to recognize, as both States
and the regulated community already
do, that there may be circumstances in
which States are simply unable to
develop and submit those SIP revisions
by January 2, 2011, or for some period
of time beyond that date. As a result,
absent further action by EPA, those
States’ affected sources confront the risk
that they may have to put on hold their
plans to construct or modify, a risk that
may have adverse consequences for the
economy.
Given these exigent circumstances,
EPA proposes this plan, within the
limits of our power, with the intent to
make a back-up permitting authority
available—and to send a signal of
assurance expeditiously in order to
reduce uncertainty and thus facilitate
businesses’ planning. Within the design
of the CAA, it is EPA that must fill that
role of back-up permitting authority.
This FIP and the companion SIP Call
action fulfill the CAA requirements to
establish EPA in that role.
At the same time, we propose these
actions with the intent that States retain
as much discretion as possible in the
hand of the States. In the SIP Call
rulemaking, EPA proposes that States
may choose the deadline they consider
reasonable for submission of their
corrective SIP revision. If, under CAA
requirements, we are compelled to
promulgate a FIP, we invite the affected
State to accept a delegation of authority
to implement that FIP, so that it will
still be the State that processes the
permit applications, albeit operating
under Federal law. In addition, if we are
compelled to issue a FIP, we intend to
continue to work closely with the State
to assist in developing and submitting
for approval its corrective SIP revision,
so as to minimize the amount of time
that the FIP must remain in place.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Finally, we can report that in informal
conversations, officials of various States
have acknowledged the need for our SIP
Call and FIP actions. That is, they have
acknowledged that a short-term FIP may
be necessary in their States to establish
permitting authority to construct and
modify in accordance with
environmental safeguards for these
sources. In addition, some States have
indicated that they will closely consider
their opportunities to accept delegation
of the permitting responsibilities.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866—Regulatory
Planning and Review
Under Executive Order (EO) 12866
(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
because it raises novel legal or policy
issues. Accordingly, EPA submitted this
action to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review under EO
12866 and any changes made in
response to OMB recommendations
have been documented in the docket for
this action.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action imposes new information
collection burden. The action is based
on information concerning whether the
States have authority to regulate GHGs
under their SIP PSD provisions, which
information is already requested of the
States in the Tailoring Rule. The OMB
has previously approved the
information collection requirements
contained in the existing regulations for
PSD (see, e.g., 40 CFR 52.21) and title
V (see 40 CFR parts 70 and 71) under
the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
and has assigned OMB control number
2060–0003 and OMB control number
2060–0336 respectively. The OMB
control numbers for EPA’s regulations
in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
The Tailoring Rule does not establish
any new requirements (either control or
reporting) for any sources. It merely
establishes the thresholds that trigger
NSR and title V for GHG sources. The
trigger for GHG and title V is not due to
the Tailoring Rule but the result of the
endangerment finding and the LDVR.
The NSR and title V ICRs will need to
be modified to include the new sources
that will be triggered due to the GHG
requirements (in July 2011). The Agency
anticipates making such modifications
upon renewal of the NSR and title V
ICRs at the end of the year.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 170 / Thursday, September 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E. Executive Order 13132—Federalism
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts
of this notice on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business
that is a small industrial entity as
defined in the U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) size standards
(see 13 CFR 121.201); (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a
government of a city, county, town,
school district, or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; or (3) a
small organization that is any not-forprofit enterprise that is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic
impacts of this proposed rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Although this rule would lead to
Federal permitting requirements for
certain sources, those sources are large
emitters of GHGs and tend to be large
sources. We continue to be interested in
the potential impacts of the proposed
rule on small entities and welcome
comments on issues related to such
impacts.
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not 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. This action
merely prescribes EPA’s action for
States that do not meet their existing
obligation for PSD SIP submittal. Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply
to this action.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132,
and consistent with EPA policy to
promote communications between EPA
and State and local governments, EPA
specifically solicits comment on this
proposed rule from State and local
officials.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no Federal
mandates under the provisions of Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–
1538) for State, local or tribal
governments or the private section. The
action imposes no enforceable duty on
any State, local or tribal governments or
the private sector. This action merely
prescribes EPA’s action for States that
do not meet their existing obligation for
PSD SIP submittal. Thus, this proposed
rule is not subject to the requirements
of sections 202 or 205 of UMRA.
This action is also not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of UMRA
because it contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. This
action merely prescribes EPA’s action
for States that do not meet their existing
obligation for PSD SIP submittal.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:15 Sep 01, 2010
Jkt 220001
F. Executive Order 13175—Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000). This action does not impose a FIP
in any tribal area. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this action.
Although Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this proposed rule, EPA
specifically solicits additional comment
on this proposed action from tribal
officials.
G. Executive Order 13045—Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only
to those regulatory actions that concern
health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5–501 of
the EO has the potential to influence the
regulation. This action is not subject to
EO 13045 because it merely prescribes
EPA’s action for States that do not meet
their existing obligation for PSD SIP
submittal.
H. Executive Order 13211—Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ‘‘significant energy
action’’ as defined in Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)),
because it is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. This
action merely prescribes EPA’s action
for States that do not meet their existing
obligation for PSD SIP submittal.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53891
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary
consensus standards.
This proposed rulemaking does not
involve technical standards. Therefore,
EPA is not considering the use of any
voluntary consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898—Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) establishes Federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the U.S.
EPA has determined that this
proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority or low-income populations
because it does not affect the level of
protection provided to human health or
the environment. This proposed rule
merely prescribes EPA’s action for
States that do not meet their existing
obligation for PSD SIP submittal.
K. Determination Under Section 307(d)
Pursuant to sections 307(d)(1)(B) of
the CAA, this action is subject to the
provisions of section 307(d). Section
307(d)(1)(B) provides that the provisions
of section 307(d) apply to ‘‘the
promulgation or revision of an
implementation plan by the
Administrator under section 110(c) of
this Act.’’
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
53892
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 170 / Thursday, September 2, 2010 / Proposed Rules
V. Statutory Authority
The statutory authority for this action
is provided by sections 110, 165, 301,
and 307(d)(1)(B) of the CAA as amended
(42 U.S.C. 7410, 7475, 7601, and
7407(d)(1)(B)). This action is subject to
section 307(d) of the CAA (42 U.S.C.
7407(d)).
Page 46 of 49—Action To Ensure
Authority To Issue Permits Under the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Federal Implementation
Plan
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon dioxide,
Carbon dioxide equivalents, Carbon
monoxide, Greenhouse gases,
Hydrofluorocarbons, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, Methane, Nitrogen
dioxide, Nitrous oxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Perfluorocarbons,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur hexafluoride,
Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: August 12, 2010.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010–21706 Filed 9–1–10; 8:45 am]
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is proposed to be
amended as follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
RIN–2060–AQ08
2. Section 52.37 is added to read as
follows:
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
§ 52.37 What are the requirements of the
Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) to
issue permits under the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration requirements to
sources that emit greenhouse gases?
(a) The requirements of sections 160
through 165 of the Clean Air Act are not
met to the extent the plan, as approved,
of the States listed in paragraph (b) of
this section does not apply with respect
to emissions of the pollutant GHGs from
certain stationary sources. Therefore,
the provisions of § 52.21 except
paragraph (a)(1) are hereby made a part
of the plan for each State listed in
paragraph (b) of this section for: (1)
Beginning January 2, 2011, the pollutant
GHGs from stationary sources described
in § 52.21(b)(49)(iv), and [Alternative 1
for paragraph (a)(2)]
(2) Beginning July 1, 2011, in addition
to the pollutant GHGs from sources
described under paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, the pollutant GHGs from
Jkt 220001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0107; FRL–9190–7]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
15:15 Sep 01, 2010
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
40 CFR Part 52
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
stationary sources described in
§ 52.21(b)(49)(v). [Alternative 2 for
paragraph (a)(2)]
(2) Beginning July 1, 2011, in addition
to the pollutant GHGs from sources
described under paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, stationary sources described in
§ 52.21(b)(49)(v).
(b) Paragraph (a) of this section
applies to:
(1) Alaska;
(2) Arizona, Pinal County; Rest of
State (Excludes Maricopa County, Pima
County, and Indian Country);
(3) Arkansas;
(4) California, Sacramento
Metropolitan AQMD;
(5) Connecticut;
(6) Florida;
(7) Idaho;
(8) Kansas;
(9) Kentucky, Jefferson County and
Rest of State;
(10) Nebraska;
(11) Nevada, Clark County;
(12) Oregon;
(13) Texas.
(c) For purposes of this section,
references to the ‘‘pollutant GHGs’’ refers
to the pollutant GHGs, as described in
§ 52.21(b)(49)(i).
Action To Ensure Authority To Issue
Permits Under the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration Program to
Sources of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Finding of Substantial
Inadequacy and SIP Call
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The EPA is proposing to find
that 13 States with EPA-approved State
implementation plan (SIP) New Source
Review Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) programs are
substantially inadequate to meet Clean
Air Act (CAA) requirements because
they do not appear to apply PSD
requirements to GHG-emitting sources.
For each of these States, EPA proposes
to require the State (through a ‘‘SIP
Call’’) to revise its SIP as necessary to
correct such inadequacies. EPA
proposes an expedited schedule for
States to submit their corrective SIP
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
revision, in light of the fact that as of
January 2, 2011, certain GHG-emitting
sources will become subject to the PSD
requirements and may not be able to
obtain a PSD permit in order to
construct or modify. As for the rest of
the States with approved SIP PSD
programs, EPA solicits comment on
whether their PSD programs do or do
not apply to GHG-emitting sources. If,
on the basis of information EPA
receives, EPA concludes that the SIP for
such a State does not apply the PSD
program to GHG-emitting sources, then
EPA will proceed to also issue a finding
of substantial inadequacy and a SIP Call
for that State.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be
received on or before October 4, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2010–0107 by one of the following
methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the online instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–9744.
• Mail: Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2010–0107, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
West (Air Docket), 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Mail code: 6102T,
Washington, DC 20460. Please include a
total of 2 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 Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20503.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA West (Air
Docket), 1301 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC
20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2010–0107. 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–2010–
0107. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
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 https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 170 (Thursday, September 2, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53883-53892]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21706]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0107; FRL-9190-8]
RIN-2060-AQ45
Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention
of Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Federal Implementation Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this rulemaking, EPA is proposing a Federal implementation
plan (FIP) to apply in any State that is unable to submit, by its
deadline, a corrective State implementation plan (SIP) revision to
ensure that the State has authority to issue permits under the Clean
Air Act's (CAA or Act) New Source Review Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program for sources of greenhouse gases (GHGs).
This proposal is a companion rulemaking to ``Action to Ensure Authority
to Issue Permits Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Finding of Substantial
Inadequacy and SIP Call,'' which is being signed and published on the
same schedule. In that action, EPA is proposing to make a finding of
substantial inadequacy and proposing to issue a SIP call for 13 States
on grounds that their SIPs do not appear to apply the PSD program to
GHG-emitting sources.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before October 4,
2010.
Public Hearing: One public hearing concerning the proposed
regulation will be held. The date, time and location will be announced
separately. Please refer to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional
information on the comment period and the public hearing.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2010-0107 by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Fax: (202) 566-9744
Mail: Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0107, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West (Air Docket), 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Mail code: 6102T, Washington, DC 20460.
Please include a total of 2 copies.
Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
West (Air Docket), 1301 Constitution Avenue, Northwest, Room 3334,
Washington, DC 20004, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0107.
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-
2010-0107. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://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 https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://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 https://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, avoid 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. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to section I.C of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket. All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West Building, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202)
566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lisa Sutton, Air Quality Policy
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
[[Page 53884]]
Standards (C504-03), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-3450; fax number: (919)
541-5509; e-mail address: sutton.lisa@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For questions related to a specific State,
local, or tribal permitting authority, or to submit information
requested in this action, please contact the appropriate EPA regional
office:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact for regional office (person,
EPA regional office mailing address, telephone number) Permitting authority
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I............................... Dave Conroy, Chief, Air Programs Branch, Connecticut, Massachusetts,
EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office Square, Suite Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode
100, Boston, MA 02109-3912, (617) 918-1661. Island, and Vermont.
II.............................. Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch, New Jersey, New York, Puerto
EPA Region 2, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, Rico, and Virgin Islands.
New York, NY 10007-1866, (212) 637-3706.
III............................. Kathleen Anderson, Chief, Permits and District of Columbia, Delaware,
Technical Assessment Branch, EPA Region 3, Maryland, Pennsylvania,
1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103- Virginia, and West Virginia.
2029, (215) 814-2173.
IV.............................. Dick Schutt, Chief, Air Planning Branch, Alabama, Florida, Georgia,
EPA Region 4, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, GA 30303- Carolina, South Carolina, and
3104, (404) 562-9033. Tennessee.
V............................... J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
Branch (AR-18J), EPA Region 5, 77 West Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin.
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604-3507,
(312) 886-1430.
VI.............................. Jeff Robinson, Chief, Air Permits Section, Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico,
EPA Region 6, Fountain Place 12th Floor, Oklahoma, and Texas.
Suite 1200, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX
75202-2733, (214) 665-6435.
VII............................. Mark Smith, Chief, Air Permitting and Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and
Compliance Branch, EPA Region 7, 901 North Nebraska.
5th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101, (913)
551-7876.
VIII............................ Carl Daly, Unit Leader, Air Permitting, Colorado, Montana, North Dakota,
Monitoring & Modeling Unit, EPA Region 8, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202-
1129, (303) 312-6416.
IX.............................. Gerardo Rios, Chief, Permits Office, EPA Arizona; California; Hawaii and
Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San the Pacific Islands; Indian
Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 972-3974. Country within Region 9 and
Navajo Nation; and Nevada.
X............................... Nancy Helm, Manager, Federal and Delegated Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and
Air Programs Unit, EPA Region 10, 1200 Washington.
Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA
98101, (206) 553-6908.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
Entities potentially affected by this rule include States, local
permitting authorities, and tribal authorities.\1\ Any SIP-approved PSD
air permitting regulation that is not structured such that it includes
GHGs among pollutants subject to regulation under the Act will
potentially be found substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements,
under CAA section 110(k)(5), and the State will potentially be affected
by this rule. For example, if a State's PSD regulation identifies its
regulated NSR pollutants by specifically listing each individual
pollutant and the list omits GHGs, then the regulation is inadequate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA respects the unique relationship between the U.S.
government and tribal authorities and acknowledges that tribal
concerns are not interchangeable with State concerns. However, for
convenience, we refer to ``State'' in this rulemaking to
collectively mean State, local permitting authorities, and tribal
authorities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entities potentially affected by this rule also include sources in
all industry groups, which have a direct obligation under the CAA to
obtain a PSD permit for GHGs for projects that meet the applicability
thresholds set forth in the Tailoring Rule.\2\ This independent
obligation on sources is specific to PSD and derives from CAA section
165(a). Any source that is subject to a State PSD air permitting
regulation not structured to apply to GHG-emitting sources will
potentially rely on this rule to obtain a permit that contains emission
limitations that conform to requirements under CAA section 165(a). The
majority of entities potentially affected by this action are expected
to be in the following groups:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule. 75 FR 31514 (June 3,
2010). The Tailoring Rule is described in more detail later in this
preamble.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry group NAICS \a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Utilities (electric, natural gas, other 2211, 2212, 2213.
systems).
Manufacturing (food, beverages, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316.
tobacco, textiles, leather).
Wood product, paper manufacturing...... 321, 322.
Petroleum and coal products 32411, 32412, 32419.
manufacturing.
Chemical manufacturing................. 3251, 3252, 3253, 3254, 3255,
3256, 3259.
Rubber product manufacturing........... 3261, 3262.
Miscellaneous chemical products........ 32552, 32592, 32591, 325182,
32551.
Nonmetallic mineral product 3271, 3272, 3273, 3274, 3279.
manufacturing.
Primary and fabricated metal 3311, 3312, 3313, 3314, 3315,
manufacturing. 3321, 3322, 3323, 3324, 3325,
3326, 3327, 3328, 3329.
Machinery manufacturing................ 3331, 3332, 3333, 3334, 3335,
3336, 3339.
Computer and electronic products 3341, 3342, 3343, 3344, 3345,
manufacturing. 4446.
Electrical equipment, appliance, and 3351, 3352, 3353, 3359.
component manufacturing.
Transportation equipment manufacturing. 3361, 3362, 3363, 3364, 3365,
3366, 3366, 3369.
Furniture and related product 3371, 3372, 3379.
manufacturing.
Miscellaneous manufacturing............ 3391, 3399.
[[Page 53885]]
Waste management and remediation....... 5622, 5629.
Hospitals/nursing and residential care 6221, 6231, 6232, 6233, 6239.
facilities.
Personal and laundry services.......... 8122, 8123.
Residential/private households......... 8141.
Non-residential (commercial)........... Not available. Codes only exist
for private households,
construction and leasing/sales
industries.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System.
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this proposal will also be available on the World Wide Web. Following
signature by the EPA Administrator, a copy of this notice will be
posted on the EPA's NSR Web site, under Regulations & Standards, at
https://www.epa.gov/nsr.
C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk
or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information
identified as CBI only to the following address: Roberto Morales, OAQPS
Document Control Officer (C404-02), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park,
NC 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0107.
2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
D. How can I find information about the public hearing?
The EPA will hold one public hearing on this proposal. The date,
time, and location of the public hearing will be announced separately.
The EPA encourages commenters to provide written versions of their oral
testimonies either electronically or in paper copy. If you would like
to present oral testimony at the public hearing, please notify Ms.
Pamela S. Long, New Source Review Group, Air Quality Policy Division
(C504-03), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number
(919) 541-0641, or e-mail: long.pam@epa.gov. Persons interested in
presenting oral testimony should notify Ms. Long at least 2 days in
advance of the public hearing. Persons interested in attending the
public hearing should also contact Ms. Long to verify the time, date,
and location of the hearing. The public hearing will provide interested
parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning
the proposed rule.
E. How is the preamble organized?
The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
D. How can I find information about the public hearing?
E. How is the preamble organized?
II. Background and Context of Proposed Rule
A. Introduction
B. CAA and Regulatory Context
C. SIP Inadequacy and Corrective Action; Federal Implementation
Plans
D. States That Do Not Appear To Apply the PSD Program to GHG
Sources; PSD GHG SIP Call
III. Proposed Federal Implementation Plan
A. Timing for FIP
B. Substance of FIP
C. Primacy of the SIP Process
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform
E. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211--Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Determination Under Section 307(d)
V. Statutory Authority
II. Background and Context of Proposed Rule
A. Introduction
In this rulemaking under the CAA, EPA is proposing a FIP for 13
States for which, in a companion action, EPA is proposing a finding of
SIP substantial inadequacy and is proposing to issue a SIP Call because
the States' PSD SIP programs do not appear to apply to sources of GHGs.
``Action to Ensure Authority to Issue Permits Under the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions: Finding of Substantial Inadequacy and SIP Call'' (the ``PSD
GHG SIP Call'' or ``SIP Call''). These two rulemakings address States
whose permitting regulations and SIPs appear to fail to apply the PSD
program to sources of GHGs in those States. As discussed further in
this preamble, certain larger GHG-emitting sources will be subject to
PSD permitting requirements on and after January 2, 2011. Thus, in
States whose PSD programs do not apply to sources of GHGs, sources will
be unable to obtain
[[Page 53886]]
a PSD permit that covers GHG emissions and therefore potentially unable
to undertake construction or modification projects on and after January
2, 2011.
The States for which we are proposing a FIP are listed in table II-
1, ``States with SIPs That Do Not Appear To Apply PSD to GHG Sources
(Presumptive SIP Call List).'' If any of these States are not in a
position to submit to EPA a corrective SIP revision by its deadline,
EPA will promulgate a FIP that will provide authority to issue PSD
permits for construction or modification of appropriate GHG sources in
the State.
Table II-1--States With SIPs That Do Not Appear To Apply PSD to GHG
Sources (Presumptive SIP Call List)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State (or area) EPA region
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska........................................ X
Arizona: Pinal County; Rest of State (Excludes IX
Maricopa County, Pima County, and Indian
Country).
Arkansas...................................... VI
California: Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD...... IX
Connecticut................................... I
Florida....................................... IV
Idaho......................................... X
Kansas........................................ VII
Kentucky: Jefferson County; Rest of State..... IV
Nebraska...................................... VII
Nevada: Clark County.......................... IX
Oregon........................................ X
Texas......................................... VI
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rest of the States with approved SIP PSD programs (meaning each
of those not listed in table II-1) are listed in table II-2, ``States
with SIPs that Appear to Apply PSD to GHG Sources (Presumptive Adequacy
List).'' For each of the States listed in table II-2 (as well as for
any States with approved SIP PSD programs that we may have
inadvertently omitted from table II-2), EPA is soliciting comment in
the SIP Call companion notice on whether their SIPs do or do not apply
the PSD program to GHG-emitting sources. We are not at this time
proposing a FIP for the States listed in table II-2. However, if EPA
concludes, on the basis of information EPA receives, that such a
State's SIP does not apply the PSD program to GHG-emitting sources,
then EPA will proceed to issue for that State a finding of substantial
inadequacy and a SIP Call on the same schedule as for the States listed
in table II-1 (the presumptive SIP Call list). If a SIP-called State is
not able to submit to EPA a SIP revision that applies the PSD program
to GHG sources by the deadline required in the SIP Call, then EPA
proposes to promulgate a FIP without further notice and comment. The
promulgated FIP will apply the PSD program to GHG sources in the State
and provide PSD permitting authority for construction and modification
of affected sources. Accordingly, interested parties in a State for
which we, in the companion SIP Call rulemaking, solicit comment on the
adequacy of its SIP to apply PSD to GHG-emitting sources should
consider the comment period for the present notice to be their
opportunity to comment on the FIP that EPA would implement in their
State (should EPA ultimately determine to issue a SIP Call for their
State in EPA's final action on the companion SIP Call rulemaking).
Table II-2--States With SIPs That Appear To Apply PSD to GHG Sources
(Presumptive Adequacy List)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State (or area) EPA region
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama: Jefferson County; Huntsville; Rest of IV
State.
California: Mendocino County AQMD; Monterey IX
Bay Unified APCD; North Coast Unified AQMD;
Northern Sonoma County APCD.
Colorado...................................... VIII
Delaware...................................... III
Georgia....................................... IV
Indiana....................................... V
Iowa.......................................... VII
Louisiana..................................... VI
Maine......................................... I
Maryland...................................... III
Michigan...................................... V
Mississippi................................... IV
Missouri...................................... VII
Montana....................................... VIII
New Hampshire................................. I
New Mexico: Albuquerque; Rest of State........ VI
North Carolina: Forsythe County; Mecklenburg; IV
Western NC; Rest of State.
North Dakota.................................. VIII
Ohio.......................................... V
Oklahoma...................................... VI
Pennsylvania: All except Allegheny County..... III
Rhode Island.................................. I
South Carolina................................ IV
[[Page 53887]]
South Dakota.................................. VIII
Tennessee: Chattanooga; Nashville; Knoxville; IV
Memphis; Rest of State.
Vermont....................................... I
Virginia...................................... III
West Virginia................................. III
Wisconsin..................................... V
Wyoming....................................... VIII
Utah.......................................... VIII
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The background and context for this proposed rule is the same as
for the proposed PSD GHG SIP Call and other actions cross-referenced in
that action. Familiarity with the proposed PSD GHG SIP Call is
presumed. As a result, the background and context for this rule will be
only briefly summarized here.
B. CAA and Regulatory Context
1. SIP PSD Requirements
Under the CAA PSD requirements, a new or existing source that emits
or has the potential to emit ``any air pollutant'' in specified
quantities cannot construct or modify unless it first obtains a PSD
permit that, among other things, imposes emission limitations that
qualify as best available control technology (BACT). CAA sections
165(a)(1), 165(a)(4), 169(1). Longstanding EPA regulations have
interpreted the term ``any air pollutant'' narrowly so that only
emissions of any ``regulated NSR pollutant'' trigger PSD. 40 CFR
52.21(j)(2), (b)(50)(iv). The term ``regulated NSR pollutant'' is
defined to include the following four classes of air pollutants:
(i) any pollutant for which a NAAQS has been promulgated;
(ii) any pollutant subject to an NSPS promulgated under CAA 111;
(iii) any pollutant subject to a standard promulgated under CAA
title VI; and
(iv) ``any pollutant that otherwise is subject to regulation under
the Act'' (excluding HAPs listed under CAA section 112).
The CAA contemplates that the PSD program be implemented in the
first instance by the States. States are required to include PSD
requirements in their SIPs. CAA section 110(a)(2)(C). Most States have
PSD programs that have been approved into their SIPs, and these States
implement their PSD program and act as the permitting authority. For
the most part, these approved SIPs mirror EPA regulatory requirements,
as found in 40 CFR 51.166 (except for the recently added revisions from
the Tailoring Rule). As a result, most SIPs include the applicability
requirement that PSD apply to sources that construct or modify and
thereby increase their emissions of any ``regulated NSR pollutant.'' A
number of States do not have PSD programs approved into their SIPs; in
those States, EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 52.21 govern, and either EPA
or the State as EPA's delegatee acts as the permitting authority.
2. Recent EPA Regulatory Actions Concerning PSD Requirements for GHG-
emitting Sources
Beginning on January 2, 2011, certain stationary sources that
construct or undertake modifications will become subject to the CAA
requirement to obtain a PSD permit for their GHG emissions. This is
because of the following EPA regulatory actions.
By notice dated December 15, 2009, pursuant to CAA section 202(a),
EPA issued, in a single final action, two findings \3\ regarding GHGs
that are commonly referred to as the ``Endangerment Finding'' and the
``Cause or Contribute Finding.'' In the Endangerment Finding, EPA found
that six long-lived and directly emitted GHGs--carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide
(N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs),
and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)--may reasonably be anticipated
to endanger public health and welfare. In the Cause or Contribute
Finding, the Administrator ``define[d] the air pollutant as the
aggregate group of the same six * * * greenhouse gases,'' 74 FR 66536,
and found that the combined emissions of this air pollutant from new
motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the GHG air
pollution that endangers public health and welfare.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for
Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.'' 74 FR
66496.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By notice dated May 7, 2010, EPA published what is commonly known
as the ``Light-Duty Vehicle Rule'' (LDVR),\4\ which for the first time
established Federal controls on GHGs, those emitted from light-duty
vehicles. This rule specifies, in its applicability provisions, the air
pollutant subject to control as the aggregate group of the six GHGs,
including CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs,
and SF6. 75 FR 25686 (40 CFR 86.1818-12(a)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and
Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards; Final Rule,'' 75 FR 25324
(May 7, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By notice dated April 2, 2010, EPA promulgated what is commonly
known as the Johnson Memo Reconsideration.\5\ The Johnson Memo
Reconsideration interpreted one of the regulatory triggers for PSD
applicability--the term ``subject to regulation''--and concluded that
promulgation of the LDVR would render GHGs ``subject to regulation''
and thereby trigger PSD applicability for GHG-emitting sources on
January 2, 2011, which according to EPA is the date upon which the LDVR
takes effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ``Interpretation of Regulations that Determine Pollutants
Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting Programs'' (75 FR 17004; April
2, 2010) (finalizing EPA response to petition for reconsideration of
``EPA's Interpretation of Regulations that Determine Pollutants
Covered by Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
Permit Program'' (commonly known as the ``Johnson Memo''), December
18, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By notice dated June 3, 2010, EPA published what is commonly known
as the ``Tailoring Rule,''\6\ which limits the applicability of PSD to
certain GHG-emitting sources through a multi-step phase-in approach. In
the Tailoring Rule, EPA established the first two steps of the phase-in
approach as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule,'' 75 FR 31514.
For the first step of this Tailoring Rule, which will begin on
January 2, 2011, PSD * * * requirements will apply to sources' GHG
emission only if the sources are subject to PSD * * * anyway due to
their non-GHG pollutants. [We call these sources ``anyway
sources.''] Therefore, EPA will not require sources or modifications
to evaluate whether they are subject to PSD * * * requirements
solely on account of their GHG emissions.
[[Page 53888]]
Specifically, for PSD, Step 1 requires that as of January 2, 2011,
the applicable requirements of PSD, most notably, the best available
control technology (BACT) requirement, will apply to projects that
increase net GHG emissions by at least 75,000 tpy carbon dioxide
equivalent (CO2e) but only if the project also
significantly increase emissions of at least one non-GHG pollutant.
The second step * * * beginning on July 1, 2011, will phase in
additional large sources of GHG emissions. New sources * * * that
emit, or have the potential to emit, at least 100,000 tpy
CO2e will become subject to the PSD * * * requirements.
In addition, sources that emit or have the potential to emit at
least 100,000 tpy CO2e and that undertake a modification
that increases net emissions of GHGs by at least 75,000 tpy
CO2e will also be subject to PSD requirements. [We call
this the 100,000/75,000 threshold.] For both steps, we note that if
sources or modifications exceed these CO2e-adjusted GHG
triggers, they are not covered by permitting requirements unless
their GHG emissions also exceed the corresponding mass-based
triggers (i.e., unadjusted for CO2e.)
75 FR 31516. In the Tailoring Rule, EPA codified the Johnson Memo
Reconsideration interpretation of the term ``subject to regulation''
and added a further interpretation of that term designed to expedite
the adoption of the phase-in approach by the States into their SIPs. In
addition, in the Tailoring Rule, EPA identified the air pollutant as
the aggregate of the six GHGs, again, CO2, CH4,
N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6. The Tailoring Rule
further provided that for purposes of determining whether the amount of
GHG emissions exceeds specified thresholds and therefore triggers the
application of PSD, the amount of emissions must be calculated on both
a mass basis and, as alluded to above, a carbon dioxide equivalent
(CO2e) basis. With respect to the latter, according to the
rule, ``PSD * * * applicability is based on the quantity that results
when the mass emissions of each of these gases is multiplied by the
Global Warming Potential (GWP) of that gas, and then summed for all six
gases.'' 75 FR 31518.
Further information on the applicable CAA provisions, the
Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings, the LDRV, the Johnson
Memo Reconsideration, and the Tailoring Rule is contained in the
Tailoring Rule and the proposed PSD GHG SIP Call.
We note that in this rulemaking we are not addressing the issue of
accounting for emissions of GHGs from bioenergy and other biogenic
sources (which are generated during the combustion or decomposition of
biologically based material such as forest or agriculture products).
When we finalized the Tailoring Rule, we noted that EPA planned to seek
comment on how to address emissions of biogenic CO2 under
the PSD and title V programs through future action, such as a separate
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) (75 FR at 31591). As a
first step, we recently issued a Call for Information (CFI) to solicit
public comment and data on technical issues that might be used to
consider biomass fuels and the emissions resulting from their
combustion differently with regard to applicability under PSD and with
regard to the BACT review process under PSD. See ``Call for
Information: Information on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with
Bioenergy and Other Biogenic Sources,'' 75 FR 41173 (July 15, 2010).
Additional information on this CFI is available at https://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/biogenic_emissions.html. In the
CFI we stated: ``In response to this Call for Information, interested
parties are invited to assist EPA in the following: (1) Surveying and
assessing the science by submitting research studies or other relevant
information, and (2) evaluating different accounting approaches and
options by providing policy analyses, proposed or published
methodologies, or other relevant information. Interested parties are
also invited to submit data or other relevant information about the
current and projected scope of GHG emissions from bioenergy and other
biogenic sources.'' 75 FR at 41174.
Without prejudging the outcome of the CFI process, EPA anticipates
that the comments we receive in response to the CFI, with regard to
applicability under PSD and with regard to the BACT review process
under PSD, will inform any subsequent actions to address applicability
of emissions of GHGs from bioenergy and other biogenic sources under
the PSD program.
C. SIP Inadequacy and Corrective Action; Federal Implementation Plans
The CAA provides a mechanism for the correction of SIPs that are
inadequate, under CAA section 110(k)(5), which provides:
(5) Calls for plan revisions
Whenever the Administrator finds that the applicable
implementation plan for any area is substantially inadequate to * *
* comply with any requirement of this Act, the Administrator shall
require the State to revise the plan as necessary to correct such
inadequacies. The Administrator shall notify the State of the
inadequacies and may establish reasonable deadlines (not to exceed
18 months after the date of such notice) for the submission of such
plan revisions.
This provision by its terms authorizes the Administrator to
``find[] that [a SIP] * * * is substantially inadequate to * * * comply
with any requirement of this Act,'' and, based on that finding,
``require the State to revise the [SIP] * * * to correct such
inadequacies.'' This latter action is commonly known as a ``SIP call.''
In addition, this provision provides that EPA must notify the State of
the inadequacies and authorizes EPA to establish a ``reasonable
deadline[] (not to exceed 18 months after the date of such notice)''
for the submission of the corrective SIP revision.
If the State fails to submit the corrective SIP revision by the
deadline, CAA section 110(c) authorizes EPA to ``find[] that [the]
State has failed to make a required submission.'' CAA section
110(c)(1)(A). Once EPA makes that finding, CAA section 110(c)(1)
requires EPA to ``promulgate a Federal implementation plan at any time
with 2 years after the [finding] * * * unless the State corrects the
deficiency, and [EPA] approves the plan or plan revision, before [EPA]
promulgates such [FIP].''
D. States That Do Not Appear To Apply the PSD Program to GHG Sources;
PSD GHG SIP Call
A number of States do not have an approved PSD SIP; as a result, in
these States \7\ the applicable regulatory authority is EPA's
regulations, found in 40 CFR 52.21, which constitute a FIP. For sources
in these States, either the EPA Regional Office or the State acting as
EPA's delegatee is the permitting authority. In these States, EPA's
regulations apply directly. As a result, the regulations apply the PSD
program to any constructing or modifying source that emits the
requisite quantity of any ``regulated NSR pollutant,'' 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50), which includes any ``pollutant subject to regulation,''
which, in turn, as discussed earlier in this preamble, will cover GHG
emissions on January 2, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ In the following listed State or local jurisdictions, as
well as in all Indian country, EPA is the PSD permitting authority,
implementing the Federal PSD regulation at 40 CFR 52.21: American
Samoa; Arizona (some areas); California (most areas); District of
Columbia; Guam; Massachusetts; New Jersey; New York; Northern
Mariana Islands; Puerto Rico; Trust Territories; and the Virgin
Islands. In a smaller number of areas, listed as follows, the State
or local permitting authority is delegated at least partial
authority by EPA to implement the Federal PSD regulation: Arizona
(some areas); California (some areas); Hawaii; Illinois; Minnesota;
Nevada (most areas); Pennsylvania (some areas); and Washington.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of the other States administer their PSD programs through an
approved SIP and, as a result, they or their local
[[Page 53889]]
entities are the PSD permitting authority. Of these States, most appear
to have SIP PSD applicability provisions that parallel EPA's regulatory
PSD applicability provisions and therefore apply PSD to any stationary
source that emits the requisite amount of any air pollutant ``subject
to regulation.'' As a result, and absent any other provision under
State law that limits the applicability of these provisions, these PSD
SIPs will cover GHG sources, just as the current FIPs do, in these
States, on and after January 2, 2011. Therefore, these States or local
authorities will be able to act as the permitting authority for GHG
sources in their States.
As discussed in the PSD GHG SIP Call, it appears, on the basis of
preliminary research and information received that for 13 of the States
with approved PSD SIPs, the PSD programs do not apply to GHG-emitting
sources. In many of these SIPs, the PSD applicability provisions do not
mirror EPA's regulatory provisions by applying PSD requirements to
sources of any air pollutant ``subject to regulation.'' Instead, the
applicability provisions specifically list the air pollutants to which
the PSD program applies and do not include GHGs on that list. Although,
as discussed in the proposed PSD GHG SIP Call, these SIPs may have
other provisions that provide the State with general authority to issue
permits that meet CAA requirements, until EPA receives more
information, we will proceed on the basis that these SIPs do not apply
their PSD programs to GHG sources. Also as discussed in the proposed
SIP Call, the State of Connecticut explicitly excludes GHGs from the
State PSD program. In addition, as discussed in the proposed SIP Call,
some States with SIP PSD applicability provisions that do mirror EPA's
regulatory provisions by applying PSD requirements to sources of any
air pollutant ``subject to regulation'' nevertheless do not appear to
apply PSD to GHG-emitting sources because these States have other State
law constraints against applying State law or SIP requirements without
specific State action authorizing such application of law.
In the SIP Call, EPA proposed to find the SIPs for these 13 States
to be substantially inadequate, and EPA proposed a SIP Call under CAA
section 110(k)(5). EPA stated that it intends to finalize the finding
of substantial inadequacy and the SIP Call by December 1, 2010. EPA
further stated that it would allow States 12 months from the date of
signing the finding and the SIP Call for States to submit their
corrective SIP revisions, but that States could indicate to EPA that
they do not object to a shorter deadline, and in that event EPA would
impose that shorter deadline.
In the proposed SIP Call, EPA also solicited comment on whether the
approved SIPs for those other States (listed in table II-2 of this
preamble, for which EPA was not proposing a SIP Call) do or do not
apply their PSD programs to GHG-emitting sources. EPA asked the other
States to review their SIPs and, if their SIPs fail to apply PSD to
GHG-emitting sources, advise EPA by the end of the comment period of
the State's inadequacy and also inform EPA if they do not object to a
shorter deadline for submittal of the required corrective SIP revision.
In the proposed SIP Call, we stated that the required corrective
SIP revision could constitute a simple addition of GHGs to the list of
pollutants subject to PSD applicability, with GHGs defined as the
aggregate of six pollutants--CO2, CH4,
N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6.
III. Proposed Federal Implementation Plan
In this rulemaking, we propose a FIP, under CAA section
110(c)(1)(A), for any State--if ultimately there is any--for which we
issue a finding of failure to submit a SIP submission required under
the PSD GHG SIP Call.
A. Timing for FIP
If any of the States for which we issue the SIP Call does not meet
its SIP submittal deadline, we will immediately issue a finding of
failure to submit a required SIP submission, under CAA section
110(c)(1)(A), and immediately thereafter promulgate a FIP for the
State. This timing for FIP promulgation is authorized under CAA section
110(c)(1), which authorizes us to promulgate a FIP ``at any time within
2 years after'' finding a failure to submit a required SIP submission.
We intend to take these actions immediately in order to minimize any
period of time during which larger-emitting sources may be under an
obligation to obtain PSD permits for their GHGs when they construct or
modify, but no permitting authority is authorized to issue those
permits.
After we have promulgated a FIP, it must remain in place until the
State submits a SIP revision and we approve that SIP revision. CAA
section 110(c)(1). Under the present circumstances, we will act on a
SIP revision to apply the PSD program to GHG sources as quickly as
possible. Upon request of the State, we will parallel-process the SIP
submittal. That is, if the State submits to us the draft SIP submittal
for which the State intends to hold a hearing, we will propose the
draft SIP submittal for approval and open a comment period during the
same time as the State hearing. If the SIP submittal that the State
ultimately submits to us is substantially similar to the draft SIP
submittal, we will proceed to take final action without a further
proposal or comment period. If we approve such a SIP revision, we will
at the same time rescind the FIP.
B. Substance of FIP
The proposed FIP constitutes the EPA regulations found in 40 CFR
52.21, including the PSD applicability provisions, with a limitation to
assure that, strictly for purposes of this rulemaking, the FIP applies
only to GHGs. Under the PSD applicability provisions in 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50), the PSD program applies to sources that emit the
requisite amounts of any ``regulated NSR pollutant[s],'' including any
air pollutant ``subject to regulation.'' However, in States for which
EPA would promulgate a FIP to apply PSD to GHG-emitting pollutants, the
approved SIP already applies PSD to other air pollutants. To
appropriately limit the scope of the FIP, EPA proposes in this action
to amend 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50) to limit the applicability provision to
GHGs.
We propose this FIP because it would, to the greatest extent
possible, mirror EPA regulations (as well as those of most of the
States). In addition, this FIP would readily incorporate the phase-in
approach for PSD applicability to GHG sources that EPA has developed in
the Tailoring Rule and expects to develop further through additional
rulemaking. As explained in the Tailoring Rule, incorporating this
phase-in approach--including Steps 1 and 2 of the phase-in as
promulgated in the Tailoring Rule--can be most readily accomplished
through interpretation of the terms in the definition ``regulated NSR
pollutant,'' including the term ``subject to regulation.''
In accordance with the Tailoring Rule, as described earlier in this
preamble, the FIP would apply in Step 1 of the phase-in approach only
to ``anyway sources'' (that is, sources undertaking construction or
modification projects that are required to apply for PSD permits anyway
due to their non-GHG emissions and that emit GHGs in the amount of at
least 75,000 tpy on a CO2e basis) and would apply in Step 2
of the phase-in approach to both ``anyway sources'' and sources that
meet the 100,000/75,000-tpy threshold (that is, (i) sources that newly
construct and would not be subject to PSD on account
[[Page 53890]]
of their non-GHG emissions, but that emit GHGs in the amount of at
least 100,000 tpy CO2e, and (ii) existing sources that emit
GHGs in the amount of at least 100,000 tpy CO2e, that
undertake modifications that would not trigger PSD on the basis of
their non-GHG emissions, but that increase GHGs by at least 75,000 tpy
CO2e).
Under the FIP, with respect to permits for ``anyway sources,'' EPA
will be responsible for acting on permit applications for only the GHG
portion of the permit, and the State will retain responsibility for the
rest of the permit. Likewise, with respect to permits for sources that
meet the 100,000/75,000-tpy threshold, our preferred approach--for
reasons of consistency--is that EPA will be responsible for acting on
permit applications for only the GHG portion of the permit, that the
State permitting authorities will be responsible for the non-GHG
portion of the permit, and EPA will coordinate with the State
permitting authority as needed in order to fully cover any non-GHG
emissions that, for example, are subject to BACT because they exceed
the significance levels. We recognize that questions may arise as to
whether the State permitting authorities have authority to permit non-
GHG emissions; as a result, we solicit comment on whether EPA should
also be the permitting authority for the non-GHG portion of the permit
for these latter sources.
We propose that the FIP consist of the regulatory provisions
included in 40 CFR 52.21, except that the applicability provision would
include a limitation so that it applies for purposes of this rulemaking
only to GHGs.
C. Primacy of the SIP Process
This proposal is secondary to our overarching goal, which is to
assure that in every instance, it will be the State that will be that
permitting authority. EPA continues to recognize that the States are
best suited to the task of permitting because they and their sources
have experience working together in the State PSD program to process
permit applications. EPA seeks to remain solely in its primary role of
providing guidance and acting as a resource for the States as they make
the various required permitting decisions for GHG emissions.
Accordingly, beginning immediately we intend to work closely with
the States--as we have already begun to do since earlier in the year--
to help them promptly develop and submit to us their corrective SIP
revisions that extend their PSD program to GHG-emitting sources.
Moreover, we intend to promptly act on their SIP submittals. Again,
EPA's goal is to have each and every affected State have in place the
necessary permitting authorities by the time businesses seeking
construction permits need to have their applications processed and the
permits issued--and to achieve that outcome by means of engaging with
the States directly through a concerted process of consultation and
support.
EPA is taking up the additional task of proposing this FIP and the
companion SIP Call action only because the Agency believes it is
compelled to do so by the need to assure businesses, to the maximum
extent possible and as promptly as possible, that a permitting
authority is available to process PSD permit applications for GHG-
emitting sources once they become subject to PSD requirements on
January 2, 2011.
In order to provide that assurance, we are obligated to recognize,
as both States and the regulated community already do, that there may
be circumstances in which States are simply unable to develop and
submit those SIP revisions by January 2, 2011, or for some period of
time beyond that date. As a result, absent further action by EPA, those
States' affected sources confront the risk that they may have to put on
hold their plans to construct or modify, a risk that may have adverse
consequences for the economy.
Given these exigent circumstances, EPA proposes this plan, within
the limits of our power, with the intent to make a back-up permitting
authority available--and to send a signal of assurance expeditiously in
order to reduce uncertainty and thus facilitate businesses' planning.
Within the design of the CAA, it is EPA that must fill that role of
back-up permitting authority. This FIP and the companion SIP Call
action fulfill the CAA requirements to establish EPA in that role.
At the same time, we propose these actions with the intent that
States retain as much discretion as possible in the hand of the States.
In the SIP Call rulemaking, EPA proposes that States may choose the
deadline they consider reasonable for submission of their corrective
SIP revision. If, under CAA requirements, we are compelled to
promulgate a FIP, we invite the affected State to accept a delegation
of authority to implement that FIP, so that it will still be the State
that processes the permit applications, albeit operating under Federal
law. In addition, if we are compelled to issue a FIP, we intend to
continue to work closely with the State to assist in developing and
submitting for approval its corrective SIP revision, so as to minimize
the amount of time that the FIP must remain in place.
Finally, we can report that in informal conversations, officials of
various States have acknowledged the need for our SIP Call and FIP
actions. That is, they have acknowledged that a short-term FIP may be
necessary in their States to establish permitting authority to
construct and modify in accordance with environmental safeguards for
these sources. In addition, some States have indicated that they will
closely consider their opportunities to accept delegation of the
permitting responsibilities.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993),
this action is a ``significant regulatory action'' because it raises
novel legal or policy issues. Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under EO 12866 and
any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been
documented in the docket for this action.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action imposes new information collection burden. The action
is based on information concerning whether the States have authority to
regulate GHGs under their SIP PSD provisions, which information is
already requested of the States in the Tailoring Rule. The OMB has
previously approved the information collection requirements contained
in the existing regulations for PSD (see, e.g., 40 CFR 52.21) and title
V (see 40 CFR parts 70 and 71) under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control
number 2060-0003 and OMB control number 2060-0336 respectively. The OMB
control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR
part 9.
The Tailoring Rule does not establish any new requirements (either
control or reporting) for any sources. It merely establishes the
thresholds that trigger NSR and title V for GHG sources. The trigger
for GHG and title V is not due to the Tailoring Rule but the result of
the endangerment finding and the LDVR. The NSR and title V ICRs will
need to be modified to include the new sources that will be triggered
due to the GHG requirements (in July 2011). The Agency anticipates
making such modifications upon renewal of the NSR and title V ICRs at
the end of the year.
[[Page 53891]]
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of this notice on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that is a
small industrial entity as defined in the U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA) size standards (see 13 CFR 121.201); (2) a small
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town,
school district, or special district with a population of less than
50,000; or (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise that is independently owned and operated and is not dominant
in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Although
this rule would lead to Federal permitting requirements for certain
sources, those sources are large emitters of GHGs and tend to be large
sources. We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related
to such impacts.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA, 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538) for State, local or tribal governments or the private
section. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. This action merely prescribes
EPA's action for States that do not meet their existing obligation for
PSD SIP submittal. Thus, this proposed rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 or 205 of UMRA.
This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action merely
prescribes EPA's action for States that do not meet their existing
obligation for PSD SIP submittal.
E. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not 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. This action merely prescribes EPA's
action for States that do not meet their existing obligation for PSD
SIP submittal. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this
action.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule
from State and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action does
not impose a FIP in any tribal area. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this action.
Although Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed
rule, EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed
action from tribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying
only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks,
such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the EO has the
potential to influence the regulation. This action is not subject to EO
13045 because it merely prescribes EPA's action for States that do not
meet their existing obligation for PSD SIP submittal.
H. Executive Order 13211--Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. This action merely prescribes EPA's
action for States that do not meet their existing obligation for PSD
SIP submittal.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus
standards.
J. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the U.S.
EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This proposed rule merely prescribes EPA's action for
States that do not meet their existing obligation for PSD SIP
submittal.
K. Determination Under Section 307(d)
Pursuant to sections 307(d)(1)(B) of the CAA, this action is
subject to the provisions of section 307(d). Section 307(d)(1)(B)
provides that the provisions of section 307(d) apply to ``the
promulgation or revision of an implementation plan by the Administrator
under section 110(c) of this Act.''
[[Page 53892]]
V. Statutory Authority
The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections
110, 165, 301, and 307(d)(1)(B) of the CAA as amended (42 U.S.C. 7410,
7475, 7601, and 7407(d)(1)(B)). This action is subject to section
307(d) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7407(d)).
Page 46 of 49--Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Federal Implementation Plan
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon dioxide,
Carbon dioxide equivalents, Carbon monoxide, Greenhouse gases,
Hydrofluorocarbons, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Methane,
Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrous oxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Perfluorocarbons, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
hexafluoride, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: August 12, 2010.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code o